Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Overtime compensation laws

This is topic Overtime compensation laws in forum Ground Level at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=5;t=000981

Posted by Benjamin J. Kepner (Member # 1241) on 11-28-2003, 11:29 AM:

I just spent about an hour doing a search of the site trying to find an answer to this and I couldn't find anything that satisfied me.

Is there a federal law that exempts movie theaters from paying their employees overtime compensation? If so, does this law supercede state laws that apply to overtime? (I know minimum wage laws are whichever is higher)

Can anyone point me to a site or law that states this, I am just not willing to accept the explanation anymore that "it is just the way the movie industry is".

I know that Michigan state law exempts entertainment and amusement establishments from paying overtime if they meet all the follow guidelines:

1. Open to the general public at a fixed location
2. It is open primarily to provide leisure activities to those that attend
3. It is open no more than 7 months out of the calendar year

Now it is number three that really makes me wonder. The only theaters (at least in Michigan) that should then be exempt for paying overtime then would be seasonal theaters such as drive-ins.

Can anyone provide me with anything that would show otherwise?

Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 11-28-2003, 11:49 AM:

I read an article in the local paper a while back where a parent wrote in asking if her daughter should be paid overtime since they were working her 45+ hours a week at the movie theater.

The columnist (in the business section) replied that places such as Disneyworld and other "attraction" venues ARE exempt, but movie theaters are not. At least, that's what the state law says.

All the corporate and manager types like to think of their theaters as "a snack bar that happens to show movies" then so be it, and pay me overtime. If not, then make up your mind.

Regal paid me overtime, but Carmike did not, so I made it VERY clear that I refused to work overtime if I wasn't going to be compensated for it. It worked out for the most part, but I ended up having to leave a few shifts early at the end of the week.

Sorry folks, this is time out of my life that I'm giving up to make you money. If you don't want to pay me extra for staying extra, then I won't...

=TMP=

Posted by Kyle Watkins (Member # 986) on 11-28-2003, 01:52 PM:

Thomas,

Florida is exement form paying overtime, i went thew countless phone calls with the labor board on this matter. Now this was 1999 and 2000, wether the law change since then I dont know.

Kyle

Posted by Matt Zeiner (Member # 1914) on 11-28-2003, 03:33 PM:

Check out the FLSA - there is a federal exemption from overtime obligations specific to movie theatres. That, not your state's statutes, is the ultimate authority. (FLSA.org)

Posted by Dennis M Dow Jr (Member # 1970) on 11-28-2003, 03:49 PM:

My company pays us OT even tho our contract does not require it... guess they figure easier to pay than to fight

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 11-28-2003, 04:18 PM:

As I understand it, in California, over 40 hours in a week is overtime PLUS over 8 hours in a shift is overtime PLUS if you work then leave and then come back the second shift is overtime.

Unless, of course, you're salary. Then you're screwed sideways.

(Moving to Ground Level)

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 11-28-2003, 07:01 PM:

so I made it VERY clear that I refused to work overtime if I wasn't going to be compensated for it.

Were you on salary? If you were an hourly employee by law you must be compensated. The question at hand is whether you would get paid at 1.5X your normal rate. But even if they don't pay overtime they still have to pay your normal rate if you are an hourly employee.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 11-28-2003, 07:43 PM:

In the case of employee rules...I can think of no case when the most restrictive rules dont apply. In the DC metro area...DC as always been a over 40 hours must be paid at 1.5X pay...even though the neighboring jurisdictions did not have that clause. DC isn't even a state and that rule must be followed.

Steve

Posted by Kris Brunton (Member # 432) on 11-28-2003, 08:02 PM:

I beleive in Ontario overtime must be paid out at 1.5x for those exceeding 44 hours in a week. Then you have salary employees and 60 hours in a week is not unheard of. [Confused]

Posted by Philip Wittlief (Member # 1724) on 11-28-2003, 08:25 PM:

I know in the Indiana state code 'motion picture theater' is exempt from the overtime law.

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 11-28-2003, 08:27 PM:

State law for kentucky is you must be paid overtime if you work over 40 hours. Movie theaters are not exempt.

Posted by Martin Brooks (Member # 1269) on 11-28-2003, 09:06 PM:

State law does not trump Federal labor law, except if the State pays higher. However, there is a Federal exemption for Motion Picture Theater employees from overtime pay.

