This is topic Movie Theatre Circuits Fined For Child Labor Violations 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=002476
Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 03-02-2011, 12:07 PM:
 
Foxnews.com

quote: Fox News

U.S. Fines 3 Movie Theater Companies Over Child Labor Allegations

Published March 01, 2011

ST. LOUIS -- Operators of three of the nation's biggest movie theater chains have paid more than $277,000 in federal fines over allegations that they violated child-labor laws by letting teenagers work too many hours and use dangerous machinery such as trash compactors, the Labor Department announced Tuesday.

The government said the alleged violations of U.S. child-labor laws by Regal Cinemas Inc., Marcus Theatres Corp. and Wehrenberg Inc. were uncovered as part of a "strategic" crackdown on what the department called the industry's high rate of noncompliance.

Investigators found the supposed offenses to be sweeping, surfacing in 27 theaters in California, Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, South Carolina and Wisconsin.

Some 160 employees were illegally being required to perform hazardous jobs -- everything from operating paper balers and trash compactors to driving motor vehicles, using power-driven mixers and baking -- in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act's youth-employment provisions, the Labor Department said.

That law identifies 17 hazardous jobs barred for workers younger than 18, including operating and unloading scrap paper balers and paper box compactors unless certain specific conditions are met. The law also restricts the times and hours of employees younger than 16 -- something the Labor Department said Marcus Theatres did not honor.

"The penalties imposed as a result of these violations should serve as a wake-up call to movie theatre owners and other employers," Labor Secretary Hilda Solis said in a statement.

"Businesses that employ minors are legally and ethically obligated to abide by child labor standards and ensure youth are protected on the job."

All three companies were alleged to have allowed young workers to load and operate trash compactors -- a federal violation that got Regal Cinemas, the Knoxville, Tenn.-based operator of Regal, Edwards and United Artist theaters, the heftiest of the fines: $158,400.

Regal Entertainment Group, Regal Cinemas' corporate parent, markets itself online as the purveyor of the nation's biggest and most geographically broad theater circuit, with 6,683 screens at 537 theatres in 37 states and the District of Columbia as of late last month.

Milwaukee, Wis.-based Marcus Theatres Corp., which paid $93,995 in fines, also let teenage workers drive motor vehicles, run a dough mixer. Employees younger than 16 were asked to do baking and allowed to work longer hours than legally permitted.

Marcus Theatres, a Marcus Corp. unit touting itself as the nation's sixth-biggest theater circuit, with 684 screens at 55 locations in seven Midwest states, said in a statement it remains dedicated to providing a safe workplace, fully cooperated with the Labor Department and "proactively took actions to address this situation before any violations were assessed." The company said those steps have included barring minors from loading trash compactors, revising signs to better spell out safety policies and age requirements, and reviewing federal regulations with managers and other employees.

While none of the violations linked to Marcus Theatres involved accidents or injuries, the company "is happy that these issues were brought to our attention so we could further strengthen the policies and procedures that we already have in place to ensure a safe and enjoyable working environment for all of our associates," the company said.

Based in St. Louis, Wehrenberg -- dating to 1906 as the self-professed oldest family owned and operated theater group in the country -- has paid $25,080 on allegations that it also allowed young workers to operate motor vehicles.

Messages left Tuesday with Regal and Wehrenberg were not immediately returned.

The Labor Department said the companies have agreed to put in place compliance and training programs. Regal Cinemas is showing a child-labor public service announcement about workplace safety at all of its 458 digital cinema sites in 39 states.

According to federal law, workers 14 or 15 may do certain occupations outside school hours, but not before 7 a.m. or later than 7 p.m., or past 9 p.m. from June 1 until Labor Day. Such workers also may not work more than three hours on a school day, 18 hours in a school week, or eight hours on a non-school day and 40 hours in a week when school isn't in session.
Does this mean kids can't work 90 hours a week?
 
Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 03-02-2011, 01:28 PM:
 
quote: Mitchell Dvoskin
Does this mean kids can't work 90 hours a week?
Only if they are in the country legally [evil]
 
Posted by John T. Hendrickson, Jr (Member # 849) on 03-03-2011, 08:34 AM:
 
The article is not at all surprising. I'm sure labor violations happen all over the country in the exhibition industry. I would think that the chains would be most prone to it- kids working for the minimum wage and managers who could care less how many hours the employees work, so long as they can cover the shifts. Higher-ups looking the other way. No problem, as long as the bottom line shows a profit.

You will also find managers who are too lazy to interview perspective new employees to spread out the hours. Easier to work the present ones to death.

This sort of thing is probably less likely to happen where individual theatre owners run a hands-on type of operation, unless, of course, you have the type of individual owner who doesn't give a damn and doesn't bother to monitor total hours.

I'm not saying that mistakes don't happen even in well-run theatres. Generally speaking, good business people don't let something like this occur.
 
Posted by Chad Souder (Member # 343) on 03-04-2011, 06:22 PM:
 
John -

You're way off on this story. We're (Marcus) not working anyone to death and there were no higher ups looking the other way. You're implying managers were intentionally violating labor laws and that is simply not the case. We offer hours to those who want them. In Iowa for example, someone under 16 can only work 3 hours on a school day. 3 hours isn't a very long shift. 3 hours and 5 minutes is a violation for which you get fined. The violations regarding equipment usage are something we admittedly weren't very clear on. That is now fixed.

Also, the "operating motor vehicles" mentioned is referring to allowing someone under 18 to use their vehicle for a work errand. In other words, a 17 year old with a valid driver license that drives over to another theatre to borrow some supplies or to get copies made at a store causes a violation. Yes, its that stupid.

There were some mistakes made and we now won't be hiring anyone under 16. Sorry kids, you can't have a job here because the government doesn't trust you around a donut conveyor oven or to go grab something out of the freezer. There were no injuries sustained and we had no employees complain about unfavorable working conditions. This is simply a revenue stream for an under-funded government watchdog. This is how stupid their standards are: A 15 year old cannot use the oven to cook a pizza and they can't help unload a delivery truck, but there is no language restricting them from using the popper or running projection equipment. Yep, really stupid.
 
Posted by Bill Enos (Member # 440) on 03-04-2011, 07:11 PM:
 
They can't operate a film projector here, I checked about 10-12 years ago, if it has parts that can move or get hot they can't touch it. Va. has stricter regs than the Feds. We don't hire anybody under 18 for anything.
 
Posted by Edward Havens (Member # 4715) on 03-06-2011, 02:48 PM:
 
Way to make generalizations, Mr. Hendricksen. Maybe these types of things are typical in the theatres you frequent, but I'm quite proud to say that, since 1986, not one theatre I have ever worked at has been hit with any kind of labor citation and/or fine.

I am aware at least one of the theatres in my circuit was checked last week as part of this sweep, but since my chain is not listed as one of the offenders and the state that theatre is in is not listed amongst the locations where violations were discovered, I am wondering how many theatres the Labor Department actually checked as part of this sweep and how many came out without a single violation. Did they check fifty locations? 27 of 50 locations with violations is quite problematic indeed. Did they check a hundred? 250? 500? 1,000? There are roughly 5,900 operational movie theatre complexes (indoor and drive-in, single screen to megaplex) in America in March 2011, so how many did they check and how many came away clean? FoxNews is more likely to write a story up to be sensationalistic and push aside the facts and figures that show their angle to be pure drivel.
 
Posted by John T. Hendrickson, Jr (Member # 849) on 03-06-2011, 07:44 PM:
 
New Jersey has strict regulations regarding child labor, and yes, businesses are monitored, and yes, there are citations and fines involved for those who violate said regulations.

I can not speak for the specifics of other areas, but I stand by my closing remark in my reply to this topic:

I'm not saying that mistakes don't happen even in well-run theatres. Generally speaking, good business people don't let something like this occur.
 
Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 03-08-2011, 09:38 PM:
 
quote: Chad Souder
You're way off on this story. We're (Marcus) not working anyone to death
Not to seem snarky here, but the Feds don't seem to agree with you. Isn't it precisely MARCUS Theatre Corp. who the Feds are going after here for their non-comliance with child labor laws?

quote:
The government said the alleged violations of U.S. child-labor laws by Regal Cinemas Inc., Marcus Theatres Corp. and Wehrenberg Inc. were uncovered as part of a "strategic" crackdown on what the department called the industry's high rate of noncompliance.
Why, yes...so it is.
 
Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 03-08-2011, 09:56 PM:
 
Someone needs to get real here, we work in a carnival industry!
There is a culture of cutting it close in this industry. Promoting kids to management so they can run the booth is one easy example. I know we don't work in steel mills here, but there are job hazards in the entertainment industry and I don't mean just lecherous managers.

There are child labor laws for good and proper reasons.

If someone has a problem with what the law states, say so and don't whine about persecution.
 
Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 03-08-2011, 10:28 PM:
 
If we weren't such a sue-happy society alot of these rules wouldn't be there. A kid can drive his beat-up, dangerous car over the speed limit and risk death all the way to his job at the movie theatre, but if he happens to burn his finger on the popcorn kettle, suddenly the theatre company is on the hook for thousands of dollars in "damages."*

* This is a theoretical thing; I don't think it's actually happened yet
 
Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 03-09-2011, 12:51 AM:
 
Come on Mike, having a parent looking for a money pot "damages" just because little Johnny gets his finger burned is not what is being discussed here. This is not some irrate gold-digger, it's the US government looking to enforce child labor laws. Shouldn't it be doing that? Which of the child labor laws do you think shouldn't be enforced? They were not enacted because we are litigious society; they are enacted because we want to protect children.

Sure, people do stupid things -- ahole parents will send their 15yr out to work in a "beatup, dangerous car over the speed limit and risk death all the way to his job at the movie theatre" -- do you think that should give his employer the right to put him in further risk when he gets to his job by not obeying labor laws? Or perhaps get rid of those terribly confining speed limits too -- how about that? The one is irrelevant to the other.

And not-for-nutting, but everyone yells about how we are so ready to sue -- damn litigious society we've got here -- yah, until they feel they have been wronged and want redress. Methinks they would be the first to scream even louder if that route to a remedy were denied them. And who should we appoint to judge what is a legitimate lawsuit and which ones should be tossed out on the merits? Oh, wait....that would be the judges. Or maybe we should get rid of them too?
 
Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 03-09-2011, 08:34 AM:
 
Moderation is a key. I too think we are an over litigious society.

While I don't think we should selectively enforce laws...I do think we would be well served to re-evaluate all of our laws on a regular basis to see if they are needed or serve the purpose intended...if they aren't doing society good, repeal them.

I do think we need to have some form of Federal law dealing with "assumed risk." That is, going out into the world has inherent hazards (slipping and falling, cutting oneself...etc)...and with that you don't get to sue someone JUST because you got hurt. The threshold of responsibility should be a bit higher than what I see...there should need to be willful neglect involved or deliberate intent. If you are a klutz, it isn't the world's fault to pay for you.

But back on topic...child labor laws are a touchy one and they vary from locale to locale. If they are on the books, then they should be enforced. If they should not be on the books, repeal them.

-Steve
 
Posted by Jonathan M. Crist (Member # 413) on 03-09-2011, 10:45 AM:
 
quote: Steve Guttag
child labor laws are a touchy one and they vary from locale to locale.
This is only partially true. With regard to the employment hours of 14 and 15 year olds (intended to make sure work does not interfere with school studies - for details see Mitchell's original post above) and prohibition of the use of certain types or equipment and occupations even for 16 to 18 year olds (safety issues) these are found in the federal Fair Labor Standards Act and as such apply across all 50 states. States are always free to provide MORE protection but the federal law provides a minimum standard.

With regard to the necessity of having 'working papers' and with regard to working hours for 16 to 18 year olds these do vary state to state.

I doubt that most theatre operators (unless they have a dedicated HR department) are even aware what their state labor laws are - other than it is a form they have to post on the employee bulletin board (assuming they even have an employee bulletin board).

In my area a local theatre manager was charged with sexual assault of a 15 year old female employee in his office at the close of the employee's shift on a Wednesday night at closing time (11PM). Since it was a school night the labor law violation came to light as part of the investigation. I was stunned to hear the local police admit they were unaware of the existence of the child labor laws.
 
Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-09-2011, 10:57 AM:
 
quote: John T. Hendrickson, Jr
I would think that the chains would be most prone to it- kids working for the minimum wage and managers who could care less how many hours the employees work, so long as they can cover the shifts.
Actually, the thing I have been seeing is managers and assistants -basically anyone on salary and exempt from overtime being over-worked and constantly under pressure from the higher ups to keep cutting payroll further and further and further. The fewer people on the clock the better. Who gives a damn how long the lines are at the concession stand or that there's not enough people to clean the auditoriums between shows or keep rowdy, disruptive audience members under control?

Our current regulations on child labor are an extension of general worker's comp liabilities. It all goes back to insurance and covering one's ass. With totally unchecked cost inflation continuing on in the health care industrial complex we can look forward to this situation getting worse and worse.

