Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help M*Modal Nuance New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Games Faith Board Prayer Requests Health Issues

ADVERTISEMENT



Nuance

Yes, I agree, it looks as if they are focusing - on the paid breaks aspect

Posted: Aug 25th, 2018 - 4:37 pm In Reply to: FT 40 hours/NOPE - Metoo

Perhaps that's the easiest to prove?

If you demand "piece workers" - which we are classified as - take paid breaks and they are paid based on production you are in fact lowering their production by forcing them to take the breaks in what should be productive time, hence lowering their pay.

Perhaps they will demand that those 2 breaks every day were never taken or were never factored in correctly and that is where they are claiming we are owed overtime? Hard to fathom until I can read the lawsuit (of course, not sure I can understand that either - legalese is a confounding language).

Personally, every time I went to the loo or left my desk I would log out, not intentionally taking breaks but my main objective was keeping my lph up because my state's minimum wage went up and if I slipped below a certain lph and got an error I would be in trouble with that darned MUP garbage.

Every day I ended up working probably an extra hour at least to make my login time up to 8 hours (surprising how those little bits of time add up - had I commuted to a job and back it might have taken me less time!), and now it appears perhaps we were only supposed to log 7.5 hours because of the breaks? Or were we supposed to incorporate the breaks into the 8 hours? That makes no sense at all since your line count would be toast then.

I don't recall being informed about those breaks at all. Rather confusing.

ADVERTISEMENT


Post A Reply Reply By Email Options


Complete Discussion Below: ( marks the location of current message within thread)