The general labor law rules are here: General Info on the Fair Labor Standards Act
Q&A here: Q&A
The list of exemptions is here: FLSA Exemptions

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 11-29-2003, 12:26 AM:

Sounds like a question for a lawyer because there is nothing in there that says that a state cannot have greater requirements than the Feds. Indeed, it specifically says they can for minimum wage so wouldn't the same theory apply to the OT rules, that is, if the state says everyone must get it even if the feds don't require it, then they must be paid, no? Note that the list of exemptions is a list of exemptions from the FLSA (federal law), variously for minimum wage and/or overtime. It doesn't say anything about short circuiting state laws.

Posted by Rachel Gilardi (Member # 1016) on 11-29-2003, 02:15 AM:

I made many phone calls on this subject with the labor board back in Massachusetts. Movie Theaters are exempt from paying overtime. They also have different hours that young employees (14-17) can work compared to 'normal' jobs because of theaters odd hours. That was a couple years ago, and no - I don't remember the exact hours. [Smile]

Posted by Jason Black (Member # 684) on 11-29-2003, 08:23 AM:

SC is a 'no overtime pay' state also. No overtime pay meaning no 1.5x pay rate after 40 hours. I was under the impression that NC was also, but a few years ago (3-4) parents of a UA employee in Wilmington, NC sued the company after their kid did not receive OT pay. They won the judgement and OT pay was retroactive for him for the time that he had worked OT. I'm not sure what happened with anyone else whom had worked OT with UA in NC. I have employees who hit around 40 a week and I have exchange students who ask for 65/week. While I can hear soem of you screaming at how unfair that may be, it is their choice to work such as they pay to come here and seemingly are quite happy to work at the theatre for me, or at least they "act" that way.. [Cool]

I'm almost 100% sure that if we were required to pay OT there would not be a soul who would get more than 39 hours. You know, like Wal-Mart. Keep the hours down and skirt bennies... [Eek!]

To clarify what TMP commented about Carmike... he received pregular hourly wages for OT hours worked, he just didn't recieve an accelerated wage. Soem like it, some don't but we all know that most of us aren't in the exhibition end of the business for the money now, are we? [uhoh]

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 11-29-2003, 09:45 AM:

quote:
Unless, of course, you're salary. Then you're screwed sideways.

Same on this side of the pond, too. One company I worked for when I was in the cinema business and which shall remain nameless had a habit of sticking someone on salary the moment their hourly pay started to approach a reasonable weekly wage.

Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 11-29-2003, 12:12 PM:

Steve, I was hourly, and yes, as Jason pointed out I was to be paid my regular wage over 40 hours. Nevermind that I specifically applied for a PART TIME JOB which shouldn't have put me over 40 hours anyway. But give someone a tie and a gold nametag and they think they're God.

There's an interesting question. If you're a PART TIME employee and you work over 40 hours, it would make sense for them to compensate you 1.5x your pay over those 40 hours since you ARE working "over time" based on your job classification.

Kyle -- That's strange, since 1998-2000 were the years I actually WAS getting paid overtime! [Smile]

I'll be the first to admit that Florida is pretty screwed up in terms of labor laws. Hell, minimum wage hasn't budged for over 6 years!!!

I would never, ever accept a salary job unless the salary worked out to be desireable per-hour. And none of this 50-hour week crap I saw many poor managers work week after week.

True that many of us didn't take this job for the money, but we didn't take it as a hobby either.

=TMP=

Posted by Kyle Watkins (Member # 986) on 11-29-2003, 05:52 PM:

I rather not have the OT, of course that depends on the company working for. What I did I for 2 companys i work for, instead of having 2 jobs, I just work at the theater only, work out great for me. The company i work for now does pay OT but wont allow you to work over 40 hours, of course now im salary so it dont really mater.

Kyle

Posted by Rachel Gilardi (Member # 1016) on 11-29-2003, 06:58 PM:

huh? [Confused]

Posted by Benjamin J. Kepner (Member # 1241) on 11-29-2003, 09:18 PM:

I had one of my managers looking up an answer for me and found one that satisfied me. There is a stipulation that any facility that deals with interstate commerce (doesn't apply here) or Has a gross annual income of >$500,000 then they are subject to the rules of the FSLA as stated in previous posts. So yes theaters are exempt from paying overtime unless they make less than $500,000 a year and the state doesn't give them a different exemption. Otherwise they are truly exempt.