And we can also look forward to even more businesses hiring people illegally, paying them cash under the table to get around the system -whether they're illegal immigrants or actual American citizens. Bars and night clubs are a great example. Lots of American citizens working there, but quite a few bars are paying those folks off the books to save huge amounts of money. When they get caught, they get closed. But no one goes to jail over it. Our prisons are already crowded with too many other more serious criminals to bother doing anything about "white collar crime."
 
Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 03-09-2011, 12:00 PM:
 
quote: Bobby Henderson
The fewer people on the clock the better. Who gives a damn how long the lines are at the concession stand or that there's not enough people to clean the auditoriums between shows or keep rowdy, disruptive audience members under control?
Similarly, I remember at an old job, the manager got a new janitor service contracted to clean auditoriums and the lobby. The corporate people complained to her that they were charging much more than the agency used the year before, but all that corporate person saw was the balance sheet and not all the times the guys hadn't shown up at all or had done a piss-poor job. And it had only gotten worse when they knew we'd signed a contract with someone else.
 
Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 03-09-2011, 12:20 PM:
 
One problem with the managers and such working overtime is the stupid exemption Cinema employees have on the overtime law. Why should Cinema (or anyone else, for that matter) be exempt from getting overtime pay? The idea is to prevent people from being overworked. With the exemption...then why wouldn't a theatre owner keep piling more and more on the manager/asst. managers...it is free labor after a point. The only safety net is if the amount of hours worked versus the salary would place said manager at less than minimum wage.

In my day, very few 14-15 year olds were hired due to prohibitive hour restrictions. The 16 and 17 year olds did have different labor laws in DC, MD and VA. In DC, for instance, they could not work past 10:00pm...normally not too much of an issue...except if you were a projectionist. Maryland and Virginia were not as restrictive but more of the time between school and work as well as work and school.

-Steve
 
Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 03-09-2011, 01:27 PM:
 
And since it is the movie industry, youngsters are flattered to be promoted to an assistant manager gig. They're on their way to a glamorous career.
 
Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 03-09-2011, 03:04 PM:
 
-
 
Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 03-09-2011, 03:21 PM:
 
Sam: i like the carnival analogy. When I first started, the largest local circuit was Switow Theatres. The joke was that "we are only 2 steps away from the Midway." Indeed Grandaddy Switow was a carny; stopped in Louisville about 1900 and set up a sheet and projected slides. . . . .we WERE 2 generations away from the carnival.

fwiw: My first job was after 8th grade building racks for Altec/Stromberg Carlson/Rauland. The company also had large punch presses which made said job illegal. Frankly the large presses scared me to death. Within 2 weeks, the people who hired me realized that I was OK around power tools and everything (except punch presses) was OK and safe. Still illegal, though. In Kentucky the schools enforce student labor permits. What makes this funny is that I got my job due to pressure from my Mom's supervisor at the school system; the very people who were supposed to protect me. They knew me well enough to realize that I was safe where someone else might not be. (I built all of the school system racks for 9 years.) Louis
 
Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 03-09-2011, 06:23 PM:
 
I'm glad my irony was not missed.
 
Posted by Chad Souder (Member # 343) on 03-10-2011, 06:38 PM:
 
quote: Frank Angel
Not to seem snarky here, but the Feds don't seem to agree with you. Isn't it precisely MARCUS Theatre Corp. who the Feds are going after here for their non-comliance with child labor laws?
Yes, Marcus was one of the companies audited, but I was specifically responding to the accusation by John of "working present employees to death." Trash compactor and motor vehicle violations are not the same as excessive hours. Child labor violations make you think of rows of children in a sweat shop being worked like slaves. This was not the case. Why did they go on a mad hunt for trash compactor violations? I don't really know. Why was Marcus one of the chains? Nobody knows that either. Marcus has had no accidents relating to compactors by anyone of age, much less someone under 18. Maybe one of the other chains had an accident and they decided to make it a mission. One they're in your building they inspect everything they can and rack up as many fines as possible. That's how they stay afloat, after all.

quote: Bobby Henderson
Actually, the thing I have been seeing is managers and assistants -basically anyone on salary and exempt from overtime being over-worked and constantly under pressure from the higher ups to keep cutting payroll further and further and further.
You are absolutely correct on this, Bobby. Last I knew, Carmike was requiring 50+ hours per week from their salaried managers and they also give salary to assistant managers and require them to work far more than 40. I will add that I do not know of this to be a problem with Marcus.

quote: Steve Guttag
Why should Cinema (or anyone else, for that matter) be exempt from getting overtime pay?
My understanding is that this is because of the massive seasonal swings theatres experience. My employees actually enjoy the option of working 45, 50, or even 60 hours per week over their Christmas break. They're not doing anything else anyway and if we had to pay overtime, we would probably be like Wal-Mart and not allow anyone to work more than 39.5 hours. In fact, Wal-Mart writes you up if you go over. In addition to the safety concerns of factory labor, overtime laws were intended more for businesses with benefits because they didn't want to hire additional employees and have to pay those benefits. At a theatre with part-time, minimum wage kids, there are no benefits so it doesn't matter.
 
