Salary & Closures
Salary & Closures
(OP)
Currently I work for a small manufacturer which had to shut down for a few days due to the big wind that rolled through the East Coast.
I am curious to know how other companies deal with employee pay during closures (say, due to weather/natural disaster).
What happened for us:
Hourly employees received no pay. They were allowed to allocate paid time off if they had any available. This makes sense to me.
Salary (exempt) employees were required to allocate PTO for the closure days. By the letter of the law (FLSA), this is allowed.
(It states that employers can require an employee to apply accrued PTO towards the closure days.)
The kooky bit, is many employees have no PTO left, so they are requiring the use of PTO from the next year (which hasn't been "accrued" yet). By the same token, our usual PTO is pro-rated during the year. So they essentially force PTO upon us when it is convenient to them, but only dole it out slowly during the year normally. Some of us have flights & hotels booked, and now no PTO left to cover the trip.
On the one hand, they are not even required by law to supply any PTO. On the other, they already offer 1-2 weeks less than the local competition for the same years of service. Yes, the standard "Update your resume" reply is welcome.
They seem to be in the legal right here, if only barely. Do we have any right to feel jerked around?
I am curious to know how other companies deal with employee pay during closures (say, due to weather/natural disaster).
What happened for us:
Hourly employees received no pay. They were allowed to allocate paid time off if they had any available. This makes sense to me.
Salary (exempt) employees were required to allocate PTO for the closure days. By the letter of the law (FLSA), this is allowed.
(It states that employers can require an employee to apply accrued PTO towards the closure days.)
The kooky bit, is many employees have no PTO left, so they are requiring the use of PTO from the next year (which hasn't been "accrued" yet). By the same token, our usual PTO is pro-rated during the year. So they essentially force PTO upon us when it is convenient to them, but only dole it out slowly during the year normally. Some of us have flights & hotels booked, and now no PTO left to cover the trip.
On the one hand, they are not even required by law to supply any PTO. On the other, they already offer 1-2 weeks less than the local competition for the same years of service. Yes, the standard "Update your resume" reply is welcome.
They seem to be in the legal right here, if only barely. Do we have any right to feel jerked around?





RE: Salary & Closures
In the case you described, people who borrow but won't need the PTO next year will experience a net benefit by getting paid now. People who borrow but WILL need the PTO next year will have postponed the period they go unpaid, thus they also benefit (although only a little).
My analysis assumes that you have the option to take unpaid leave next year at the originally scheduled vacation time. If that's not the case, then I would probably feel jerked around. Even if that's not the company's standard policy, I would hope they would make an exception due to extraordinary circumstances.
Maybe you should build up a week or two of "reserve" PTO time unless unused time is lost.
RE: Salary & Closures
Requiring them to take PTO seems like it doesn't follow the law. It's Personal Time Off, where you're given the option when to use it, sick, vacation, personal. Now if this was twenty years ago, and there was a sick time option, I would say they could make you take that.
Sure doesn't sound like I'm right.
RE: Salary & Closures
TygerDawg
Blue Technik LLC
Virtuoso Robotics Engineering
www.bluetechnik.com
RE: Salary & Closures
Unpaid leave would be highly unlikely.
Our PTO does not carry over to next year. Nor do we have a full allotment on Jan 1st.
This is why we're rather annoyed. This seems like a blatant attempt to have the benefits of exempt employees (free O/T), without picking up the tab when it is required of them. Again, I don't think they've done anything outright illegal, but they're definitely not buying any favors or morale.
RE: Salary & Closures
Labor laws only ensure that if the employee does actual work for the company, the employee gets pay. Otherwise, no work, no pay. Shutdowns and temporary layoffs are the province of unemployment insurance.
TTFN
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies
RE: Salary & Closures
http://www.dol.gov/whd/opinion/FLSA/2005/2005_10_2...
Seems to say that as long as you worked a day in that week, then the salary must be paid. They can put the employee to -4 personal days, though, which is effectively what they've done.
So what they've done is legal, even if it's made half their staff hate their guts.
RE: Salary & Closures
TTFN
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies
RE: Salary & Closures
What is the norm for salaried staff in the US?
RE: Salary & Closures
TTFN
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies
RE: Salary & Closures
I guess it always depends on the company size and financial position, but I think many companies would just pay their employees through this sort of period rather than invite resentment that CW42 seems to be feeling. I'm not sure how my current employer would respond to this situation, but I know I've had employers in the past who simply paid me for this kind of thing. In one case there was a massive blizzard and I actually made it into work, but most didn't, and they paid everyone, and I didn't complain or feel resentment.
M.S. Structural Engineering
Licensed Structural Engineer and Licensed Professional Engineer (Illinois)
RE: Salary & Closures
To the OP, your company is following the letter of the law, but could use a little spirit.
"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."
Ben Loosli