Posted by Adam Wilbert (Member # 1184) on 11-30-2003, 12:06 AM:

A certain lax organization that i recently worked for issued overtime based on the two-week payroll schedule. Meaning 80+ hours in two weeks put you into overtime. 51 hours one week and 30 hours the second counted as 1 hour of 1.5X and 80 hours of 1X. I kept an eye on my hours and pointed it out everytime I exceeded 40 in a week, but the floor staff, as much as i reminded them, did not.

In Arizona, the VPs of Harkin's said that, if the law were to change and OT came into play, the managers just wouldn't be allowed to work over 40. Given the choice, most there would rather work OT at regular pay then being sent home at 40.

-Adam

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 11-30-2003, 12:48 AM:

[Confused]

"gross annual income of >$500,000" means greater than $500,000.

Posted by Travis Hubrig (Member # 1745) on 11-30-2003, 04:05 PM:

Edit:

Carmike now pays overtime 1.5x here in my state.
If you are not salary, you will not work more than 40hrs a week.

I am pretty sure in North Dakota, theatres are exempt from paying overtime...

[ 12-01-2003, 05:28 PM: Message edited by: Travis Hubrig ]

Posted by R. Andrew Diercks (Member # 1725) on 11-30-2003, 11:09 PM:

The State minimum wage rate for Iowa is $5.15 per hour. If the Federal minimum wage surpasses Iowa's minimum wage, the Federal minimum wage rate will replace Iowa's minimum wage rate. Overtime is only applicable when it is included in an employment agreement or a contract between employer and employee.

This was copied from the Iowa overtime law website. Subdirectory of workforce development. I guess this is why I never got overtime before I was salary. Now of course I expect to work over 40 hours. I can't complain though, free movies and the many hours of downtime with little work between showtimes was compensation enough for a lad in school. I might have bitched a bit in a 20 screen with no downtime.

Posted by Jason Black (Member # 684) on 11-30-2003, 11:21 PM:

Travis,

That's a very broad, not to mention untrue, statement that you have made. You might consider editing to reflect OT regs in YOUR state.

Posted by Gracia L. Babbidge (Member # 582) on 12-01-2003, 01:29 AM:

I remember being on slavery... er, salary... [evil]

um yeah, work in excess of 40 / week, and technically get paid for only 40 hours. Then again, it was possible to get some paid time off.

Most weeks the amount of hours I worked didn't phase me, then there were the weeks from hell when I would have liked to have been hourly and paid time and a half for the multitude of hours worked in excess of forty. [Razz]

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 12-01-2003, 03:12 PM:

Just because you are put on salary does not make you exempt from overtime. Usually people in supervisory/administrative roles are the ones who are exempt, check your state laws to be sure.

As an example, our janitors are paid a salary instead of an hourly wage. In the extraordinarily unlikely event that one of them were to work over 40 hours they would qaulify for overtime pay under Wisconsin law.

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 12-01-2003, 05:26 PM:

The screening rooms I worked for in California paid overtime on anything over 40 hours and 8 hours per shift. But the projectionists at the theatres were paid regular time from open to 1am. After 1am you got overtime, so they would schedule films to end just before or just after. So you got 15 minutes of OT.

The Southern California GCC projectionists during the early 90's, got what was called daytime overtime in their contract. This meant anything before 12 noon was overtime. So GCC theatre projectionists with morning screenings would get overtime plus anything after 12 midnight. The other chains had after 12:30 am most of the times during the early 90's.

Here in New York, I'm on salary for 40 hours plus overtime after 8 hours and overtime on weekends and all holidays. Most days I do from 4-6 hours of overtime for the day.

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 12-02-2003, 05:41 AM:

Although getting paid over time is nice, I've never been a huge fan of it since I'd rather work at one job 88 hours a week than two jobs at 44 hours a week each. One job cuts down on the travel time which leaves more time for eating and sleeping. I guess the upside is it keeps things a little more interesting.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 12-02-2003, 09:23 AM:

News from NATO:

http://www.infocusmag.com/03november/washreport2.htm

quote:
Issue Takes On New Importance For Election Year
Overtime Pay Takes Center Stage in Congress
by Jonathan Yarowsky
NATO Washington Counsel

In a recent column, we discussed the increasing attention given to the issue of “overtime” pay in the American workplace. At the time of that earlier column, legislation (H.R. 1119) was pending before the House Education and Workforce Committee that would amend the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) of 1938 to permit private sector employers to offer their employees the option of receiving overtime pay in the form of paid compensatory time in lieu of cash wages. Supporters of this legislation contend that in the changing workplace environment, flexibility is necessary to provide working parents with the option of receiving comp time in lieu of cash compensation in order to spend more time at home.