Posted by John T. Hendrickson, Jr (Member # 849) on 03-11-2011, 09:09 PM:
 
Hold on there Chad. Are you saying that you allow employees to work 50-60 hours during busy periods and you don't pay them overtime?

I have two problems with this if true. First, in New Jersey, hourly employees are entitled to overtime if they exceed 40 hours, That's the law.

Second, for those employees working over 40 hours a week, just how productive do you think those people are after working one and a half times the hours of a normal week (60 hours)?

And as far as scheduling overtime for employees, you can knock Walmart all you want, but that only seems like a sensible business practice to me in order to keep labor costs down.
 
Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 03-11-2011, 09:27 PM:
 
Many states use the same overtime rules that the federal government does for the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and in it, Motion picture theater employees are exempt from overtime. That's the law.

http://www.dol.gov/elaws/esa/flsa/screen75.asp
 
Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 03-11-2011, 09:30 PM:
 
The overtime exemption mainly applies to managers...and in any event...there should be NO exemption...working in excess of 40-hours should constitute overtime...otherwise...you get what has been happening...people are forced to do MORE work for no more pay. The salaried employee gets abused.

If labor really wanted to scare the crap out of business, they should start a serious campaign to eliminate the exemption for "Supervisors" from being in a union. If there is a group in this business that needs a union...it is theatre managers...what an abused lot (by and large....sure there are good examples but there are a ton of bad examples).
 
Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 03-11-2011, 09:44 PM:
 
The department of labor says that the exemption applies to "employees of motion picture theaters" and not just managers. I agree that there shouldn't be an exemption but the exemption is there nonetheless.
 
Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 03-11-2011, 11:51 PM:
 
When state and federal law contradict in these matters the more stringent standard applies. Yes, there is an exemption for all theatre employees, not just salaried employees, in the FSLA; however, a state can pass a law that supersedes that exemption. So, in Wisconsin for example there is no such state law but in North Dakota there is. I am not sure if New Jersey has over-ridden the exemption or not.
 
Posted by Kurt Zupin (Member # 2751) on 03-12-2011, 03:32 AM:
 
quote: John T. Hendrickson, Jr
Second, for those employees working over 40 hours a week, just how productive do you think those people are after working one and a half times the hours of a normal week (60 hours)?
The overtime thing has always been a double edged sword for me. I love my job, I'm a capped out AM4 with my company. Thats the highest you can go with out being on salary. If Theatres were made to pay overtime then I'd have to go out and find another job or work two jobs because I would never get more then 35 hours a week. I simply would not be able to live off of 70 hours a week after taxes. Its no secret that Managers and even the team members are not paid a reasonable wage for the things expected. I should probably be making $3-4 more an hour for the things that I have to be able to do. But it is the nature of the beast, something we have to deal with if we want to work in the industry we love. Thankfully my bosses understand that fact and allow us to work as much as we would like. If you don't want to work 60 hours a week then don't! No gun is being held to your head. Please don't act high and mighty that people are being Forced to work these hours.

John I work on average of 60 hours a week and my productivity is as high or higher then those that work the "normal" 40 every week. Chad isn't forcing these kids to work 60 hours a week over the holidays. Half of my staff when they are not in school are trying to get as many hours as they can. And shocker guess what. They do just as good a job as when they only work 15.

Any company that willingly hires anyone under the age of 16 does so knowing that they are going to have to jump through a lot of hoops. You take the risk of these fines on yourself. The company I work for does not hire anyone under the age of 16 because of these simple facts.
 
Posted by Chad Souder (Member # 343) on 03-12-2011, 01:29 PM:
 
Well said, Kurt.

John - First, I really don't care what New Jersey law is. I don't live in New Jersey. I know what Iowa law is, which is where I live and work. You seem to be the only one here that doesn't understand labor laws vary state to state.

