I recently had a discussion with an associate (also an payroll consultant) about the regular rate of pay and payroll systems in general. Unfortunately the question we both had, we could not fully answer. So I am turning to my blog followers to help me out. When I started in payroll we did payroll by hand, including the regular rate of pay calculations. Of course, systems have improved since 1977. But my question is…which current systems (whether in-house or service bureau) do regular rate of pay calculations? For example, I give a bonus to an employee for finishing a project on time (nondiscretionary bonus) and he earned it in the same week it was paid. For this scenario would your payroll system do the regular rate of pay calculation? Or would you have to do it by hand and add it in? Second example, an employee receives a monthly commission on sales (hourly employee). He is paid his commission on July 15th for the month of June. Would your system be able to recalculate the additional overtime due? Or would you have to do it by hand (Excel spreadsheet)?
If your system does not do the regular rate of pay calculation, did you know this when you bought the system or signed up for the service bureau?
I appreciate any input you might have on the subject. Please include the name of the system if you can do so. Also please note if you had to have a special program written to handle the calculations.
The latest on the salary increase was released today. The U.S. Department of Labor has today announced that it will publish a Request for Information (RFI), Defining and Delimiting the Exemptions for Executive, Administrative, Professional, Outside Sales and Computer Employees. The RFI offers the public the opportunity to provide information that will aid the Department in formulating a proposal to revise these regulations. The RFI solicits feedback on questions related to the salary level test, the duties test, inclusion of non-discretionary bonuses and incentive payments to satisfy a portion of the salary level, the salary test for highly compensated employees, and automatic updating of the salary level tests. The 60-day comment period for all issues raised in the RFI ends on September 25, 2017. The public may submit comments according to the instructions listed in the RFI as published in the Federal Register.
But the court case is still raging on. The DOL has decided to fight the ruling, not to defend the limits set by the Obama administration, but to defend the concept that the DOL has the right to change the salary limit. Lots of legal blogging on the topic so I wanted to include some of those blogs for you today:
The Department of Labor (DOL) has just announced that they will reinstate the issuance of opinion letters. The action allows the department’s Wage and Hour Division to use opinion letters as one of its methods for providing guidance to covered employers and employees. An opinion letter is an official, written opinion by the Wage and Hour Division of how a particular law applies in specific circumstances presented by an employer, employee or other entity requesting the opinion. The letters were a division practice for more than 70 years until being stopped and replaced by general guidance in 2010.
“Reinstating opinion letters will benefit employees and employers as they provide a means by which both can develop a clearer understanding of the Fair Labor Standards Act and other statutes,” said Secretary Acosta. “The U.S. Department of Labor is committed to helping employers and employees clearly understand their labor responsibilities so employers can concentrate on doing what they do best: growing their businesses and creating jobs.”
The division has established a web page where the public can see if existing agency guidance already addresses their questions or submit a request for an opinion letter. The web page explains what to include in the request, where to submit the request, and where to review existing guidance. The division will exercise discretion in determining which requests for opinion letters will be responded to, and the appropriate form of guidance to be issued.
California has long had a day of rest requirement. In fact it has existed long before overtime and minimum wage. It guarantees an employee “one day’s rest therefrom in seven”. But which employees and what exactly is one day in seven? This was really never litigated before the current case of Mendoza v. Nordstrom in which the ruling was just handed down on May 8th. Rather than my trying to explain the entire court case in a blog, I will, instead, urge you to read the recap of the case as presented by Sheppart Mullin Richter & Hampton’s Brian S. Fong for the Mondaq News Update Service. It is an in-depth look at the ruling and the impact on employers.
Got a great blog post yesterday from Bill Pokorny, with Wage & Hour Insights concerning paying employees for charity work. During this time of the year this question comes up a lot for payroll professionals. In his June 7th blog he has given a clear and concise answer on when charity work could be considered hours worked. Check out his blog today.
Yesterday the California Senate passed SB 562, The Healthy California Act. This bill would create the Healthy California Program to provide comprehensive universal single-payer health care coverage and a healthcare cost control system for the benefit of all residents of the state of California. It would be funded by a combination of employer and employee payroll taxes. Of the 33 developed nations in the world 32 of them have what is known as universal healthcare. The lone exception to this, of course, is the United States. Universal healthcare, however is not defined as government only healthcare, but can include both public and private insurance and medical providers. So if this bill actually passes the assembly and the financial aspects are resolved it would put California on the list of countries with universal healthcare. This would be a very unique situation. One of our states has universal health care but the country does not. But I think the bigger question for this blog is: “why don’t businesses embrace universal health care?”
And I’m not the only one questioning this. Warren Buffett has stated that other countries have gained a five or six point advantage over the United States because of healthcare spending by employers. The National Federation of Independent Business conducted a survey of small business priorities and problems and found that the cost of health insurance is the most severe problem facing American small business today. In fact 52% of small business owners identified it as a critical issue. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) puts the cost of healthcare in 2016 for employers with more than 500 workers at $4.28 per hour or 9% of the total compensation costs. For employers with 100 to 499 employees the insurance costs are $2.77 per hour worked or 8.5% of total compensation. Now some will say that this cost is due to the Affordable Care Act. But the increase under the Affordable Care Act for employers with more than 500 employees as compared with the cost in 2006 was 1%. For those employers with under 500 employees it was 2.5%. However this statistic does not reflect that many of the employers with under 500 employees did not offer health insurance in 2006. So why do we continue to put this burden on employers and why do they continue to fight to keep it?
Using the 2006 figures so that we do not factor in Obama care, if I were to propose an 8% tax on all employers with over 500 employees there would be riots in the streets. Yet that’s what employers were paying for healthcare. So if we were to take this 8% as a payment from each employer and add in the cost the employee paid could this be the beginning of universal healthcare for the United States. Think about it for a minute. Employers would no longer need to contact insurance companies, negotiate costs, and have someone in the company to oversee the program (an additional cost of a salary) nor have someone in Accounts Payable pay the bill. Would it have to be a federal program? Most countries that have universal healthcare have a combination of national and municipalities handling the programs. The tax would be on the federal level but the healthcare itself is provided on the local level since those are the ones that usually understand what the community requirements are.
Would this help us become more competitive in the world? Would it help employers become more financially solvent? Would it get health care for all the citizens of the United States? The answers to those questions, of course, remained unanswered as of today. But unless we begin to look into shifting the costs of health care away from employers we will never know.
Wage theft is getting a lot of attention lately. In my May 30th blog I discussed an EPI report that went into detail concerning wage theft in the United States. But is wage theft even more rampant than that report indicated? A recent article in the New York Times concerns how Uber is just discovering they have been miscalculating the commissions paid their drivers and are getting ready to pay tens of millions in back payments. But a driver’s advocacy group in New York is indicating that the company is also making its drivers swallow the per cab ride tax burden imposed by New York. This practice, according to the New York Taxi Workers Alliance amounts to wage theft. It all boils down to how the contracts are interpreted and only the courts will decide in the end. But it is food for thought. Are major corporations guilty of wage theft as a matter of business practice? This is a disturbing questions that must be answered.
What do you think? Is wage theft a serious problem in the U.S.? Take our poll or leave a comment.