As also indicated at that time, we were monitoring the legislation closely because FLSA, in addition to providing that eligible employees who work over 40 hours will be compensated at a rate of one and one-half times their regular rate of pay, also includes exemptions to such a 40-hour workweek – including a specific reference to motion picture theatres. Thus, any legislation that implicates the underlying provisions of the 1938 Act must be tracked very carefully.

As of this writing, H.R. 1119 has not received a vote on the House floor. However, the legislative action on the issue of overtime has now shifted to a policy debate about the Department of Labor’s plan to change the definition of who is eligible for overtime pay. The changes in definitions are embodied in regulations proposed by the Department of Labor on March 31. There is sharp disagreement about how many people would be affected. Currently, workers earning $8,000 or less are statutorily guaranteed overtime pay. The new regulations would raise the cutoff to $22,100. Supporters of the new regulations contend that this change would allow 1.3 million low-wage workers (earning between $8,000 and $22,000) to be eligible for overtime. At the same time, the regulations would disqualify certain workers now receiving overtime if they “hold a position of responsibility” while performing non-manual work. Opponents counter with the argument that the new standard is overbroad and vague and that, ironically, overtime would be denied to thousands of white collar workers currently receiving it.

On July 10, the House of Representatives debated an amendment offered by congressmen David Obey (D-Wis.) and George Miller (D-Calif.) that would prohibit the secretary of labor from promulgating any regulation that has the effect of exempting from FLSA overtime compensation requirements any employee currently eligible for overtime pay. The amendment which was offered to the Labor Department-Health and Human Services Department appropriations bill (Labor/HHS).

Following the August recess, the Senate took up Labor/HHS. At that time, Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) offered a similar amendment to block the implementation of the new Department of Labor rules. Six Republicans joined with 48 Democrats in opposing the proposed changes to overtime eligibility, and the Harkin amendment was approved.

But the matter is hardly resolved, as the larger Labor/HHS bill moves to a House-Senate conference where the conferees must resolve many critical issues covering programs from student loans to medical research to Medicare.

It is now abundantly clear in Washington that the seemingly innocuous, non-partisan issue of “overtime” has finally migrated up the political radar screen to set the stage for an “election year” debate.

Posted by Jason Black (Member # 684) on 11-12-2004, 09:49 PM:

BUMPING this back for conversation...

Has anyone else in theatre operations/management had to alter the method of payment for any salaried personnel due to implemenation of the FairPay Act adopted 8/23/04?

From all I have been able to decipher under the FLSA & DOL sites, the theatre industry continues to carry the exemption from overtime payment.

Anyone have any words of wisdom?

Posted by Chase Hanson (Member # 2779) on 11-13-2004, 02:34 AM:

Well

I know that "WE" do pay out OT, it appears to be mandated specifically for the Entertainment Industry in California. We also pretty much have no manager on Salary anymore, I imagine this is because the Fairpay Act, although from what I understood when all the math was done Salary and Wage managers were making about the same amount of money.

Posted by Jason Black (Member # 684) on 11-13-2004, 10:48 AM:

Chase,

Rest assured that any time you compare a salaried position over an hourly position, the hourly position damn near always equates to better pay for the time worked, at least in this business...
[Mad]

Hell, with the increase to $455/wk, I'd rather be an asst and know that I would only work 40/hrs week. Nothing like an hour decrease with a pay increase!!

Posted by Chase Hanson (Member # 2779) on 11-13-2004, 12:28 PM:

Well

One is infinitely scalable one isnt. The purpose of the comparison was to see (because we were curious) that the IRL figures were roughly comperable (I think they were comparing 50/hr work weeks). Its pretty rare to find a salaried spot in this business that is reasonable compensation for the amount of work you do.

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 11-13-2004, 12:31 PM:

Jason, I've come to the same conclusion as you from examination of the laws (www.dol.gov). Our home office apparantly has a different opinion on the matter [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Jason Black (Member # 684) on 11-13-2004, 12:59 PM:

Whay aren't you at work? LOL.. I tried calling you last night and just a few minutes ago...

Fair Pay Act

FairPay

DOL's FairPay Overtime Initiative

Secretary's Video
Welcome to the FairPay Web site. It's designed to help you understand the Department's new FairPay rules that strengthen overtime protections.

