You are exempt employee

来源: lexm5 2014-11-13 22:01:31 [] [旧帖] [给我悄悄话] 本文已被阅读: 次 (1917 bytes)
本文内容已被 [ lexm5 ] 在 2014-11-13 22:07:01 编辑过。如有问题,请报告版主或论坛管理删除.
Your argument is nonsensical, what are the relationships between (1) exempt employee and timesheet; (2) exempt employee with partial work day? What are you trying to prove?

1. The way to prove a case is (1) if A then B; (2) C is A; (3) if C then B.

(1) if I am a non-exempt employee, I am entitled to $5000 backpay.
(2) I am a non-exempt employee because ....
(3) therefore, I am entitled to $5000 backpay.

Please prove (2), starting with the definition of "non-exempt" employee.

2. Here is how I (your company) prove that you are an exempt employee:
https://www.illinois.gov/idol/laws-rules/fls/pages/overtime-exemption.aspx

You are a professional as defined in above link:

"Whose primary duty consists of the performance of work requiring knowledge of an advanced type in a field of science or learning customarily acquired by a prolonged course of specialized intellectual instruction and study; and Consistently exercises discretion and judgment"

Only those workers need close supervision such as manual labor (janitors, machine operators, bus drivers) are not exempt employees.

Every HR professional know this, your argument is easy to rebut.

3. Your old supervisor left the company might have nothing to do with your case, it is 10 years after the fact anyway. Don't get your hopes up.

Lastly, this is not a court hearing, but an administrative hearing.  The rule of evidence is looser than court hearing, but the administrative judge can stop  you if you ramble on like pile up irrelevant evidence like those in your post.  Focus your limited time to prove you are non-exempt employee.

Good luck. 

所有跟帖: 

他写错了,是去年的事,不是10年前。同意你说的,证明自己实际上是non-exempt.另外觉得不要请律师,5000还不够律师花的 -Manymore- 给 Manymore 发送悄悄话 Manymore 的博客首页 (0 bytes) () 11/13/2014 postreply 22:28:12

楼主的strong argument 是他/她原文中的2。 其依据见内 -CheGuevara- 给 CheGuevara 发送悄悄话 CheGuevara 的博客首页 (7694 bytes) () 11/13/2014 postreply 22:43:29

LZ是part-time exempt -lexm5- 给 lexm5 发送悄悄话 (867 bytes) () 11/14/2014 postreply 04:57:48

我是full time exempt, 但公司在扣工资这一点上所做的事已经事实上将我们这些 exempt employee 当成 -远浦归舟- 给 远浦归舟 发送悄悄话 (0 bytes) () 11/14/2014 postreply 18:06:11

"原公司是一周工作35小时制度" How can this be full time exempt? -lexm5- 给 lexm5 发送悄悄话 (0 bytes) () 11/14/2014 postreply 18:16:29

传统行业的一些老公司的确就是这种制度。很多员工一辈子就只在这家公司工作,因为喜欢这样轻松的工作环境。 -远浦归舟- 给 远浦归舟 发送悄悄话 (0 bytes) () 11/14/2014 postreply 18:23:45

您说得非常对。 感谢您找出来的这些法律文字。 这个周末我要好好研究一下。 -远浦归舟- 给 远浦归舟 发送悄悄话 (0 bytes) () 11/14/2014 postreply 18:03:00

DOL需要的是1)35HR/W的证据。2)你所说的那种克扣工钱已成为公司的惯例 -CheGuevara- 给 CheGuevara 发送悄悄话 CheGuevara 的博客首页 (833 bytes) () 11/15/2014 postreply 22:39:32

回答问题1): 我的paycheck 可证明。 比如我最后一张 paycheck, 他们扣掉我两天的工资, 是按每天7小时计算的 -远浦归舟- 给 远浦归舟 发送悄悄话 (407 bytes) () 11/16/2014 postreply 19:30:41

切格瓦拉先生, 麻烦您解释一下“如果印度人从来没有开会,email解释过, 你就不会处于不利的局面." . 我是法律菜鸟,此处看 -远浦归舟- 给 远浦归舟 发送悄悄话 (0 bytes) () 11/16/2014 postreply 19:39:00

没看明白您说的 ““如果印度人从来没有开会,email解释过, 你就不会处于不利的局面." 求解释。多谢。 -远浦归舟- 给 远浦归舟 发送悄悄话 (0 bytes) () 11/16/2014 postreply 20:10:14

我是指克扣工钱后,印度人发现不对有没有开会,email补救过,因为 -CheGuevara- 给 CheGuevara 发送悄悄话 CheGuevara 的博客首页 (1227 bytes) () 11/17/2014 postreply 00:21:09

印度人没有觉得不对, 公司在收到劳动部门转给他们的我的wage claim 后, 律师没有进行任何调查 (连我是男是女都没搞清楚 -远浦归舟- 给 远浦归舟 发送悄悄话 (857 bytes) () 11/17/2014 postreply 11:24:52

我觉得你因该强调 -CheGuevara- 给 CheGuevara 发送悄悄话 CheGuevara 的博客首页 (1534 bytes) () 11/17/2014 postreply 23:26:07

完全赞同您的意见。 我6月份给他们的回复以及现在我准备 hearing 都是采取您提的这个主张和思路。再次致谢! -远浦归舟- 给 远浦归舟 发送悄悄话 (0 bytes) () 11/18/2014 postreply 20:55:30

请您先登陆,再发跟帖!

发现Adblock插件

如要继续浏览
请支持本站 请务必在本站关闭/移除任何Adblock

关闭Adblock后 请点击

请参考如何关闭Adblock/Adblock plus

安装Adblock plus用户请点击浏览器图标
选择“Disable on www.wenxuecity.com”

安装Adblock用户请点击图标
选择“don't run on pages on this domain”