my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » Banks, Paychecks, Service Fees (Page 3)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4

Author Topic: Banks, Paychecks, Service Fees Gordon McLeod Film God Posts: 9532 From: Toronto Ontario Canada Registered: Jun 99 posted 08-19-2009 02:30 PM                     If the bank lost then the employer would be compelled to move their account since the law requires that the employer pay with out discount  |  IP: Logged Mitchell Dvoskin Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1869 From: West Milford, NJ, USA Registered: Jan 2001 posted 08-19-2009 02:37 PM                     Banks can charge whatever fees they can get away with. Employers in all 50 states are required to pay you in full on pay day, and can not require you to open a bank account at a bank you do not choose. It is time people started suing employers who participate in this banking scam. Yes, I know that can be difficult, but until this happens, nothing will change.  |  IP: Logged Mark J. Marshall Film God Posts: 3188 From: New Castle, DE, USA Registered: Aug 2002 posted 08-19-2009 02:56 PM                    Yep... they're also required to pay you in a form that is exchangeable for US cash ON DEMAND - which means I do *NOT* have to do anything else but present the check to the financial institution that the check is drawn on, and receive the amount of cash that is equal to the face value of the check. I do not have to pay $5, or sing the National Anthem, or anything else. Seems to me that requiring me to do so is illegal.  |  IP: Logged Bill Enos Film God Posts: 2081 From: Richmond, Virginia, USA Registered: Apr 2000 posted 08-19-2009 03:26 PM                     That "settlement" still doesn't allow the employee to cash the pay check. Just another ploy by the bank to collect more fees from people who can't manage a checking account, which is the very reason they want cash. The goddamned banks would rather do anything than be honest. Bandits aren't the robbers, the banks are.  |  IP: Logged Chris Slycord Film God Posts: 2986 From: 청주시, 경북도, South Korea Registered: Mar 2007 posted 08-20-2009 11:39 AM                     The problem with this whole "The banks have to give me cash on demand" thing is that you guys are forgetting that even if you normally deposit a check, 100% of that isn't put into your account immediately for withdrawl due to the fact that they are allowed to put a hold on it for the time that it takes to verify the check is real. Though that wait time has decreased now since they've got electronic ways to check.  |  IP: Logged Mark J. Marshall Film God Posts: 3188 From: New Castle, DE, USA Registered: Aug 2002 posted 08-20-2009 12:41 PM                    quote: Chris Slycord "The banks have to give me cash on demand" thing No, the bank the check is DRAWN ON has to give me cash on demand. If I take it to a different bank and deposit it into an account, then yes, I have to wait for my bank to demand the money from the issuing bank. That request goes through the Federal Reserve system and sometimes takes a few days. The banks have methods of immediately knowing if a check drawn from their corporate customers' accounts is real or not because they already have a record of the check existing. If they're unsure, they can make a phone call, they can take my thumb print and two forms of ID so they can find me if there's a problem. But they have to cash it... unless the funds aren't there of course, then the company has a problem!  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 08-20-2009 01:38 PM                     A couple of things here... The reason the suit was filed was it was bringing the employers into legal hassle (not complying with payment in full for services)...it was the employers who were, in effect, bringing the law suit. As such, the employer was to be given the information on any such fees that might cause them to not be in compliance and hence the settlement (not a decision, mind you) was to come up with a means to keep the employers from having legal action against them. Now, if the employer is given notification of such a fee in the future, it could be their option to move the account or absorb the fee since the employee is entitled to their full pay amount, under the law. The problem with a $5 or similar fee for an employee is that suing over $5 or $130 to $260/year is one that the lawyer fees will be prohibitive...after all the person that does not maintain a checking account of their own is not likely to have the financial means to initiate this sort of law suit. It used to be said that it is bad to get into a writing match with a newspaper that buys their ink by the 55-gallon drum or words to that effect. The same could be true with a bank that deals in cash all the time. I repeat that I'd be very surprised if this ever was decided in the bank's favor at the supreme court level. Banks are entitled to charge fees, for sure (and they do and will). But a check bearing the signed name of an account holder (and a payroll check at that) and the issuing bank, the bank is indeed devaluing the check. As for insufficient funds...that is another matter all together...the bank isn't refusing to issue the money that is there...they are stating that the money isn't there. That brings about another whole litany of issues with respect to labor law and payment. Finally...I believe an employee may always require to be paid in cash. It is the only form of legal tender in the USA. The fact that most nobody does it for a whole list of reasons (it can be a big pain in the ass to move that money around and keep track on the accounting side and will likely do nobody any good). The employee is entitled to be paid in full, period. Most folks go for direct deposit nowadays, if available. No fees (in fact, some employers will try to charge a fee for writing a paper check), and the money moves that day...no need for getting the check, endorsing, depositing, waiting for it to clear before drawing upon it. Steve  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 08-20-2009 01:53 PM                        quote: Mark J. Marshall I do not have to pay $5, or sing the National Anthem, or anything else. Seems to me that requiring me to do so is illegal. That's a good thing about this country. It takes more than "seems to me" to make something a requirement!  |  IP: Logged Bill Enos Film God Posts: 2081 From: Richmond, Virginia, USA Registered: Apr 2000 posted 08-20-2009 02:10 PM                     If you had the choice of singing the Star Spangled Banner or paying the 5 bucks, which would you choose? We'll assume you already know the words and the tune.  |  IP: Logged Mark J. Marshall Film God Posts: 3188 From: New Castle, DE, USA Registered: Aug 2002 posted 08-20-2009 08:11 PM                    I might have to charge THEM if I were going to give a rousing performance of the Star Spangled Banner.  |  IP: Logged Dustin Mitchell Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1865 From: Mondovi, WI, USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 08-21-2009 04:24 AM                     Funny story about this, my father is in a similar situation. The place that he works draws their checks from Wells Fargo. Since my dad refuses to have a bank account anymore, whenever he goes to cash his check not only does he have to pay $5, but he has to give his fingerprint too (electronic pad). So, yeah, whatever, I guess that's fine. So one day he finally gives in to the cashiers sales pitch and agrees to open a savings account. After filling out the paperwork etc. the person at the bank tells him his credit history has a few 'hic-ups' (he has a lot of unpaid medical debt from having his appendix removed and a few other things, no insurance). Because of these 'hic-ups' he'll have to open a checking account along with his savings account. Now say what? Lets follow the logic here; my dad has bad credit, so Wells Fargo decides its too risky to let him deposit money in a savings account (?!?) so to make things more secure he must have a checking account, which will let him give people pieces of paper for payment with no more assurance he has the money to pay than Wells Fargo's good reputation. Bullshit. I never asked, but I'm willing to bet that checking account was not of the 'free' variety. If you want to get even more tin-foil hatty, I'd say Wells Fargo was counting on him bouncing checks and thus letting them charge him overdraft fees. Needless to say he did not open an account.  |  IP: Logged Mitchell Dvoskin Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1869 From: West Milford, NJ, USA Registered: Jan 2001 posted 08-21-2009 09:47 AM                     As an employee, you do not need to sue your employer over this. A formal complaint to your states department of labor will require them to take action on your behalf, and it will cost you nothing. As to actually suing, while it is true that each individual case does not add up to a lot of money, a class action against a large employer would. Personally, I direct deposit into my existing bank account, which works fine for me, but to each their own...  |  IP: Logged Lyle Romer Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1400 From: Davie, FL, USA Registered: May 2002 posted 08-21-2009 10:09 AM                     As an aside can somebody explain why there are so many people that don't have any type of bank/credit union account? My parents opened a savings account for me when I was very young. I opened a checking account in high school when I got a part time job. I'm not trying to be an ass I've just never understood the prominence of check cashing stores and the long "non-account holder" lines on pay day. There's a zillion free checking accounts with little to no minimum balance out there so why wouldn't somebody have one?  |  IP: Logged Robert Minichino Master Film Handler Posts: 350 From: Haskell, NJ, USA Registered: Dec 2005 posted 08-21-2009 10:37 AM                        Most banks do credit checks on customers opening checking accounts and won't let you open a checking account if you have a low credit score. I'm surprised that a bank wouldn't let you open a savings account without opening a checking account, too; I've usually heard that story in reverse (so they can take the overdraft fees out of your savings account). Also, banks tend to require a minimum balance to avoid fees, and not everyone can afford that. Of course, some people also don't trust banks or don't want anyone keeping track of their money, for whatever reason.  |  IP: Logged Bill Enos Film God Posts: 2081 From: Richmond, Virginia, USA Registered: Apr 2000 posted 08-21-2009 10:51 AM                     I have a brother in law who had a career in the banking industry and had a fairly high position says not to trust them or believe anything. He also never kept anything in the free account they require all employees to have for direct deposit. He discovered thru a good friend he had in I.T. that while it is unlawful for them to use the access that upper management was able to view all transactions in employees personal accounts. Every payday he transferred all but one dollar to another bank.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.