Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Company refuses to pay their hourly employees???

This is topic Company refuses to pay their hourly employees??? in forum Film-Yak 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=8;t=005514

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-27-2008, 06:26 AM:

I got an email today from a forum member who asked to remain anonymous, so please do not ask me to tell you who the member is or what theater company this is from. This email quote below is a direct, unedited snippet from his theater company's payroll department. He and the other workers are hourly employees, and their job deals with traveling to remote locations to help get new theaters open, training or whatever their responsibilities are.

quote:
If adjusted, corrected or regular hours are not submitted by the next payroll, meaning 2 weeks after the hours are due,
I assume that the person did not work in that 2 week time period.
So, I will not pay them; even if submitted 4 weeks later.
Ball’s in your court to get them paid correctly, on time or not at all.

Is this actually LEGAL??? I'm pretty sure it is not. Apparently with these people working in other states for the company it is difficult to send in their info, but regardless...they worked the hours...they are on an hourly rate...the company owes them the money. Right?

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 06-27-2008, 06:54 AM:

Normally, stiffing employees is a huge no-no...often subject to treble damages.

The employer would have little ground to stand on. In theory, THEY assigned them to work...not the employee just chooses when to work and where to work. As such, the employer would have an interesting case stating that "they presume the employee didn't work." The work they were assigned to do magically got done?

While I don't know about the time limits submitting one's hours...I would HIGHLY doubt that it is anywhere near 2-weeks in any jurisdiction. It is the employer's responsibility for means to record these hours, not the employee's.

If the employee is being stiffed...I would suggest calling the government office...typically the wage and hour division. They will give you a better clarification on what the law is...and, if necessary, go after the employer. Again...stiffing employees is often a treble damage offense.

Posted by David Zylstra (Member # 4230) on 06-27-2008, 09:24 AM:

Sounds a bit harsh to me.

Here's how I understand the quote:

1. The employees have to keep track of their hours themselves since they work in the field
2. Hours are due sometime before paychecks are cut
3. IF adjustments are needed the corrections are due before the next payroll deadline, which is 2 weeks after the original deadline
4. The "policy" is that no corrections can be done 2 weeks after the payroll period that needs correction (this could be just 1 person's policy)

Editted after re-reading the quote:
I just re-read the quote a third time and it sounds as if payroll did not get a timesheet for a specific employee for over 4 weeks from a specific 2 week period - the real question should be what can a legal company policy be when employees have to turn in their own time sheets - i.e. can the policy say "if you don't turn in a timesheet every Friday you don't get paid for that week"? How long can a company be required to wait for timesheets? Can an employee forget to turn one in and then a year later turn it in and expect to get paid? I'm not a professional HR person so I don't know government rules, but common sense tells me if I want to get paid I should turn in my timesheet - now if the timesheets were sent in and misplaced that is a different story.

The last line of the quote says it is the middle manager the email was written to as being responsible to track down timesheets and turn them in on time.

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 06-27-2008, 09:40 AM:

Steve is correct on this. There are two seperate issues here, and in the eyes of the law one has nothing to do with the other. Management certainly can take disciplinary action against employees who do not submit their timesheets. But, the employees must be paid.

Posted by Sean McKinnon (Member # 612) on 06-27-2008, 11:54 AM:

I beleive John is correct. If it is a job requirement to complete paperwork, and time sheets on a timely manner you can discipline an employee for failing to do so. However, there is no legal way to not pay an employee for the time they worked. As a matter of fact failing to pay an employee will cost you A LOT more that the hours the employee worked due to legal fees, and government fines.

My suspision is that this was sent as an idile threat simply to "motivate" the employees and managers to get thier paperwork and timesheets in on time. I doubt anyone would actually be stupid enough to not only refuse to pay someone for hours they worked but to actually document it as well!

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 06-27-2008, 12:36 PM:

From the email is it the employee not submitting a time sheet to his manager or the manager not submitting a group of time sheets for those who report to them

Posted by Joe Elliott (Member # 4006) on 06-27-2008, 01:00 PM:

I agree, it depends on the state, but most states would be the same. You must pay your employees for time worked regardless.

However I have worked for 2 companies that I was responsible for my own time cards, and sending them in. Both companies had the policy that if you did not get you cards in on time, then it would be paid at their convenience, not yours, which usually meant a pay period or two later. Sometimes you would even have to remind them. Most laws state you must pay them, but not when. Usually after only once of having to wait on a paycheck, the guy would remember to submit his time cards on time, from then on.

I would recommend to him to look up the labor laws in his state. He could then send an anonymous e-mail to his company stating the law, and give them a recommendation to motivate their employees differently, perhaps with the example above. If they make it clear that they would have to wait several weeks on a paycheck for not getting their time cards in on time, I would bet it would no longer (or at least only occasionally) be a problem.

Posted by Todd McCracken (Member # 4718) on 06-27-2008, 01:56 PM:

I was a service manager for 6 years including field services. You have to pay your employee's period. You can take action against employee's for not submitting required paperwork on time or not at all up to and including termination (with documentation unless you want a lawsuit). However you still have to pay them for hours worked. Failure to due so will get you in hot water with the state wages board and the NLRB.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 06-27-2008, 02:09 PM:

I would bet this employer is just having a problem with employees submitting time sheets months after they are due. He's "talking tough" in order to get his people to get their paperwork in on time.

Posted by Bill Enos (Member # 440) on 06-27-2008, 02:55 PM:

"Talking tough" will get him in trouble with the company and should get him terminated as well as causing the company problems with the govt.

Posted by Anslem Rayburn (Member # 1267) on 06-28-2008, 04:19 AM:

quote: Joe Elliott
However I have worked for 2 companies that I was responsible for my own time cards, and sending them in. Both companies had the policy that if you did not get you cards in on time, then it would be paid at their convenience, not yours, which usually meant a pay period or two later. Sometimes you would even have to remind them. Most laws state you must pay them, but not when.

Is that true? I know it might vary by state, but according to the Arizona Industrial Commission, Division of Labor:

"The employer has to pay its employees at least twice per month, no longer than sixteen days apart and payment of the wages must be within five of the employer’s working days after the pay period ends. School Districts may withhold wages during their normal two week payroll processing cycle. Employers whose payroll systems are centralized outside the state of Arizona may pay their employees no later than ten days after the end of the pay period." - Link

I guess I just assumed other states had similar laws, as Arizona is not exactly kind to employees. Arizona has no break requirements, no minimum hours that must be paid for a scheduled shift, no minimum time between scheduled shifts, etc.