Second, if you don't have people capable of maintaining productivity at a movie theatre pace for 60 hours in the same week, I'm sorry. From what I've seen on Jersey Shore that doesn't really surprise me. We don't have that problem here. If an employee asks for lots of hours, then their productivity drops, you can assume an observant manager is going to notice and correct it. Keep in mind these are not forced hours. My employees tell me how much they prefer to work, and we try our best to comply. 40 hours isn't some magical number. It's not like once you get to 41 or 45 hours you all of a sudden lose strength in your scooping hand. My productivity problems have more frequently come from employees working 20 hours per week, but choosing to go tie one on the night before an 8 hour shift.

Third, I'm not knocking Walmart. I'm knocking a law that forces them to make the business decision to restrict their employees to fewer than 40 hours. Like Kurt said, it just forces people to get a second job which accumulates more than 40 hours combined anyway, so you're drop in productivity theory completely falls apart.
 
Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 03-12-2011, 02:51 PM:
 
The 40 hour standard was brought about by those dreaded labor unions and the idea was for a person to be able to make a living wage within those hours and be able to pursue a real life in the remaining time.

(There are certainly employees that want to work maximum hours for any number of reasons; from poverty to a drug habit and everything in between. The reason doesn't really matter but at some point it should not be allowed.)

The industry lobby pushed through exemptions years ago when TV was emptying theatres to be exempt from paying minimum wage as well as other provisions. Kind of like endangered species legislation. Some of these provisions are still law.

Certain owners would argue to this day it's not a viable business if they have to pay adult wages or conform to hearing impaired and disability legislation. This is all about self interest.
 
Posted by Mike Frese (Member # 4361) on 03-12-2011, 03:04 PM:
 
I hired a 15 year old when we first started. The parents approved and the kid understood that his school work would not suffer. A neighboring hostile business raised some fuss over a work situation that was agreeable to all parties including the parents. Because of that hassle, we will no longer hire anyone younger than 16.

Overtime: I do not require any staff person to work more than 40 hours. If they choose to work more than 40 hours (for all of the reasons mentioned already) they will not get time and a half.
 
Posted by Aaron Mehocic (Member # 15) on 03-12-2011, 04:42 PM:
 
quote: Chad Souder
I'm sorry. From what I've seen on Jersey Shore that doesn't really surprise me. We don't have that problem here.
Hate the game, not the player. Insinuating everybody from New Jersey behaves like those morons lessens your entire argument in my opinion.
 
Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 03-12-2011, 04:56 PM:
 
I never meant to imply that federal exemption didn't apply to all employees...it is just the managers that get extra screwed...the salaried ones don't get any extra money. The hourly one does get their regular rate.

The hourly ones are also eligible for unions that could bargain for overtime pay for over 40. There are states and localities that require time and one half for over 40 and those businesses don't go broke doing it. Normally one only wants their better employees working those extra hours anyway since there is extra value in their service (they are more capable, can handle more, do a better job...etc). In my past jobs...it was a way to give a raise to those employees that were superior without the formality of a pay grade increase.

While I can appreciate the notion that working the extra hours at straight time is a means for some. It also proves the point that the exemption artificially depresses wages in this industry. If good employees can't afford to work in the cinema industry, they would seek employment elsewhere and force a change in the wage structure if the theatre wanted to keep good employees. Instead, the talented employees must give up more of their free time to make what they should make in a reasonable amount of hours.

The bottom line for me is...there should not be exemptions for the movie industry.
 
Posted by Mike Frese (Member # 4361) on 03-14-2011, 12:40 PM:
 
Steve,

Management pay structure is based on how many hours they are expected to work. If that number hours was say 50 and but it needs to be capped at 40, the salary paid will be lower. I used to pay my managers with an expectation of 45 hours a week but found I was getting the short end of that stick. So now all of my staff are paid hourly.
 
Posted by John T. Hendrickson, Jr (Member # 849) on 03-15-2011, 08:37 AM:
 
To return to the original topic:

Bobby Henderson from Oklahoma was really on-point and stated the dirty little secret of the movie business, the exploitation of the “salaried” people in the exhibition industry.

Sam Chavez also got it right. The entire exhibition industry has a deplorable record on violation of child labor laws.



Bttm line: they violated federal law and they had to pay the price.

If you are in disagreement with the law, then work to change it.
 
