The Family Time Flexibility Act would undermine some nurses’ non-exempt status.
The Bush administration wishes to eliminate time-and-a-half pay for overtime for at least six million American workers who presently are eligible. As president of Maine’s nurses, I think every nurse ought to be concerned.
I refer to the “Family Time Flexibility Act,” which was just passed in the U.S. House by a razor-thin margin of 213-210. Both of Maine’s congressmen voted against this bill. The bill now goes to the Senate and nobody is quite sure when they will vote. We are fortunate that Maine’s two senators are independent-minded.
As the attention shifts to the Senate consideration of this bill, I can only hope that Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins are aware of the deleterious effects of this proposal.
The American Nurses Association is protesting the “Family Time Flexibility Act” because it would undermine some of the crucial protections of the Fair Labor Standards Act, passed in 1938. Employees are categorized as “exempt” (salaried) or non-exempt (hourly, eligible for overtime pay). Specifically, employees who devote more than 20 percent of their work per week to non-exempt duties could be classified as exempt. Also, the job requirements of administrative and professional employees would be raised in a manner that would expand the number of professional workers, such as RNs, who are classified as exempt from overtime protections.
Also, the Bush administration is trying to impose a new standard that requires the administrative employee to hold a “position of responsibility” with the employer. I think it is obvious that registered nurses are licensed professionals who share a responsibility for the outcomes of nursing care. If their jobs are defined that way, all nurses could be classified as “administrative employees” and exempted from overtime pay. It would cause a dramatic shift in the wage structure of every health care worker. A nursing administrator from here in Maine asked me, “Don’t they have enough sense to help the nursing profession during our shortage?”
There is also a proposed change that would redefine who is a “learned professional.” Learned professionals are presently exempt if they exercise discretion and independent judgment and perform office or non-manual work that requires knowledge of an advanced type in a field of science. The proposed regulation eliminates the discretion and judgment facet of this test and recognizes knowledge acquired by alternative means, such as a combination of intellectual instruction and work experience.
This new definition will add many health care workers, including registered nurses, to the learned professional exempt category. It is not simply about the loss of money. This will have an impact on lifestyle of nurses. Right now, the time-and-a-half rule serves to prevent employers from using overtime as a staffing tool in hospitals.
It would be easy to mitigate this effect by attaching an amendment to specify that no person now eligible for overtime pay will be taken off the eligibility list. The Bush administration has blocked efforts to amend the legislation in this way. In the U.S. Senate, opponents of the bill will attempt to amend it with the Harkin Amendment, which would prevent this harm from occurring, but Bush has said he would veto the bill if the Harkin Amendment were to be included. In other words, they will not protect nurses from the untoward effects of this bill.
I ask every nurse – and indeed, every skilled worker performing a knowledge task – to read the above standards and definitions. Ask yourself the question as to whether it sounds as though it applies to you. I believe it does apply. Together we must act.
Joe Niemczura, RN, MS is president of ANA-Maine, part of the American Nurses Association.
Send questions/comments to the editors.
