Register free!
Search
 
     

The Green Industry's Resource Center


Click for Weather
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 03-11-2011, 02:13 PM
masonenterprises masonenterprises is offline
LawnSite Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by vencops View Post
Agreed.

Now.......when you start working folks over 40hrs/wk.......you're gonna run into trouble.

There was a rash of claims made against employers in the early 90's in the golf profession (club professionals). Clubs used to put the assistant professionals on salary and work them exhorbitant hours.

That's not legal.
I can see your reasoning.. but corporations play by there own roles... that place i worked all the salary people worked at least 45 to 50 hour weeks.. some even more than that, depending on their place in the corporate ladder.. the upper management easily did 12 hr days and sat and sun... all for a 40 hr week salary... that probably equalled $130K + a year .. they expect you to live there.. and it is 100% legal... they say if you dont like it.. then get a new job.. its the benefit of working hourly... we get paid for our OT... doesnt seem fair but neither is this world
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 03-11-2011, 02:23 PM
zimmatic zimmatic is online now
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 397
I placed one employee on Salary. It didnt matter how many hours worked in the week. You still have to track hours. Once he goes over the 2080hrs/year then have to pay the overtime. Lawyer and accnt said it was okay since he is in a production and supervisory role. They also informed me that there are diffrent rules for (salary) if the employee is strictly managment or strictly production.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 03-11-2011, 02:55 PM
vencops's Avatar
vencops vencops is offline
LawnSite Bronze Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: NC
Posts: 1,537
Salary = annual wage.

They were correct. If the folks don't like it.....they can go somewhere else for a better (hopefully) wage.

But, to think you can put blue-collar workers on a salary....to keep your expenditures down.....is a recipe for the dept. of labor fining you AND forcing you to pay back-wages.

Like I said, if you think it sounds good...someone's probably thought of it, before. That doesn't mean it's legal.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 03-11-2011, 04:24 PM
4lextrem 4lextrem is offline
LawnSite Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Montreal
Posts: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by WYtyler View Post
We are considering switching our payscale to a "pay per job" instead of hourly. We have a lot of wasted time and think that if the crew knows what they are getting paid for that particular job, they would buy into more. For example, paying out 20% of total invoice divided among 3 guys. Crew leader gets 8% and the 2 laborers each get 6% (for a total of 20%). That would be there pay. No matter how quick or slow they do it. Any ideas?
Sounds like an idea.

Another idea is hiring people that dont waste time lol.
Seriously, that how the best in my province works, and i work that way too. The 2 guy/2 mowers/1 truck get xx number of adresses on little papers.

Well they need to do them that day, that it thats all, do it, youre paid for it, i expect you to do x per hour.

Your goal, your employees, they HAVE TO execute it, its not an option.

Mcdonald employees NEED to do those hamburgers, not dick around. Same thing here. I'd just fire them.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 03-11-2011, 05:13 PM
ghunter502's Avatar
ghunter502 ghunter502 is offline
LawnSite Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Kansas
Posts: 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by vencops View Post
Salary = annual wage.

They were correct. If the folks don't like it.....they can go somewhere else for a better (hopefully) wage.

But, to think you can put blue-collar workers on a salary....to keep your expenditures down.....is a recipe for the dept. of labor fining you AND forcing you to pay back-wages.

Like I said, if you think it sounds good...someone's probably thought of it, before. That doesn't mean it's legal.
Maybe you need to talk to your attorney and accountant! It is perfectly legal to put your employees on salary.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 03-11-2011, 05:56 PM
vencops's Avatar
vencops vencops is offline
LawnSite Bronze Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: NC
Posts: 1,537
"It is perfectly legal to put your employees on salary. "

Some of them....sure. Did you read the link I supplied?

Good luck, however you choose to handle this.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 03-11-2011, 06:11 PM
vencops's Avatar
vencops vencops is offline
LawnSite Bronze Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: NC
Posts: 1,537
You could also be paying them a salary in a non-exempt structure (i.e they'd still be eligible....and you liable....for overtime). In this case, yes....perfectly legal. I have a feeling this isn't what's being discussed, though.

Here's another link to good info.....

http://www.meocpa.com/salaryot.html
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 03-11-2011, 10:40 PM
ghunter502's Avatar
ghunter502 ghunter502 is offline
LawnSite Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Kansas
Posts: 245
I still don't see any problem they get paid the same salary every week 52 weeks a year. What is the problem didn't find the answer in that article if there is something missing I would like to know what it is. Also the laws have proably changed since the article was dated in 2002. Do you have anything more recent?
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 03-12-2011, 03:42 AM
Stillwater Stillwater is offline
LawnSite Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: The United States
Posts: 4,250
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghunter502 View Post
I still don't see any problem they get paid the same salary every week 52 weeks a year. What is the problem didn't find the answer in that article if there is something missing I would like to know what it is. Also the laws have proably changed since the article was dated in 2002. Do you have anything more recent?

If I understand all this correctly and I am not mistaken, the possible problem you failed to see in the link above is what you state in your post # 5
you are correct the laws have changed since 2002 they have gotten stronger for the employee
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 03-26-2011, 04:27 PM
Sam75 Sam75 is offline
LawnSite Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Chicago IL
Posts: 30
Don't Be Blindsided with an Overtime Audit Due to Misclassifying Independent Contractors
Posted on March 10, 2010 by Laura L. Himelstein, Esq.

Email This
Print
Comments
Trackbacks
Share Link

The IRS has stepped up enforcement of rules regarding independent contractors. Early this year, the IRS started deploying auditors to conduct intensive audits of an estimated 6,000 employers in different industries and including both large and small companies. The federal government believes that misclassification is on the rise given that independent contractors receive fewer incentives to trim costs during these difficult economic times. The IRS is engaging in vigorous enforcement for various reasons, including to collect more money for the federal tax coffers and as a result of the Obama administration’s friendly approach to labor.

Correct classification of independent contractors depends on weighing multiple factors, including without limitation: the autonomy exercised by the worker, who controls his/her performance and schedule, where the work is performed, who owns the tools required to perform the work, whether the worker works for one or more different companies at the same time, whether the parties have an agreement and if so, what intent is evidenced in the agreement, and other factors.

If a worker has been misclassified as an independent contractor, the worker could be entitled to seek overtime payments for work performed. Independent contractors with newly conferred employee status also may seek other benefits, including unemployment benefits or workers comp, or bring legal action that they would not have done when they thought they were independent contractors.

But that is just the start. While misclassifying a single worker may lead to some liability for overtime payments and other benefits, employers should take a hard look at the bigger picture. An IRS audit could possibly lead to an audit by the federal or state Department of Labor. Such an audit might examine a company’s overall approach to independent contractor classifications and overtime. In fact, Obama’s 2011 budget proposes a joint taskforce of the IRS and DOL to crack down on independent contractor misclassification.

In addition, workers who believe they have been improperly classified and are owed overtime could band together and bring a class action. That is what is currently happening to Blackwater Security Consultants.

So beware – misclassifying an independent contractor can have substantial, costly consequences, from having to pay overtime and other benefits to one misclassified worker – to an overtime audit of your entire workforce to a class action lawsuit for unpaid benefits and/or overtime.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
hourly rate , pay , production , salary

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1998 - 2012, LawnSite.com™ - Moose River Media
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:01 AM.

Page generated in 0.07646 seconds with 9 queries