Posted by Chad Souder (Member # 343) on 03-17-2011, 06:59 PM:
 
quote: Aaron Mehocic
Insinuating everybody from New Jersey behaves like those morons lessens your entire argument in my opinion.
I know. It was a joke. I've never even watched Jersey Shore, although I've spent a substantial amount of time on the real Jersey Shore since my mother was born and raised in Cherry Hill and her parents had a summer home in Tom's River. But I digress. It was just a joke.

quote: John T. Hendrickson, Jr
Bttm line: they violated federal law and they had to pay the price.
Nobody is arguing with you there, but that's a far cry from your original accusations of laziness, working employees to death and owners who don't give a damn.

While I also agree with Bobby, I don't think it is something unique to the exhibition industry. I don't know of a salaried person in ANY field that works 40 hours. I would guess 45-50 is more common. I suppose there are some self-employed people out there that can make that happen, but most of them I know work far, far more than 40 hours since it's their own money. Thinking through my mental Rolodex of friends and aquaintances, everyone salaried works well over 40. Overtime laws make some think 40 hours is a full week of work, or a maximum a person should be expected to work, when in my opinion that is not true. It's just a convenient, even number for which unions long ago negotiated.
 
Posted by John T. Hendrickson, Jr (Member # 849) on 03-21-2011, 06:34 PM:
 
Chad, you don't know of a salaried employee in ANY field that works 40 hours?

Try teachers and school administrators for starters. There are a great many jobs that pay salaries AND work even less than 40 hours. Here's a link if you care to educate yourself:

http://articles.cnn.com/2009-01-21/living/cb.work.less.earn.more_1_earnings-annual-workers?_s=PM:LIVING
 
Posted by Kurt Zupin (Member # 2751) on 03-22-2011, 12:11 AM:
 
quote: John T. Hendrickson, Jr
Try teachers and school administrators for starters
This is a joke right? I know many teachers and not a single one works less then 50 hours a week.

Even if you took the worst teacher in the world, and they worked only 7 hours a day at the school itself. Thats 8am to 3pm, thats 35 hours a week. Yea, that falls in your catagory John. But even bad teachers work more hours at home and at the school grading papers and such. Or does that not count on their hours of work?
 
Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 03-22-2011, 06:36 AM:
 
You forgot the planning out of the day...I guess they do all of that on the fly too.

Teaching has never been an 8-hour day...it is always much longer.
 
Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 03-22-2011, 05:27 PM:
 
I do think teachers are underpaid, but I get tired of the "pity party" they're always throwing themselves. They get a couple of great perks, such as:

- Tenure
- Summers off

...and, if they're smart enough to be a teacher they should be smart enough to know what the pay is before they get into the field.
 
Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 03-23-2011, 10:51 AM:
 
Speaking as a child of 2 elementary school teachers, who taught in 2 different school districts, I have to say that after the first few years of teaching, they have it pretty easy. Of course there are always exceptions do to a given school or class demographics, but they are exceptions.

I do not feel that teachers, or other government employees are overpaid. They are not. What is out of control is the obscene amount retirement benefits they receive, and the sense that they are somehow entitled to it. Years ago, government employees were paid below market wages in return for better retirement. They are no longer paid below market, and have not been for some time.
 
Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 03-23-2011, 11:11 AM:
 
My problem with the point that civil servants are paid above market conditions is one where we have to debate whether the water rose or the bridge lowered.

I'm in the latter camp. The middle class has disappeared for a number of reasons so civil servants' pay is relatively higher compared to private sector, but they're not exactly getting ahead of the curve.

There is the implied social contract, if not in all cases a union contract, that both parties went into in good faith.

Is it fair to nullify unilaterally wages and working conditions both parties agreed to? That is what some would like to do.
 
Posted by Chad Souder (Member # 343) on 03-23-2011, 08:17 PM:
 
John - As others have already pointed out, the mere mention of teachers is proof you need some education in their field. Our local schools have conferences this week. The teachers won't be getting home until 6:30 tonight and 8:30 tomorrow, after a week of completing report cards every night at home.

Now, take that CNN list, remove everyone on it that is self-employed (something I mentioned as an exception), then remove people whose hours are limited for safety reasons by government or company regulation, and what do you have left? A couple of highly specialized fields that I don't know anyone in and that such a small percent of salaried professions that they're the exception that proves the rule.

