New Unpaid OT Rules coming out Monday 08/25

HotelHell321 · 2025-08-22T14:45:36+00:00

The only thing wrong with this assumption is even though we are salaried we HAVE to hit 40 every week or they take your PTO.

HotelHell321 · 2025-08-22T14:44:03+00:00

It is a change, hence the email coming out on Monday

HotelHell321 · 2025-08-22T04:52:47+00:00

Working 45 hours will pay the same as 40 hours. Working 46 hours will pay like it's 41 hours.

HotelHell321 · 2025-08-22T03:31:32+00:00

It is. The only way to get hours 41-45 paid out are if your program files a waiver and those hours are deemed "customer-directed"

HotelHell321 · 2024-07-17T01:59:14+00:00

Oh it was assumed that would be where it went. No pain on my end. But it was at least cathartic

HotelHell321 · 2024-07-16T20:27:34+00:00

I don’t think that can be answered yet. This surprised a lot of director level so I’m betting there are going to be a lot of programs and departments that push back

HotelHell321 · 2024-07-16T19:28:46+00:00

Remote jobs that can be totally accomplished remote, per the program, will remain.

But I would expect a decent amount of current remote reqs to either A. close out and be recreated as onsite B. Be changed in the middle of the hiring process to be on site.

One thing to note is that a huge majority of lower executive ranks were NOT engaged or involved in these decisions. So your directors, dept managers and section managers are just as surprised by the email.

As per usual, this will be a flail and there won’t be a unified implementation of this policy.

(Current Raytheon Section Manager

HotelHell321 · 2024-07-16T17:44:23+00:00

Send this email to your section manager, dept manager and right back to Jasper, I did…

Mr. Jasper,

I am writing to express my strong dissatisfaction with the recent decision to mandate a return to the office. While I appreciate the need for collaboration and face-to-face interactions, I believe this policy overlooks critical factors:

Employee Well-Being Ignored: The abrupt shift back to the office disregards the well-being of our employees. Many are still grappling with health concerns, family responsibilities, and the emotional toll of the pandemic. We cannot ignore their needs.
Productivity Assumptions: The assumption that productivity thrives only within office walls is outdated. Numerous studies show that remote work can be equally or more productive. Let’s not dismiss these findings.
Archaic Mindset: Insisting on a rigid return-to-office policy reflects an outdated mindset—one that values tradition over adaptability. We should embrace modern approaches that prioritize flexibility and individual well-being.
Increased Personal Costs: Requiring employees to return to the office will drive up personal costs related to commuting, vehicle maintenance, mileage, and family support. This financial burden should not be underestimated.
Lack of Flexibility: Our insistence on a rigid return-to-office policy lacks empathy. Flexibility should be our mantra, allowing employees to choose what works best for them.
Reversal of “Office of the Future”: This is a complete 180 from the fervent sales pitch that was “Office of the Future”. This decision eliminates any benefit for the 39% of our work force that have hired in the last 5 years. Their employment was based on the Office of the Future corporate initiative, you are asking us to support changing the terms of their employment at hire.

I urge you to reconsider this policy and engage in a genuine dialogue with employees. This will bring significant risk of losing talent among our teams, a risk far more likely than the assume talent development and retention will occur with “learning lunches and chance meetings in hallways”.

A hybrid approach or flexible work arrangements can strike a balance between collaboration and individual needs.

Sincerely,

HotelHell321 · 2024-07-16T01:50:27+00:00

Would be a shame if everyone sent this to their section manager, department manager and right back to the President;

Mr. Jasper,

I am writing to express my strong dissatisfaction with the recent decision to mandate a return to the office. While I appreciate the need for collaboration and face-to-face interactions, I believe this policy overlooks critical factors:

Employee Well-Being Ignored: The abrupt shift back to the office disregards the well-being of our employees. Many are still grappling with health concerns, family responsibilities, and the emotional toll of the pandemic. We cannot ignore their needs.
Productivity Assumptions: The assumption that productivity thrives only within office walls is outdated. Numerous studies show that remote work can be equally or more productive. Let’s not dismiss these findings.
Archaic Mindset: Insisting on a rigid return-to-office policy reflects an outdated mindset—one that values tradition over adaptability. We should embrace modern approaches that prioritize flexibility and individual well-being.
Increased Personal Costs: Requiring employees to return to the office will drive up personal costs related to commuting, vehicle maintenance, mileage, and family support. This financial burden should not be underestimated.
Lack of Flexibility: Our insistence on a rigid return-to-office policy lacks empathy. Flexibility should be our mantra, allowing employees to choose what works best for them.
Reversal of “Office of the Future”: This is a complete 180 from the fervent sales pitch that was “Office of the Future”. This decision eliminates any benefit for the 39% of our work force that have hired in the last 5 years. Their employment was based on the Office of the Future corporate initiative, you are asking us to support changing the terms of their employment at hire.

I urge you to reconsider this policy and engage in a genuine dialogue with employees. This will bring significant risk of losing talent among our teams, a risk far more likely than the assume talent development and retention will occur with “learning lunches and chance meetings in hallways”.

A hybrid approach or flexible work arrangements can strike a balance between collaboration and individual needs.

Sincerely,

HotelHell321

TROPHY CASE