Under the new FairPay rules, workers earning less than $23,660 per year — or $455 per week — are guaranteed overtime protection. This will strengthen overtime rights for 6.7 million American workers, including 1.3 million low-wage workers who were denied overtime under the old rules.

Learn More About FairPay

The effective date of the regulations is August 23, 2004.

Click on any of the seminars below to learn more about the new "white collar" regulations. The seminar can be paused or forwarded just like a VCR or DVD. Click on the underlined words in the slides and script for links to the regulatory text, preamble, fact sheets and other related documents. For optimal viewing, set your screen size to 1024 X 768. You can also download this seminar for your own training event.

Posted by Chris Medley (Member # 2145) on 11-15-2004, 08:53 AM:

We will never...ever...ever get overtime as long as NATO as lobbyists in Congress. The theater chains would actually have to allow for a decent staff level and pay grade so that only forty hours for the employees would still cover everything. During the summer I don't remember seeing a week under 45 hours and that is a conservative estimate. If we all got paid 1.5x for our overtime then the chains would loose millions in extra payroll..a cost they just can't except.

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 11-15-2004, 07:21 PM:

Chris, as mentioned the company I work for is under the impression that the Fairpay Act over-rides the Fair Labor Standards Act and specificaly the theatre employee exemption clause. I (and apparantly Jason) think they are wrong. From what I can tell Fairpay augments/changes but does not replace the FSLA. Point being that as far as my company is concerned there is a such thing as overtime now, hence no employees (outside of exempt managers) can work over 40 hours a week.

I do not see the issue though, only a couple of times have I had floor staff work over 40 hours and when it happened it was because they traded shifts to get that many hours, they weren't scheduled. I really see no reason why a properly staffed theatre would need to work floorstaff more than 40 hours a week.

Now weekend/holiday pay, THAT would hurt theatres. Alas I do not think that (at least on a federal level) weekend/holiday pay is the law for anyone.

Posted by Jason Black (Member # 684) on 11-15-2004, 08:42 PM:

Dustin,

The problem lies in the fact that no one at the HO fully understands the ramifications of this new law. Converting to a straight 40 over salary is not the way to 'circumvent' this new act, IMO.

I won't go into the details here, but in the end, I see this whole process as one big, unnecessary PITA.

Posted by Lisa Cook (Member # 2718) on 11-16-2004, 08:38 PM:

I have worked in three states with the same theater chain. I started in New Mexico with no 1.5 for OT. I moved to Oregon then Texas and it was the same deal. I moved back to New Mexico about a year ago and this time they DID have 1.5 for OT. I am no expert on the subject but apparently the state ammended the labor laws (or that is what everyone was saying).

Posted by Lisa Cook (Member # 2718) on 11-16-2004, 08:49 PM:

I have worked in three states with the same theater chain. I started in New Mexico with no 1.5 for OT. I moved to Oregon then Texas and it was the same deal. I moved back to New Mexico about a year ago (only for 8 months)and this time they DID have 1.5 for OT. I am no expert on the subject but apparently the state ammended the labor laws (or that is what everyone was saying).
On a personal note, I actually liked working at a no OT theater (I know, it sounds crazy). I like to work about 50 hours a week and that NEVER happened in N.M. We (we being the non-salary management) would get scheduled about 32-37 hours a week and no more. So I got stuck with less hours which means less money (I had a whopping 2.5 hours of OT in the 8 months I was there). I understood though...those few people getting paid that extra .5 adds up and we all know how it goes when payroll $ is tight.

Posted by David Yauch (Member # 2754) on 11-18-2004, 03:39 AM:

First off, Welcome Lisa!

My theatre doesn't pay overtime either, but I imagine if they did we'd just see no one getting 40 hours anymore. Of course I live in Arizona, and the chance of seeing mandated overtime anytime soon is about as good as your chances of getting struck by lightning on the way to redeeming your winning lottery ticket, it's just not going to happen. We do get 1.5 holiday pay for thanksgiving, christmas eve evening, christmas day, and the new years.

Posted by Lisa Cook (Member # 2718) on 11-20-2004, 10:47 PM:

Thank you for the welcome David.
I thought the same for New Mexico (of all places I lived I would have thought that the last to make 1.5 mandatory for us folks).
I must say though...I love the holidays for the 1.5 because we have enough business to where that extra money isn't such an issue (and perhaps there is a hint of generosity in the air). Open to close Christmas Day & New Year's Day for me please!