The fact is, people who work 8-5 with an hour lunch always come in a little early, stay a little late, work a little during lunch some days, maybe the occasional Saturday.

quote: Mitchell Dvoskin
Papers graded while watching TV in the evening.
That's still doing work outside the workplace
quote: Mitchell Dvoskin was the last to post
Summers off.
Thank/blame the unions
quote: Mitchell Dvoskin
Tenure, so that you can slack off and still not get fired.
Ditto
 
Posted by Michael McGovern (Member # 4807) on 03-23-2011, 11:18 PM:
 
As has been brought up, the only thing I've ever seen in my years in the business that should be (but isn't) a labor violation is companies that expect salaried managers to work 60 hours a week for anywhere from $12 to $16 per hour in order to reduce the amount of payroll spent on hourly staff. It sucks, but the 60 hour work week is the reality for salaried managers in just about every retail setting these days.

It would really all depend on your district manager, some are stricter than others, and I knew some salaried managers who were definitely getting away with working under 40 hours per week, some even under 30. It was really bad for a while, but now Regal forces even salaried workers to swipe a clock which monitors their hours.

Back in the Hoyts days however it was a joke, I knew many a salaried General or Assistant that would work under 20 hours a week (and that was on a busy week) and many who would only step in their building maybe once a week to complete whatever they were responsible for and couldn't be delegated (which usually wasn't much)
 
Posted by John T. Hendrickson, Jr (Member # 849) on 03-24-2011, 07:24 PM:
 
Chad Souder wrote:

"John - As others have already pointed out, the mere mention of teachers is proof you need some education in their field. Our local schools have conferences this week. The teachers won't be getting home until 6:30 tonight and 8:30 tomorrow, after a week of completing report cards every night at home."

Really Chad? You are addressing a former teacher who worked 31 years teaching High School Social Studies, so I don't believe I need any education in the field. You should be more careful with your assumptions.

The contract in the district where I worked called for a 6hr 45 min work day. Once you get your prep down, it takes very little time to write lesson plans. Paper grading is aided today by scanners. Using a computer, you can easily make up a multiple choice test in a matter of minutes. One period of your work day is earmarked as a "professional period" of 45 minutes, so if you don't screw around at that time reading newspapers and drinking coffee, you can get most of your work outside of the classroom done.

If you are an experienced teacher, you should need no more than an additional hour a day for other items that need attention. When you start out as a newbee, of course you put in more time until you get to learn the ropes.

I would never argue that elementary teachers burn up far more than 40 hours a week. Those people are saints. As far as teacher conferences go, their students are given half days when those conferences take place, so that argument is a wash.

Phys Ed teachers have even less prep, and guidance people don't take work home. Supervisors don't work over 40 hours either.

But then again, these facts probably don't impress you because you are the one who said "I don't live in New Jersey."

Mitchell Dvoskin wrote: "Tenure, so that you can slack off and still not get fired." To which Chad wrote "ditto"

Surprise, guys. I would be the first one to scrap tenue for a merrit system, with one simple caveat: Eliminate local Boards of Education and replace them with a statewide independent commission to evaluate teachers under a uniform set of standards. That takes the politics out of the equation.

And Mitchell, as far as your statement " What is out of control is the obscene amount retirement benefits they receive, and the sense that they are somehow entitled to it.", I am sorry that you feel that way and I know that nothing I can say is going to change it. I would remind you that I, like every other retiree, paid money into that retirement system. Further, that system would be self-supporting today if the pension fund had not been raided by every New Jersey governor (both Democratic and Republican) since Christie Todd Whitman. As far as that "obscene amount of retirement benefits" you speak about, I can assure you that what I receive from the NJ State Pension Fund is far from obscene.

In the meantime, what most people don't realize is that tenured teachers can be brought up on charges and dismissed. There are a number of ways to get rid of laggards, but the truth is that most (not all) administrators don't want to be bothered implementing the process. The bad apples hold the good teachers back.

Sure, the system doesn't work, but nobody wants to take the time to fix it.

This topic has strayed far from it's original subject, but it's been fun.
 
Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 03-25-2011, 02:17 AM:
 
quote: John T. Hendrickson, Jr
In the meantime, what most people don't realize is that tenured teachers can be brought up on charges and dismissed.
Just so we're clear:
Are you saying that no one realized that if a cop gets arrested and cannot physically be in school, they'll lose their job? Or are you referring to something else?
 
Posted by Chad Souder (Member # 343) on 03-25-2011, 06:17 PM:
 
quote: John T. Hendrickson, Jr
Mitchell Dvoskin wrote: "Tenure, so that you can slack off and still not get fired." To which Chad wrote "ditto"
I was dittoing my own comment of "Thank/blame the unions" not Mithchell's
 
Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 03-25-2011, 10:48 PM:
 
And on my question earlier, I obviously meant if a "teacher" got arrested. I can't edit it anymore...
 




Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2