[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 6]
[Senate]
[Pages 7189-7190]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                                OVERTIME

  Mr. GREGG. I join the senior Senator from Alaska, the chairman of the 
Appropriations Committee, in his excellent statement congratulating our 
military, our troops; specifically, the men and women who serve in Iraq 
and the extraordinary job they are doing there. This incredible 
rotation the Senator reflected on, the logistics being an exercise of 
extreme complexity, was accomplished with great professionalism.
  His knowledge of this is unique and special, and we turn to him in 
the Senate about military affairs. I join in the acknowledgment of what 
the men and women of our services have done in this area. I thank the 
Senator for bringing it to our attention.
  I rise briefly, however, to address the new regulations proposed 
relative to white-collar overtime issues presented by the Department of 
Labor. We, as a Senate, have for literally months been hearing from the 
other side of the aisle that they wanted to stop the procedure of 
regulatory activity in this area; they wanted to foreshorten the proper 
and appropriate approach to governance; that is, to issue proposed 
regulations and take information and comment on the regulations and 
bring forward any sort of clarification of the law in the area of 
overtime activity, of which the law has been on the books for 50 years.
  Unfortunately, it has become confused and arcane in many ways. In 
fact, the law as presently structured was put together in a time when 
this country had people who were called straw bosses, leg men, and 
keypunch operators, things which no longer are relevant. Yet the law 
still has these categories of individuals and their rating systems are 
affecting how overtime is paid.
  It has become a fertile ground, regrettably, because of this 
confusion. Because it is a law that has not been adequately reformed 
and kept up to date, it is a fertile ground for lawsuits.
  The United States Bar Weekly, a lawyers' weekly USA newspaper 
headline, summed up the salaries in the workplace across America by 
saying in a headline: ``Boom In Overtime Suits, A Danger For Employers 
But A `Gold Mine' For Plaintiffs' Lawyers.''
  Unfortunately, that is all we have gotten from the regulation in the 
last 2 years--lawsuits. We do not have a more efficient marketplace, or 
people who deserve overtime getting overtime. We have not had a settled 
issue as to who has a right to overtime.
  Secretary Chao said we should do something about this proposal. 
Secretary Chao stepped forward and said this is an issue, a problem, we 
need to do something about. She put forth proposed regulations which I, 
as chairman of the committee that has jurisdiction, said there are some 
issues. We have questions. Let's look at them. That is why those 
proposed regulations received 80,000 comments. The Department has been 
reviewing those.
  Again and again people have come to the Senate from the other side of 
the aisle and used the excuse of trying to foreshorten and stop and 
undermine the process of regulatory reform and the comment period as a 
means to try to stop other legislation. How many pieces of legislation 
have been held up interminably, and some simply not passed, because the 
other side of the aisle says we cannot have the proposed regulations 
out there; we have to stay with the law as it is.
  Now it has shown the folks were absolutely wrong. The folks came to 
the Senate and tried to use this proposed regulation as a stalking-
horse to obstruct other legislation on the floor. It was a stalking-
horse because the Department of Labor has come forward now with a new 
set of regulations which have grown out of and evolved out of the work 
that was done as a result of reviewing and listening to the input from 
the 80,000 comments.
  The final set of regulations has some extremely good proposals. It 
guarantees 6.7 million Americans who today are not guaranteed overtime 
will receive overtime. People up to $23,000 of income will receive 
overtime. That is up from the present threshold today of $8,000. That 
means 6.7 million people who today are in a gray area are no longer in 
a gray area and they will get overtime.
  In addition, it makes unalterably clear this overtime regulation 
applies to white-collar areas. That was never an area for concern. 
People were concerned. The Department has made it clear the overtime of 
groups such as first responders, nurses, veterans coming back from 
serving overseas, licensed practical nurses, and registered nurses 
would be protected.
  That was never the intent of the original regulations, I don't think. 
But clearly, it is definitively addressed in this final rule.
  Furthermore, the people whose overtime may be at risk have to have an 
earning that exceeds $100,000, and they have to be in a white-collar 
activity, not a blue collar. If a blue-collar person happens to make 
more than $100,000, their overtime stays in place. The overtime of a 
white-collar person making more than $100,000 may be impacted by this. 
The Department estimates that is less than 120,000 people who may be 
impacted by that part of the regulation.
  In this final regulation, 6.7 million in the gray area will get 
overtime who are not getting it. They may be getting it, but they do 
not know they have a right. And people who are concerned about 
overtime, working blue-collar jobs, or working in areas such as law 
enforcement and firefighting or nursing, will absolutely be assured of 
their overtime rights, although they probably were.
  It means the business community, especially small businesses, will 
have a clear understanding of who has the right to overtime and who 
does not have a right to overtime--not clear, but a clearer 
understanding of who does and does not have a right to overtime. That 
means instead of ending up with small businesses especially having to 
spend a lot of money defending lawsuits which are arbitrary in many 
cases and which are class action in other cases, they will be able to 
spend their money on creating new jobs.
  Instead of having a litigious atmosphere out there, we will have an 
atmosphere where people can understand what their responsibilities are 
to pay people. Those people who are receiving this overtime will 
benefit significantly from this clarity, and other folks who will be 
getting jobs as a result of businesses having money to invest, rather 
than having to pay lawyers to defend

[[Page 7190]]

these lawsuits. It is a step in the right direction.
  I believe that opposition today, should it still continue, can only 
be defined as political. We know that opposition, in light of these 
regulations coming out in final form, was probably highly political 
before, but clearly in light of the definitiveness and the 
constructiveness of the changes which have come forward with the final 
regulations, any additional opposition is partisan, political, and 
driven by an election year attitude, or it is simply a desire to be a 
stalking-horse to promote lawsuits versus promoting efficient use of 
resources in our society, especially by small businesses.
  I congratulate the Department of Labor for doing the job which they 
are paid to do, which is to try to make our laws more understandable 
and constructive. As a result, they have made a very strong step 
forward to assisting people in getting overtime who may not be getting 
it today.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________