Thanks as always for reading the newsletter. Please take five minutes (or fewer) to fill out this reader survey -- I’m trying to get a sense of who reads the newsletter, why, and how I can keep improving it. NEW ORGANIZING New election filings at the NLRB:
Is there some reason frito-lay is content to pay out tons of time-and-a-half for overtime rather than hiring more staff? I'm aware that their wages probably are too low to attract many new workers--is that pretty much it, or are there other factors?
Forced overtime is pretty rampant in this country, and I believe it’s because taking on another full-time employee, with all the benefits and start-up/on boarding costs associated is just way more than overtime costs will be. It also means that when business is slow the company can more flexibly cut back than if they have mandatory minimum hours to maintain for employees. I wonder if actually the better the benefits, the more inclined the company is to force overtime versus hire new employees (I’m thinking here of UPS, where workers have to fight for guaranteed 8 hour days). Curious if others have insights on this though.
Is there some reason frito-lay is content to pay out tons of time-and-a-half for overtime rather than hiring more staff? I'm aware that their wages probably are too low to attract many new workers--is that pretty much it, or are there other factors?
Forced overtime is pretty rampant in this country, and I believe it’s because taking on another full-time employee, with all the benefits and start-up/on boarding costs associated is just way more than overtime costs will be. It also means that when business is slow the company can more flexibly cut back than if they have mandatory minimum hours to maintain for employees. I wonder if actually the better the benefits, the more inclined the company is to force overtime versus hire new employees (I’m thinking here of UPS, where workers have to fight for guaranteed 8 hour days). Curious if others have insights on this though.