[lbo-talk] Executives promise to do worse in the future...

[Michael Perelman]

It may not be economical because of higher accidents & poorer work, as Tom says, but 
for many employers, the benefits can be quite expensive.  If benefits would equal 
wages, then time & 1/2 would certainly be cheaper.

On Mon, Jun 20, 2005 at 03:42:03PM -0700, Jordan Hayes wrote:
> > Tom did not mention the obvious reason for overtime -- a
> > way of getting around benefits.
> 
> Is that really economical?  At time-and-a-half?
> 
> I always thought overtime was the way to get around the fact that an 8
> hour day doesn't divide very well into many tasks.  So rather than
> hiring two people at 80 hours of pay to do ~50 hours of work (or even a
> 40 hr person and a 10hr person), it's cheaper to pay one person the
> equivalent of about 55 hours.
> 
> /jordan
> 
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk

-- 
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929

Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu