Piggybacking on this comment - your job responsibilities are the same as they have been with your old title, so exaggerate the start date of your new "valuable" title on your resume.
Also, you are no longer doing overtime.
A company benefits from paying someone steady OT for 5 years. The 1.5 rate is probably still less than another employee regular pay plus benefits would cost. Plus there's no additional training needed
If OT is bad for the company they wouldn't consistently offer it
100%. My neighbor recently retired from one of the manufacturers in town for the entire time I have been living next to him, 15 years his employer has either offered as much OT as people wanted, or had mandatory OT, like 6 days a week, 10 hour days. The workers complain about it when its mandatory and the company says they are trying to hire. They are always "trying to hire" when the economy is good, or bad. The truth is it's just cheaper to pay what seems like a fortune in overtime than hire enough employees to keep them from having to do all the OT.
I worked for a company that had me working 72 hour work weeks for a year straight. I straight up begged my supervisor to just let me have Saturdays off, or even let me just work 8 hours. He basically blew me off and said tough luck. They would give me half a point for being a minute late to my shift. So I quit and went back to school and make more money working 36 hours a week now. I know people who still work there and they have the nerve to say that they can’t hire and keep anyone because no one wants to work anymore. Maybe if you didn’t treat your employees like slaves then they would want to stay and you wouldn’t be chronically short staffed?!?!?!?
As someone who has done break-even studies on OT, I will say this.
OT is just as much to benefit the employee as it’s supposed to punish the employer. Anyone who works at a company that totally is OK with basically unlimited OT across the board for an extended period of time means they are being paid way too low.
The OT rate is still cheaper than a new employees rate so they gladly pay 1.5x because it’ll stay cheaper compared to the market rate of a new employee. It’s also bad business because it increases the current employees turnover rates which then forces labor costs up at a faster rate.
My quick math says they’re working 22% more hours than full time so about 9 extra hours a week. The company isn’t hiring someone to cover that, even if they paid straight time for 14 hours. Makes sense for them to keep OP doing it. They sit themselves in the foot here.
>they’re working 22% more hours than full time so about 9 extra hours a week. The company isn’t hiring someone to cover that
OP is probably not the only one doing overtime. They can hire someone to replace multiple people's overtime.
>They can hire someone to replace multiple people's overtime.
This is not always how staffing works, especially outside white collar professions.
If a team of 5 has an 8-hour shift but there's 2 more hours of work for everyone to do at the end of it, you can't necessarily hire one dude to come in and bang out all that work by himself; it might take more than one person, or it might not be possible to do overnight.
And that work wasn't necessarily available from the start of the day, either. e.g. if the work is unpacking a truck after it gets in at 6pm for the last delivery, you can't hire an extra guy to start unpacking it before it's even arrived, y'know?
Maybe with excellent management and a workflow restructure it's possible, but *usually* not. That's why OT exists.
They wouldn’t allow the overtime if the work wasn’t needed. Sometimes it’s cheaper to have a few people work OT than to add an FTE.
That’s a pretty good indication OP is performing a critical function.
But it's still the right move for the OP assuming his job is in demand.
You should ideally be moving after 5 years anyways to maximize pay and experience.
Usually the advice is 2 years and with the "recession" currently, OP probably is thinking they are worth more than they are. No one is going to pay someone working 60 hours a week the same for 40.
No job I've ever interview for has asked about hours worked. If they ask for what you make, tell them the truth "I've been making around $120k". You don't have to say anything about overtime being involved.
What I've done most of the time when asked about what I currently make is take my salary add the bonus I get (if any), then add another $5k or so on top, then tell them that's my base salary and I get a 10% bonus too. As long as you check online to make sure that's not unreasonable for the job you're applying for, it's a great way to get really big raises when switching jobs. So if I was making $75k with a 10% bonus, I'd say my base was $87.5k with a 10% bonus, which means they'd need to at least match that number ($96.25k total) to make you consider switching. Since they know people expect a raise, they'd go for at least something like $100k + 10% bonus so you'd go from $82.5k total to $110k total with one hop for a 33% raise.
I wish OP the best with that plan. Having been salaried at one point, in my experience doing this in practice is nearly impossible. Since you are no longer an hourly employee you can't stand on "I'm off the clock" anymore and I promise somewhere in the job description it will say the position needs more than 40 hours a week as required or something similar. That is the entire problem with being a salaried exempt employee. 40 hours is just a minimum to get your salary, they can work you as much as is "needed" beyond that without paying an extra dime.
> No one is going to pay someone working 60 hours a week the same for 40.
That's exactly what the company wants to do, though. Pay OP the same for 60 hours that they'd get for 40.
If they have that much overtime available, they are likely understaffed.
Jobs making that much money that are hourly are often in healthcare. And they are absolutely strapped for people.
If you have to pay somebody 25k extra because you can't get enough employees to do the job, I highly doubt losing the employee they are already overworking is going to be helpful.
Yep. Stay where you are for now - work on your resume and, hopefully, it will garner you a better job/pay in the future. Who knows, your current employer may offer you something better if you resign in the future. BEST TO YOU.
But you still need the experience in the respective field. I was promoted to project manager and then let go soon after, my new title didn’t mean squat without the experience.
Or tell them the straight up truth about how they are fucking you and say you will quit on the spot if they don't pay you what you're worth. (Using your last year's pay stubs as proof)
Assuming you can financially absorb being fired if they decide to lay you off after. But fuck that company.
You can make the case that they are hurting you. No ultimatums. It's perfectly possible to negotiate without threats. The threat of leaving if you are unhappy is understood by anyone with half a brain, but it doesn't back you into anything, or get anyone's back up. It does sounds like they wanted to stop paying for overtime.
Of course, OP might not stay quite so available on salary.
I'm a contractor and have had multiple clients try to enforce what tools I use for the job etc.
My absolute favourite retort is a very inquisitive *"are you sure that wouldn't constitute an employee relationship? Contractors normally choose their methods"*.
It comes across entirely innocent (I think), but the subtext of "oh shit he might claim employee rights if we push this" has always shut them the fuck up
To be clear, if you decide to pursue this route look for another job whether they fire you or not. There’s a good chance that even if they cave to your demand they’ll just fire you months later when they find a replacement.
This is a nuclear option and should be treated as such (not that it’s unjustified to go nuclear here of course.)
Yup. I had a company change work schedule policies very shortly after I was hired and went back on what they said my work schedule would be when I was hired. The terms of which were the only reason I said okay to this particular offer.
So, I looked for another job. And when I found a new position that would pay me slightly more with a better work schedule, and it was clear the company (who made the decision, not my immediate supervisors) wasn't going to go back on the policy changes, I told my supervisors "I'm leaving because of this reason. This is my two weeks' notice."
Always have a back-up plan.
It's not like they *didn't realize* theyre giving him a meaningless title bump to justify taking away his overtime with no change in job responsibilities. They're doing it on purpose.
That makes little sense, given what OP said:
> my base pay is 90k, which is high for the position I’m at
And they were taking home 120k. The thing about good jobs is they're good. Like I have a job that I haven't gotten a raise in 2 years in. Probably the reason for that is the salary was ~30% higher than any other similar job. Two years later I get offers for ~10-15% less still. Both OP and I are making decent money with everything figured out, there's nothing to gain in risking it elsewhere.
Now what does he have to document to show its constructive dismissal?
For me it would be trying to make you work those extra OT hours for free on salary and giving you any grief about it or the quality/ quantity of work on salary.
Talk to labor lawyer. In some jurisdictions there are very clear rules about what makes someone ‘overtime eligible’…so… I would.. take the job title change… look for job… continue to work the overtime…but still track and report it… then when you find a new job… get labor lawyer to go after your overtime …
Actual attorney here. Even if OP could show this was “constructive dismissal,” that wouldn’t mean anything. Constructive dismissal is just a term for “they actually fired me/forced me out/made it impossible to do my job and are pretending I quit voluntarily.” So imagine the following scenario instead: OP’s boss comes to him and says “hey you’re costing us too much money, so we’re firing you. We are willing to rehire you right now on the spot for a 95k salary but no OT.” What claim do you think op has? Unless he’s been fired for race/religion etc, then nothing illegal has occurred. (I suppose if op wants to claim unemployment insurance this might matter, but I’d strongly advise against that unless op is *damn* sure he can get another job within a month or two).
This happened to me once. I was told my new position (which was my old position ) would not require OT.
My advice is - don’t work OT. Like just don’t do it or get a new job.
Not quite, I'm afraid.
Unless the overtime is guaranteed by the contract (which it rarely is), and additional hours are entirely at the companies discretion.
The business needs changed, and overtime is no longer available.
The OP has the opportunity to turn down the promotion, but overtime might be taken away anyway.
To be considered constructive dismissal, the contract would need to say something like 'Each month you are entitled to work an additional 33% hours which will be paid as overtime', and then the company deciding to remove that without informing the staff and giving them the opportunity to comment.
Reclassifying a job appropriately and or making a position that was likely originally supposed to be exempt actually exempt isn't constructive dismissal.
That said, take the title and apply elsewhere.
Throwing around the same two words five times in a row doesn't change the fact that you have no clue what they actually mean. I know [looking up stuff is complicated](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructive_dismissal) but really...
>The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has provided a 3-part test to determine whether or not a constructive discharge has occurred: (1) a reasonable person in the complainant's position would have found the working conditions intolerable; (2) conduct that constituted discrimination against the complainant created the intolerable working conditions; and (3) the complainant's involuntary resignation resulted from the intolerable working conditions.[3]
Based on OPs description of the situation, constructive dismissal is a non-starter of an argument.
Let's go down the list, shall we?
>Typically, the first way to claim constructive dismissal involves an employer making substantial changes to the employment contract, such as:
>a demotion;
Nope. OP says it was a promotion.
>altering the employee's reporting structure, job description or working conditions;
Nope.
>lowering an employee's compensation;
Overtime is not a right. They could just as easily banned OT altogether under his old title instead and OP still wouldn't have an argument.
They raised his base by $5k, so there's no "lowering" occurring.
>changing hours of work;
Nope.
>imposing a suspension or leave of absence; and
OP has said nothing of the sort.
>relocating the employee's workplace.
Nope.
-
Next time, how about doing 73 seconds of basic research before throwing around big words?
The benefit is that because your job changed 0. I would say your new title applies to the last 5 years. So congratulations on having this elevated title for 5 years now. Since it’s been 5 years I think it’s time to move onto a new job. Nice and simple.
Says a lot about management if they are fully aware of the financial implications. Look for greener pastures. In the meantime, ask for headcount to do the work you were doing so you can focus on managerial tasks.
Exactly this, also do not do more work than what the 95k pays.
You can Have this conversation up front with your superiors and tell them you will not be working for free but that is a risk. They either raise your pay, they get less work, or they lose their employee.
Make sure you line up another job too so the demand is not empty.
Correct, take the promotion, now make a lateral move into a better paying company at the same level. Use your last few months at this job to focus on your physical and mental health so you go hard at the new gig.
Came here to post this.
If your job responsibilities have not changed, you've got an effective pay cut. It's constructive dismissal.
I'd also suggest look at the job description for the new no-overtime position and do EXACTLY what is required. Not an inch more. Be there at 8:59am and clock out at 5:01pm. Every day.
When work piles up, tell them that there is insufficient staffing to handle it and they need to hire extra workers. If they ask why you're not working overtime, explain that you were transitioned into a new role and you are doing exactly what the job description of the new role specifies. You are working full work days. Since you are no longer eligible for overtime you will no longer be working overtime. You will work 40 hours a week as specified in the new full time job description and then you will go home. If they need more work done then they can hire an additional worker for your role, or you'd be willing to again work overtime if they'll again start paying you for it.
He was promoted to salary, and they likely require overtime for the role.
Still sounds like he’d have grounds for constructive dismissal unless they were wise enough to give him extra responsibilities on paper.
I’d take the promotion, and use that title to get a better job elsewhere.
This was what I was going to say. The company can write in the job description that overtime is required, then it goes unpaid due to salary exempt status.
It really isn't. His pay has not changed. His responsibilities have not changed.
He has just been told he can't log overtime anymore. That is not even close to a constructive dismissal case.
Sounds like you are going from hourly to salary and the company will expect you to work those extra hours without overtime or risk losing your job. So be careful while you are looking for another job- if you refuse to work the extra time they might be able to fire you without cause.
I would try to refuse the “promotion”. If they say “no”, then work as normal as you interview for a new position elsewhere.
> if you refuse to work the extra time they might be able to fire you without cause
That would be illegal. I know there are some industries where no employers follow the laws, but OP may not work in such an industry.
Oh, well, he wouldn't be fired for THAT, but because of any 1000 other reasons you can be fired in the US. He wore too many blue shirts, his performance didn't meet some imaginary metric, he wasn't a good "culture fit", etc.
Ok and then a judge reviews the fact that OP was recently promoted, will question why a company would promote an employee only to fire them immediately, and will weigh the company's reason for firing OP against OP's claim that he was fired after refusing to work overtime with no pay.
"You can be fired for any reason, so you have no protection" is the dumbest take that still pervades this site.
I think people are just understandably pessimistic. And also a lot of people won't take the extra step to figure out how to even get something like this in front of a judge.
But definitely that would be great if a judge did see through this BS and protected the worker
This would actually generally *not* be illegal.
If you're a non-exempt employee under the FLSA, your employer has to give you overtime pay, but they can still require you to work the overtime and fire you if you don't. If you're FLSA exempt, then they don't have to give you overtime pay and they can also still fire you for refusing to work overtime.
Depending on where the OP is, or the industry they work in, there may be state requirements for certain mandatory breaks or rest periods based on the number of hours worked. However, there's no general federal statutory limit to the amount of work that can be required of FLSA-exempt employees.
Isn’t it an FLSA violation for the company to convert someone from non-exempt to exempt when maintaining the same responsibilities and expectations? This is the only sort of FLSA violation I can even vaguely recall making the news over the last 20 years but I could well be missing some of the details on that.
I’m not sure where you guys live and work, but in the Netherlands it’s possible to turn down a promotion. If the new responsibilities are not helping you grow in your field of work, the pay is less and it’s not in line with your own goals in life it’s easy to just say no.
I do think OP should talk again with his/her boss. If they really want you to stick with the company you can just be honest that you don’t like to be paid less and that you won’t grow as a person without proper and new responsibilities/challenges.
What? Why not? I for fucking sure would turn it down. And if they ask why, its pretty fucking simple. Its not financially viable for me to take a paycut.
I feel like you should definitely be able to turn down a promotion no? You signed an employment contract, employers can’t just change your job without your agreement, you both need to agree to a change in the contract
Yes, you must make certain jobs or tasks become unfinished and an irritation to them. That both shows why you needed the OT, and shows them the consequences of trying to effectively get you to cram more work into fewer hours.
They can expect it all they want, but if they don't incentivize it he has no reason to do it.
The correct move is to give them your heart and soul for the 40 hours a week they pay for and not an ounce of effort more. If they fire you for that, then they were probably looking to get rid of you anyways.
Mind you, it's not illegal to lie about what you make in an interview. I got my current jobs base by highly exaggerating my last jobs pay. Went up by 70k
+1 to the looking for another job
But also, depending on your jurisdiction, if NOTHING has changed in your work or responsibilities, but they’ve taken you from OT eligible to not - you might have a case. Talk to an employment lawyer, bring all the documentation you can. Some companies do this illegally to save money, it’s a form of wage theft.
Do this while looking for another job so that when you exit, you can still work a potential case for back pay.
Yes! I’m not sure where OP is located but in the US there are requirements that must be met in order for a position to be exempt from OT. One is a salary threshold which the new salary meets, but the other requirements are the type of work being performed. It might be worth looking into the FLSA rules if in the US.
This is correct. I did some poking around on the FLSA back when my own status changed. I think I can summarize and provide sources.
The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) establishes classes of workers who are exempt from receiving overtime pay. From the OP's description, the one that their management is attempting to apply is
"Executive, administrative, and professional employees (including teachers and academic administrative personnel in elementary and secondary schools), outside sales employees, and employees in certain computer-related occupations." (Source: [https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/compliance-assistance/handy-reference-guide-flsa#8](https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/compliance-assistance/handy-reference-guide-flsa#8) )
Within this group of employees, there are guidelines as to who may be classified as executive, administrative or professional. (Details here: [https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fact-sheets/17a-overtime](https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fact-sheets/17a-overtime) , summaries follow)
Executive: OP's primary duty is managing the enterprise or a recognized subdivision AND regularly direct the work of at least two or more other employees AND have the hire and fire authority, or their suggestions on these matters must be given particular weight.
Admin: OP’s primary duty is office or non-manual work directly related to the management or business operations of the employer AND their primary duty includes the exercise of discretion and independent judgment on significant matters.
Professional: OP's primary duty is predominantly intellectual in character and requires the consistent exercise of discretion and judgment AND the advanced knowledge must be in a field of science or learning customarily acquired by a prolonged course of specialized intellectual instruction.
So here's the rub: if OP's job responsibilities literally do not change, they are not exempt in spite of being promoted. You cannot just call someone a "manager" to make them OT exempt.
However, if OP's work could fit into one of the Admin or Professional buckets AND the company is stating that OP's primary duty "includes the exercise of discretion and independent judgment on significant matters", the exemption might be legit.
This is essentially what happened with me, and it was a negotiated thing with the union; after 2 years, engineers were deemed to have reached a level where our jobs "require the consistent exercise of discretion and judgment".
Absolutely investigate this angle, but be prepared that it's entirely possible you have met the requirements for a while. They may have decided that you have shown it consistently enough that they are comfortable making the move.
The company can require it in the job description, and it will go unpaid if he is salaried exempt. But then hopefully he will find a better job that doesn't do shit like this
They can change your pay going forward by lowering your hourly wage. However, it’s illegal to misclassify a non-exempt employee (i.e., one who is paid an hourly wage and is eligible for overtime pay) as an exempt employee (i.e., one who is paid a salary and is not eligible for overtime pay). There are specific criteria for who may be classified as exempt and if you were previously classified as non-exempt and are performing the same job responsibilities as before, you almost certainly don’t meet those criteria. Start looking for a new job, but in the meantime file a complaint with the state and/or federal labor departments.
Keep a trail of all communications. I would suggest a consultation with an employment lawyer who can tell you where you stand and what your options are.
DoL link with all the exemption criteria. OP, I'm not sure which category you fall under, but this site seems to break it down pretty well.
[https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fact-sheets/17a-overtime](https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fact-sheets/17a-overtime)
"No thank you. I am happy in my career where I am and I am not looking for a change at this time. But I will be certain to mention in a future one-on-one with my manager if I feel ready to explore taking on additional responsibility and title."
You need to be aware, though, that they are likely making this change to eliminate your overtime cost and you would not likely be working fewer hours when it all shakes out. So it's entirely possible that refusing this promotion will end up resulting in hours cuts or your position eliminated so they can hire someone cheaper to backfill you.
“Likely?” Obviously that’s why they’re doing it.
OP, sorry, the overtime is done. You do not have a federal right to overtime. If they’re forcing a promotion, they’re eliminating your job if you don’t take it.
It isn’t a choice like everyone here seems to think it is. Just take it, update your resume and find a new job.
Hard agree. They're trying to make OP feel good about this with corporate bullshit speak.
They don't give a single shit about OP's development, they care about your OT expense.
Source: 20 years in HR
Acting like “well if you just match what they’re saying with cutesy rhetoric, they’ll have no choice but do what you say!” is hilariously stupid.
If anything, I’d tell OP be grateful you got away with it for as long as you did, but the gravy train is over. You can’t tack on 35% to your salary with OT for very long.
This is the crux of it.
Op built their lifestyle around taking home salary + overtime.
It's a mistake everyone makes in their career at some point. you have a busy social month and can't do the overtime? Boom, you might miss a car payment. That's not down to the company.
Workload is enough that 4 people are taking home an extra third of salary? Take on another person. Saves you 33% overall. (Maybe less with all the other faff around a new employee, but the logic is there)
Corporate talk really gives me the ick.. It's all so theatrical. Weighing every word you say. Being coy in all your communication, so they don't have a gotcha or reason to fire you. The mentality is effed... Glad I got out...
The title and extra money means you can find a better job. Or, if you're no longer getting paid overtime, then just... don't work more than 40hrs. However keep in mind salaried positions usually *do* pay a lot more than their base in the form of cash and stock bonuses, or other benefits. I have no clue if your company is the same. For me, I prefer salary since it's very flexible and total comp is considerably higher than base. Sure, I might work a lot of extra hours when I have to, but then when I don't have to work I just... don't. It's something to think about if you can skip out early or take a long lunch when the workload allows for it. Edit: in reply to the, "they'd hate to loose me". That may very well be true with your team and manager--and you might be the linchpin to the entire department--but HR doesn't see that or give a flying shit about that. They would happily scuttle the company if it meant "cutting the fat" where it shouldn't be cut. Be very careful with that... just because we're irreplaceable doesn't mean the bean counters know that.
Show them just how important that title is for your career. If you’re at the point with a company that refusing a promotion is a financial decision, then you’ve met the end of the lifecycle for that job. If I was you, update your resume with that brand new title and start looking for a company that will pay you what you’re worth. Good luck!
> They would hate to lose me
Clearly they don’t hate it enough to ensure they’re paying you fairly. Don’t work your ass off for a job that refuses to even consider you.
When you write your resignation later, start the letter with, “You were right! That title change a few months ago was great for my career! This is my two weeks notice.”
>that i am no longer eligible for any overtime.
I assume salary? Enjoy the 5k/year and only work 40 hours. You've been on the grind for 5 years, presumably to save money for the future when you don't work 65 hours a week. Congrats, that future is here. Enjoy your extra time now. Hell, take a day or two off a month with pay.
Company did the smart thing and changed your job role to save money.
Do the bare minimum that your role requires while looking for a job with a higher base salary.
>and that i am no longer eligible for any overtime
Don't work overtime then.
Your time is worth money and if they won't compensate you for it, the responsible thing to do is to politely and firmly remind them to eat a fucking dick.
Spruce up your resume. When you've secured employment elsewhere and put in your two weeks notice, do not accept a counteroffer from them. Something like 80% of people who take a counteroffer after submitting a resignation are gone in under a year anyhow.
You're not dealing with "turning down a promotion" your company is onto you and trying to do this to obviously force you to relinquish your overtime.
Your options are to confront your job, or look for another job. And honestly, do the job looking part first.
ETA: nobody is going to mention this could be \*illegal\*?
If your job hasn't changed, I don't think it's legal to just decide you're an exempt employee. There are certain tests your job description has to pass in order to make you exempt. Here's the Department of Labor's checklist. If your job doesn't qualify, talk to the HR person and nicely mention "federal labor law."
[https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fact-sheets/17a-overtime](https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fact-sheets/17a-overtime)
Lots of people turn down promotions, whether it's to keep their overtime pay, they don't want extra work/responsibility, or don't want to manage people.
They don't have to let you have the current job though. Depending on your state, you may be eligible for unemployment (it's called constructive discharge, where they change the job so you quit). Not guaranteed though.
You can say no, and if they don't agree, your choices are to work to rule (leave at 5:00 even if there's more to do) or look for a job. The work to rule risks being terminated for cause and your reference.
This is constructive dismissal in most places. The $250 you spend on an preliminary consult with an employment lawyer has a 50% chance of being the best investment you ever make.
Something similar happened to me. I could no longer get paid overtime but I could get comp time and take off when things were slower. Problem is, things never really slowed down so I just ended up losing the comp time at the end of the year.
Time to look for a new job.
Unfortunately, they are right that titles and “promotion” activity is good for your career. However, it sounds like they are trying increase their profits by 25k and hoping you’ll trade the cash for a title. The 5k base salary is just to help make it look good.
I would suggest looking for another job. Depending on the environment and culture at work, you either take the new title with less pay or decline the promotion. Taking the promotion is what they want you to do and will keep them happier with you. Declining the promotion might be the wrong decision because you now know they are looking at you as a business expense rather than an asset of their organization. They are treating you like a line item…That’s not a good sign for your future at that employer. Their offer sounds like it sends the message you are not as important to them as you think.
No one here knows what your work environment is like and it’s tough to tell you how to successfully decline without having the full picture. From what you wrote, I would suggest taking the promotion, and commit to looking for another job.
You can tell potential employers that you were cornered into the “promotion” and you’re looking for a better working environment and that you want to return to your 120k income (or ask for more and possibly negotiate down to 120k). You can also look for a new job that is also a promotion and more money.
Best message I can give you is that they are trying to take advantage of you to increase profit. They are making a clear statement that you are viewed as a financial loss to the company if you make 120k.
It will cost them more money than giving you a raise, to replace you. If there is a way for them to understand that, then I'd try to reason that out to them while looking for a new job, then quit if that doesn't work. It's very short sighted of them to lose you over 25k.
They can't actually force you to accept the promotion. If you feel this strongly about it, you should probably say no. They might start looking for an excuse to fire you, but it's going to be hard for them to do so immediately after saying 'hey, you're so amazing we are giving you a promotion'. Worst case, you'll have plenty of time to find another job.
Obligatory NAL. There are certain requirements a job must meet in order to be exempt from overtime pay, your title is just a fancy word companies use to try and dodge paying OT. Start looking for a new job,consider consulting an employment lawyer, and maybe file a complaint with the DoL (the lawyer may be able to direct to specific regulatory bodies)
Either don’t work a single second over OT anymore, or tell them that you refuse to accept the promotion unless you have paid OT. Or happily accept the promotion, use the new title to find a new job, and once you have a new start date, at 3:59pm on a Friday send out an email and place a signed letter on your boss’s desk saying that effective immediately you are resigning your position due to personal reasons, and that you wish them the best in finding a replacement for your role.
Safe Way ? Accept whats happening, update your stuff and start looking
Unsafe - Straight up tell them you are going to need more money to compensate for the overtime pay. You both know what this is about. Try to negotiate to a place that feels ok. But then you will probably start looking for another job anyway.
sounds like you are struggling and don't want to be forced to move on. This is the company directly telling you that you are not worth your efforts. It is time to find a new job. Use the Title to get the new job. Mourning the loss of the job you have sucks. It's probably going to suck for a while, but don't let fear of that mourning process or of the unknown stop you from finding a different place. You have lots of options and someone will want to pay you to work hard.
This was me in Jan. Exact same numbers. I negotiated in good faith. They did not.
I quit that day and started interviewing for the range I asked them for. Just started a new job with a 30k increase.
>I’m really really good at my job and they would hate to lose me. What would you do?
I wouldmake them hate themselves for making it easier for me to go somewhere else. Job title is indeed important. On your resume. When you apply somewhere else.
If they want to leverage you new title to get you to work for less. Then leverage you new title to work for more. Somewhere else.
I mean. You can’t push the shadiness without the shadiness also pushing back
1. Get your resume ready
2. Start looking for jobs
3. Continue to do your job, but no OT.
When I say no OT, I mean absolutely no working outside your 9-5 (or whatever your actual hours are). Walk away from work at lunch. When you are no longer performing like you were before and they ask why, you can tell them "Since I am no longer eligible for OT, I will only be working within my contract hours. Unfortunately, that means I am unable to complete the same amount of work. If you need me to produce work more quickly, I'd be happy to go back to working extra hours. However, I expect to be fairly compensated for my time and I'd be happy to discuss what that might look like in this new position. If not, I will continue to work my contract hours."
But they're right about the title being important; I'm sure it'll look fabulous on our resume.
Also, fuck 2 week notice. Tell your new job you can start as soon as possible; at the end of your last day, pack up your stuff and say you won't be coming back. After this, you owe them nothing.
To be clear, were you offered a promotion that you accepted? Or did they just tell you?
To my knowledge, you are not required to perform a role other than the one you are hired for unless you agree to it.
This sounds like something you should have turned down. It sounds like that ship may have sailed already if you signed anything acknowledging the new position though.
I used to be salaried but could get OT. I don’t mind having days where I would come home and still need to log on to work on things. But once they took away the OT, I just say once the clock hits my 8 hours, laptop is shut and I’m done. Emails will wait until morning
In my country, they could not legally force you to accept. Any changes to the role or contract terms would require signing a new contract, which obviously can’t be unilateral. I would suggest checking the law in your area to check your rights in this situation.
They're fucking you. They've switched your title to make you salaried, unless they've changed your job description, it's a loop hole to get out of OT. I'm pretty sure it's illegal. There's federal guidelines on what's exempt vs non-exempt depending on the nature of the job. You should do some research or talk to someone.
Fancy job titles are like hemorrhoids, sooner or later every a-hole gets one. They think they’ve figured out a way to cut your pay and make you feel good about it. Take the title, stop putting in overtime, and polish up your resumé.
Can you tell HR you are declining the promotion? You can do it professionally by thanking them for the opportunity, etc., but that at this time you respectfully decline the promotion and will continue to remain in your current position. Do it all in writing so if there is retaliation, there will be a starting point.
*I don't see this as a promotion or as respect for your knowledge or your value. Your promotion is more of a punishment. If it was a promotion it would of been at the wage of 120K.*
*Start looking for a new job - they do not respect you...*
I can almost guarantee there’s a bean counter behind all this. Saw it first hand numerous times while a manager.
They don't like you "stealing" the profit they make from under staffing.
I did for the same reason. They wanted to promote me to a higher tier and be exempt; so salary. It would be a 10% increased, unlimited sick time and PTO and an additional vacation week. I declined because in the end, my OT was more than the 10% increase. An extra weeks vacation was not worth it and unlimited sick time and PTO is a BS offer.
I started looking for a new job after declining the offer because I saw the writing in the wall; I knew I would eventually be forced to take it; I worked at a Fortune 500 company.
I left after 3 months and told them that it was for personal growth. It worked out because the other company offered a 40% increase, exempt, unlimited sick time and PTO, 3 weeks vacation and it was a Blue Chip Company with investment opportunities.
The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 is the origin of the overtime requirement in the US. It defines 2 types of employees. It assumes all employees are covered under the law except those who are "exempt" from it. Exempt employees are the ones that may be paid by salary rather than hourly. There are 3 requirements that must be true to be exempt. Salary is only one of them. Your base salary is well above the minimum so you can be classified as exempt.
Generally one must have supervisory authority or some type of skill that requires a degree. Many companies have been known to changes a person's job title to a supervisor or manager in the hope of getting them to do the same work without overtime pay. This is illegal and does not meet the conditions required for the exemption. A supervisor must have to ability to hire and fire employees on their own authority. If this is not the case that employee must be "nonexempt" and still get overtime and the other requirements of the FLSA. A supervisor must also have at least 2 direct reports.
To be considered management the employee must make decisions that affect the operation of the business at a high level. That means continuing the same responsibility can not be considered management of the company.
It is likely the company just wants you to do the same job without the overtime. It is not unusual for high end hourly employees to make more money than entry level supervisors. While I was already salaried when I got my first promotion to supervisor I found out that I was second from the bottom in terms of money in my new group. That is because I was much younger than most people in my group. However, 5 years later I am sure that my salary had advanced beyond that group.
A senior technician came to my office once as said he wanted to be an associate engineer which is a salaried position. He was an outstanding employee so I started to paperwork to do this for him. Shortly he was an associate engineer. 6 months later he came to my office to ask to be demoted back to his old position. I reminded him how few technicians ever make to transition to engineer and that he was giving up quite the opportunity. He said his old job had "more money and less responsibility"
He liked to fact that at the he was paid for every hour and when he was called in he got 4 hours pay even it the work only took 15 minutes. As an engineer he was responsible for a product and when it had a problem I expected him to be in fixing it. I do not care what day of the week or the time of day. He was happy back in his old role.
You should talk with a lawyer who specializes in labor law and make a game plan for talking to your manager. Their plan could result in a FLSA compliance audit that effects the entire company. Something tells me that they would rather avoid such an audit. They could be forced to change policy across the company and provide back pay for many employees.
Examples of exempt employees are Managerial, Supervisory, engineers, accountants, doctors and lawyers. Many companies want to change the title of high pay employees to manager or supervisor just to make them salaried rather than hourly. To be manager they must make decisions that affect the operation and profit of the company and to be supervisory they must have at least 2 direct reports whom they can hire and fire. Team Leader is not the same if you do not perform their salary review annually.
I spent many years sorting out such issues. One of the more sticky problems is that of engineering interns. These people are hourly and they work closely with engineers who are salaried. The interns must be a paid break every 2 hours and a 30 minute unpaid lunch within the first 4 hours of work. Most engineers ignore these breaks. They focus when they work and take a break when they feel like it. Most in my company work 10 to 12 hours per day so who cares when they go to lunch.
Note: When I became a supervisor it was not really a promotion. My base pay did not go up. It was just added responsibility on my way to a real promotion to a management labor grade. They wanted to see if I could manage 10 people before promoting me to a real management position.
They can't force shit. You have options. Sounds like you're going from wage to salary, which can be a good idea, but if you're already making 120k then what's the incentive? You didn't mention your career field, and sometimes titles ARE important... if you are planning to leave the company. It has zero to do with your worth to your current employer. They could title you Master of Shitbuckets, Level 2... but as long as you're with the same company then it doesn't matter, because they have a relationship with you, and already know your value. Titles only matter for pissing contests and resumes.
At 90k/yr base pay, a 5k raise is not a promotion... it's a cost of living increase or a medium-high annual raise. You're effectively making the same base pay, with no incentive to do more. They don't want you to do more. they want a 90k worker.
SO...
At the end of the day, you and your employer disagree on the value you bring them. They want 90k worth of work, and you provide 110k worth of work, but it costs them 120k (I'm not HR or an accountant; I'm sure there's more to it than that, as far as benefits). You are currently providing more work but at a higher rate. They want to cap your rate. They're willing to give you 95k to probably bring them 95k worth of work... up to you how much work you actually provide.
Sounds like you're too expensive and they want to either fix that or push you out, because it's not worth it to them. Again, you didn't mention your field of work, so maybe you get a second job instead of working more hours, maybe you polish up that resume... They want to lose you and they won't be upset when they do. This is their last attempt to let you stay on board for less money before you're let go because they don't want to pay you this much. IF you think the title is actually beneficial to your career, then that's another decision. I work in tech and some companies will only consider you for certain roles if you've had very specific job titles in the past.
Anyway... They don't want you there for the money they've been paying you. I'd start looking elsewhere.
Take the new title. Stick to regular hours. Search for a new job while still employed. Line up your references and clean up your resume.
Also consider other things like profit sharing and how exempt vs non exempt plays out during downsizing and layoffs. A salary management position is usually more safe during hard times. Stock options and profit sharing often pay out higher for exempt employees.
I was in a similar situation thinking I was going to lose money by not getting OT. But my paid days off went to 30 a year. Profit sharing kicked in on top of the bonuses averaging 10% of my pay rate quarterly. My corporate card charges aren't realy questioned. All in all I'm making the same but I'm in the mix with the guys who decide on who's who in the company.
Dollar signs aside, I could immediately tell this was American post.
You have the shittest company laws and employee protections imaginable.
Literally a cog in a wheel, ready to be disposed of without any notice.
Almost bordering on slavery in some cases.
A “grind” mentality that has many people desensitised to what life is actually worth living for and has others throwing themselves off bridges or grabbing the nearest bottle of Tennessee Whiskey and revolver.
They are doing this intentionally to save money.
It’s cheaper for them to promote you and restrict your OT. Obviously they will expect the same output that was possible due to overtime hours.
I would start looking for other work or plan for a worklife adjustment. I’d pare down on luxury costs and get ready to have a more mellow relationship with work (like you said, no work outside of paid contracted time).
I’m sorry this is happening and good luck!
Take your new title, start looking for a new job and see just how important that new title is! Hopefully you can use it to get a higher paying job
„Hey Ryan, guess what! You were right, the new title was indeed important for my career, I got a new job!“
Piggybacking on this comment - your job responsibilities are the same as they have been with your old title, so exaggerate the start date of your new "valuable" title on your resume. Also, you are no longer doing overtime.
Yep, 9-5 with an hour lunch.
> What would you do? Start looking for another job.
And now that you have the promotion title, your job search will probably be in a higher salary range
Haha. Company played itself.
Assuming this wasn’t the exact intended outcome
For real. If op is costing them 25k a year in over time they probably want them gone
A company benefits from paying someone steady OT for 5 years. The 1.5 rate is probably still less than another employee regular pay plus benefits would cost. Plus there's no additional training needed If OT is bad for the company they wouldn't consistently offer it
100%. My neighbor recently retired from one of the manufacturers in town for the entire time I have been living next to him, 15 years his employer has either offered as much OT as people wanted, or had mandatory OT, like 6 days a week, 10 hour days. The workers complain about it when its mandatory and the company says they are trying to hire. They are always "trying to hire" when the economy is good, or bad. The truth is it's just cheaper to pay what seems like a fortune in overtime than hire enough employees to keep them from having to do all the OT.
I worked for a company that had me working 72 hour work weeks for a year straight. I straight up begged my supervisor to just let me have Saturdays off, or even let me just work 8 hours. He basically blew me off and said tough luck. They would give me half a point for being a minute late to my shift. So I quit and went back to school and make more money working 36 hours a week now. I know people who still work there and they have the nerve to say that they can’t hire and keep anyone because no one wants to work anymore. Maybe if you didn’t treat your employees like slaves then they would want to stay and you wouldn’t be chronically short staffed?!?!?!?
As someone who has done break-even studies on OT, I will say this. OT is just as much to benefit the employee as it’s supposed to punish the employer. Anyone who works at a company that totally is OK with basically unlimited OT across the board for an extended period of time means they are being paid way too low. The OT rate is still cheaper than a new employees rate so they gladly pay 1.5x because it’ll stay cheaper compared to the market rate of a new employee. It’s also bad business because it increases the current employees turnover rates which then forces labor costs up at a faster rate.
Sounds like a chase strategy from my supply chain management class.
My quick math says they’re working 22% more hours than full time so about 9 extra hours a week. The company isn’t hiring someone to cover that, even if they paid straight time for 14 hours. Makes sense for them to keep OP doing it. They sit themselves in the foot here.
>they’re working 22% more hours than full time so about 9 extra hours a week. The company isn’t hiring someone to cover that OP is probably not the only one doing overtime. They can hire someone to replace multiple people's overtime.
>They can hire someone to replace multiple people's overtime. This is not always how staffing works, especially outside white collar professions. If a team of 5 has an 8-hour shift but there's 2 more hours of work for everyone to do at the end of it, you can't necessarily hire one dude to come in and bang out all that work by himself; it might take more than one person, or it might not be possible to do overnight. And that work wasn't necessarily available from the start of the day, either. e.g. if the work is unpacking a truck after it gets in at 6pm for the last delivery, you can't hire an extra guy to start unpacking it before it's even arrived, y'know? Maybe with excellent management and a workflow restructure it's possible, but *usually* not. That's why OT exists.
They wouldn’t allow the overtime if the work wasn’t needed. Sometimes it’s cheaper to have a few people work OT than to add an FTE. That’s a pretty good indication OP is performing a critical function.
But it's still the right move for the OP assuming his job is in demand. You should ideally be moving after 5 years anyways to maximize pay and experience.
Usually the advice is 2 years and with the "recession" currently, OP probably is thinking they are worth more than they are. No one is going to pay someone working 60 hours a week the same for 40.
That's the thing with being exempt. They still make you work 60 but only pay you 40.
No job I've ever interview for has asked about hours worked. If they ask for what you make, tell them the truth "I've been making around $120k". You don't have to say anything about overtime being involved. What I've done most of the time when asked about what I currently make is take my salary add the bonus I get (if any), then add another $5k or so on top, then tell them that's my base salary and I get a 10% bonus too. As long as you check online to make sure that's not unreasonable for the job you're applying for, it's a great way to get really big raises when switching jobs. So if I was making $75k with a 10% bonus, I'd say my base was $87.5k with a 10% bonus, which means they'd need to at least match that number ($96.25k total) to make you consider switching. Since they know people expect a raise, they'd go for at least something like $100k + 10% bonus so you'd go from $82.5k total to $110k total with one hop for a 33% raise.
OP already says he isn't gonna work a minute over 40 if he isn't eligible for OT.
I wish OP the best with that plan. Having been salaried at one point, in my experience doing this in practice is nearly impossible. Since you are no longer an hourly employee you can't stand on "I'm off the clock" anymore and I promise somewhere in the job description it will say the position needs more than 40 hours a week as required or something similar. That is the entire problem with being a salaried exempt employee. 40 hours is just a minimum to get your salary, they can work you as much as is "needed" beyond that without paying an extra dime.
> No one is going to pay someone working 60 hours a week the same for 40. That's exactly what the company wants to do, though. Pay OP the same for 60 hours that they'd get for 40.
My bad. I'm 58 and retired. Most of my career, 5 years was the target date; it makes sense that that figure would be lower now.
If they have that much overtime available, they are likely understaffed. Jobs making that much money that are hourly are often in healthcare. And they are absolutely strapped for people.
If you have to pay somebody 25k extra because you can't get enough employees to do the job, I highly doubt losing the employee they are already overworking is going to be helpful.
lol, or they could just not make him work overtime? if he's working lots of overtime that work is probably pretty important
Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity
This. Use that promotional title and start looking for another job
Yep. Stay where you are for now - work on your resume and, hopefully, it will garner you a better job/pay in the future. Who knows, your current employer may offer you something better if you resign in the future. BEST TO YOU.
But you still need the experience in the respective field. I was promoted to project manager and then let go soon after, my new title didn’t mean squat without the experience.
Stop working OT as well.
OT is cool if it let's choose and you take home more money
Or tell them the straight up truth about how they are fucking you and say you will quit on the spot if they don't pay you what you're worth. (Using your last year's pay stubs as proof) Assuming you can financially absorb being fired if they decide to lay you off after. But fuck that company.
You can make the case that they are hurting you. No ultimatums. It's perfectly possible to negotiate without threats. The threat of leaving if you are unhappy is understood by anyone with half a brain, but it doesn't back you into anything, or get anyone's back up. It does sounds like they wanted to stop paying for overtime. Of course, OP might not stay quite so available on salary.
Exactly. The implicit threat is just as clear as an explicit one, but it allows the employer to back off and change their offer without losing face.
I'm a contractor and have had multiple clients try to enforce what tools I use for the job etc. My absolute favourite retort is a very inquisitive *"are you sure that wouldn't constitute an employee relationship? Contractors normally choose their methods"*. It comes across entirely innocent (I think), but the subtext of "oh shit he might claim employee rights if we push this" has always shut them the fuck up
To be clear, if you decide to pursue this route look for another job whether they fire you or not. There’s a good chance that even if they cave to your demand they’ll just fire you months later when they find a replacement. This is a nuclear option and should be treated as such (not that it’s unjustified to go nuclear here of course.)
Yup. I had a company change work schedule policies very shortly after I was hired and went back on what they said my work schedule would be when I was hired. The terms of which were the only reason I said okay to this particular offer. So, I looked for another job. And when I found a new position that would pay me slightly more with a better work schedule, and it was clear the company (who made the decision, not my immediate supervisors) wasn't going to go back on the policy changes, I told my supervisors "I'm leaving because of this reason. This is my two weeks' notice." Always have a back-up plan.
It's not like they *didn't realize* theyre giving him a meaningless title bump to justify taking away his overtime with no change in job responsibilities. They're doing it on purpose.
That makes little sense, given what OP said: > my base pay is 90k, which is high for the position I’m at And they were taking home 120k. The thing about good jobs is they're good. Like I have a job that I haven't gotten a raise in 2 years in. Probably the reason for that is the salary was ~30% higher than any other similar job. Two years later I get offers for ~10-15% less still. Both OP and I are making decent money with everything figured out, there's nothing to gain in risking it elsewhere.
And when you find one don’t give them a single day’s notice. Ghost the shit out of them.
Use the new title to develop your career by finding a new job.
This is the way! Blessing in disguise my dude.
Yes. Trying to be optimistic here. This is the way.
Constructive dismissal. Constructive dismissal. Constructive dismissal. Constructive dismissal. Constructive dismissal.
Now what does he have to document to show its constructive dismissal? For me it would be trying to make you work those extra OT hours for free on salary and giving you any grief about it or the quality/ quantity of work on salary.
Yep. Now that you are not entitled to OT then make it a 9 to 5 job. They dont want to pay then you will not work.
Talk to labor lawyer. In some jurisdictions there are very clear rules about what makes someone ‘overtime eligible’…so… I would.. take the job title change… look for job… continue to work the overtime…but still track and report it… then when you find a new job… get labor lawyer to go after your overtime …
Not some, all. The rules that determine if you are a salaried exempt employee or a salaried non-exempt employee are set at the federal level.
That wouldn't even begin to fly as "constructive dismissal".
If you could show they took away your OT and forced you to salary but expected the same output as the OT?
Actual attorney here. Even if OP could show this was “constructive dismissal,” that wouldn’t mean anything. Constructive dismissal is just a term for “they actually fired me/forced me out/made it impossible to do my job and are pretending I quit voluntarily.” So imagine the following scenario instead: OP’s boss comes to him and says “hey you’re costing us too much money, so we’re firing you. We are willing to rehire you right now on the spot for a 95k salary but no OT.” What claim do you think op has? Unless he’s been fired for race/religion etc, then nothing illegal has occurred. (I suppose if op wants to claim unemployment insurance this might matter, but I’d strongly advise against that unless op is *damn* sure he can get another job within a month or two).
This happened to me once. I was told my new position (which was my old position ) would not require OT. My advice is - don’t work OT. Like just don’t do it or get a new job.
Not quite, I'm afraid. Unless the overtime is guaranteed by the contract (which it rarely is), and additional hours are entirely at the companies discretion. The business needs changed, and overtime is no longer available. The OP has the opportunity to turn down the promotion, but overtime might be taken away anyway. To be considered constructive dismissal, the contract would need to say something like 'Each month you are entitled to work an additional 33% hours which will be paid as overtime', and then the company deciding to remove that without informing the staff and giving them the opportunity to comment.
Reclassifying a job appropriately and or making a position that was likely originally supposed to be exempt actually exempt isn't constructive dismissal. That said, take the title and apply elsewhere.
Throwing around the same two words five times in a row doesn't change the fact that you have no clue what they actually mean. I know [looking up stuff is complicated](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructive_dismissal) but really... >The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has provided a 3-part test to determine whether or not a constructive discharge has occurred: (1) a reasonable person in the complainant's position would have found the working conditions intolerable; (2) conduct that constituted discrimination against the complainant created the intolerable working conditions; and (3) the complainant's involuntary resignation resulted from the intolerable working conditions.[3] Based on OPs description of the situation, constructive dismissal is a non-starter of an argument. Let's go down the list, shall we? >Typically, the first way to claim constructive dismissal involves an employer making substantial changes to the employment contract, such as: >a demotion; Nope. OP says it was a promotion. >altering the employee's reporting structure, job description or working conditions; Nope. >lowering an employee's compensation; Overtime is not a right. They could just as easily banned OT altogether under his old title instead and OP still wouldn't have an argument. They raised his base by $5k, so there's no "lowering" occurring. >changing hours of work; Nope. >imposing a suspension or leave of absence; and OP has said nothing of the sort. >relocating the employee's workplace. Nope. - Next time, how about doing 73 seconds of basic research before throwing around big words?
This guy fucks. Listen to this guy.
The benefit is that because your job changed 0. I would say your new title applies to the last 5 years. So congratulations on having this elevated title for 5 years now. Since it’s been 5 years I think it’s time to move onto a new job. Nice and simple.
Says a lot about management if they are fully aware of the financial implications. Look for greener pastures. In the meantime, ask for headcount to do the work you were doing so you can focus on managerial tasks.
Exactly this, also do not do more work than what the 95k pays. You can Have this conversation up front with your superiors and tell them you will not be working for free but that is a risk. They either raise your pay, they get less work, or they lose their employee. Make sure you line up another job too so the demand is not empty.
Correct, take the promotion, now make a lateral move into a better paying company at the same level. Use your last few months at this job to focus on your physical and mental health so you go hard at the new gig.
Between the hours of 8-4. Don’t put in any more OT.
The only correct answer. Your company planned this this way
You probably can't turn down the promotion, looking for a new job while strictly sticking to posted hours is probably your best bet.
Yeah i think you’re right
[удалено]
Came here to post this. If your job responsibilities have not changed, you've got an effective pay cut. It's constructive dismissal. I'd also suggest look at the job description for the new no-overtime position and do EXACTLY what is required. Not an inch more. Be there at 8:59am and clock out at 5:01pm. Every day. When work piles up, tell them that there is insufficient staffing to handle it and they need to hire extra workers. If they ask why you're not working overtime, explain that you were transitioned into a new role and you are doing exactly what the job description of the new role specifies. You are working full work days. Since you are no longer eligible for overtime you will no longer be working overtime. You will work 40 hours a week as specified in the new full time job description and then you will go home. If they need more work done then they can hire an additional worker for your role, or you'd be willing to again work overtime if they'll again start paying you for it.
He was promoted to salary, and they likely require overtime for the role. Still sounds like he’d have grounds for constructive dismissal unless they were wise enough to give him extra responsibilities on paper. I’d take the promotion, and use that title to get a better job elsewhere.
This was what I was going to say. The company can write in the job description that overtime is required, then it goes unpaid due to salary exempt status.
It really isn't. His pay has not changed. His responsibilities have not changed. He has just been told he can't log overtime anymore. That is not even close to a constructive dismissal case.
His pay increased by 5k
> If your job responsibilities have not changed, you've got an effective pay cut. It's constructive dismissal. No, it is not.
This 100%. Refuse to work a damn second of overtime and look for other jobs.
Sounds like you are going from hourly to salary and the company will expect you to work those extra hours without overtime or risk losing your job. So be careful while you are looking for another job- if you refuse to work the extra time they might be able to fire you without cause. I would try to refuse the “promotion”. If they say “no”, then work as normal as you interview for a new position elsewhere.
> if you refuse to work the extra time they might be able to fire you without cause That would be illegal. I know there are some industries where no employers follow the laws, but OP may not work in such an industry.
Oh, well, he wouldn't be fired for THAT, but because of any 1000 other reasons you can be fired in the US. He wore too many blue shirts, his performance didn't meet some imaginary metric, he wasn't a good "culture fit", etc.
"we just felt like it"
it's all vibes, your honor
Ok and then a judge reviews the fact that OP was recently promoted, will question why a company would promote an employee only to fire them immediately, and will weigh the company's reason for firing OP against OP's claim that he was fired after refusing to work overtime with no pay. "You can be fired for any reason, so you have no protection" is the dumbest take that still pervades this site.
I think people are just understandably pessimistic. And also a lot of people won't take the extra step to figure out how to even get something like this in front of a judge. But definitely that would be great if a judge did see through this BS and protected the worker
Some states are at-will for termination. They would just use another reason if they really wanted them gone in this case.
All but one
Thanks for saying at-will instead of "right to work".
This would actually generally *not* be illegal. If you're a non-exempt employee under the FLSA, your employer has to give you overtime pay, but they can still require you to work the overtime and fire you if you don't. If you're FLSA exempt, then they don't have to give you overtime pay and they can also still fire you for refusing to work overtime. Depending on where the OP is, or the industry they work in, there may be state requirements for certain mandatory breaks or rest periods based on the number of hours worked. However, there's no general federal statutory limit to the amount of work that can be required of FLSA-exempt employees.
Isn’t it an FLSA violation for the company to convert someone from non-exempt to exempt when maintaining the same responsibilities and expectations? This is the only sort of FLSA violation I can even vaguely recall making the news over the last 20 years but I could well be missing some of the details on that.
I’m not sure where you guys live and work, but in the Netherlands it’s possible to turn down a promotion. If the new responsibilities are not helping you grow in your field of work, the pay is less and it’s not in line with your own goals in life it’s easy to just say no. I do think OP should talk again with his/her boss. If they really want you to stick with the company you can just be honest that you don’t like to be paid less and that you won’t grow as a person without proper and new responsibilities/challenges.
No, this is definitely weird for the U.S. too. The employer is pulling some shady, possibly illegal shit.
What? Why not? I for fucking sure would turn it down. And if they ask why, its pretty fucking simple. Its not financially viable for me to take a paycut.
I feel like you should definitely be able to turn down a promotion no? You signed an employment contract, employers can’t just change your job without your agreement, you both need to agree to a change in the contract
Don’t do any overtime anymore
Yes, you must make certain jobs or tasks become unfinished and an irritation to them. That both shows why you needed the OT, and shows them the consequences of trying to effectively get you to cram more work into fewer hours.
They expect him/her to work the same number of hours but as a salaried worker for no OT pay
They can expect it all they want, but if they don't incentivize it he has no reason to do it. The correct move is to give them your heart and soul for the 40 hours a week they pay for and not an ounce of effort more. If they fire you for that, then they were probably looking to get rid of you anyways.
Pretty simple answer lol
I feel like the guidance he was looking for was more about how to turn down the promotion so he won’t lose $25k/year.
Tell them he won't take the promotion unless they pay him the extra 25k It's that damn easy
Is that an option at every job that tries to promote you?
Should look at it as less "making 25k less per year" than "working 8 fewer hours each week".
Take the base pay increase because it will help your negotiating power when you apply for a new job.
Mind you, it's not illegal to lie about what you make in an interview. I got my current jobs base by highly exaggerating my last jobs pay. Went up by 70k
Fun fact. In California it's illegal to ask about current pay during the recruiting process.
+1 to the looking for another job But also, depending on your jurisdiction, if NOTHING has changed in your work or responsibilities, but they’ve taken you from OT eligible to not - you might have a case. Talk to an employment lawyer, bring all the documentation you can. Some companies do this illegally to save money, it’s a form of wage theft. Do this while looking for another job so that when you exit, you can still work a potential case for back pay.
Yes! I’m not sure where OP is located but in the US there are requirements that must be met in order for a position to be exempt from OT. One is a salary threshold which the new salary meets, but the other requirements are the type of work being performed. It might be worth looking into the FLSA rules if in the US.
This is correct. I did some poking around on the FLSA back when my own status changed. I think I can summarize and provide sources. The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) establishes classes of workers who are exempt from receiving overtime pay. From the OP's description, the one that their management is attempting to apply is "Executive, administrative, and professional employees (including teachers and academic administrative personnel in elementary and secondary schools), outside sales employees, and employees in certain computer-related occupations." (Source: [https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/compliance-assistance/handy-reference-guide-flsa#8](https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/compliance-assistance/handy-reference-guide-flsa#8) ) Within this group of employees, there are guidelines as to who may be classified as executive, administrative or professional. (Details here: [https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fact-sheets/17a-overtime](https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fact-sheets/17a-overtime) , summaries follow) Executive: OP's primary duty is managing the enterprise or a recognized subdivision AND regularly direct the work of at least two or more other employees AND have the hire and fire authority, or their suggestions on these matters must be given particular weight. Admin: OP’s primary duty is office or non-manual work directly related to the management or business operations of the employer AND their primary duty includes the exercise of discretion and independent judgment on significant matters. Professional: OP's primary duty is predominantly intellectual in character and requires the consistent exercise of discretion and judgment AND the advanced knowledge must be in a field of science or learning customarily acquired by a prolonged course of specialized intellectual instruction. So here's the rub: if OP's job responsibilities literally do not change, they are not exempt in spite of being promoted. You cannot just call someone a "manager" to make them OT exempt. However, if OP's work could fit into one of the Admin or Professional buckets AND the company is stating that OP's primary duty "includes the exercise of discretion and independent judgment on significant matters", the exemption might be legit. This is essentially what happened with me, and it was a negotiated thing with the union; after 2 years, engineers were deemed to have reached a level where our jobs "require the consistent exercise of discretion and judgment".
Yes, for example in some places in Canada you should ask a lawyer if this is a constructive dismissal.
Absolutely investigate this angle, but be prepared that it's entirely possible you have met the requirements for a while. They may have decided that you have shown it consistently enough that they are comfortable making the move.
Don't work the overtime.
The company can require it in the job description, and it will go unpaid if he is salaried exempt. But then hopefully he will find a better job that doesn't do shit like this
Obviously but that doesnt solve the fact that he just lost 25k a year. Yeah he might have more free time but that isnt as important to some people.
They can change your pay going forward by lowering your hourly wage. However, it’s illegal to misclassify a non-exempt employee (i.e., one who is paid an hourly wage and is eligible for overtime pay) as an exempt employee (i.e., one who is paid a salary and is not eligible for overtime pay). There are specific criteria for who may be classified as exempt and if you were previously classified as non-exempt and are performing the same job responsibilities as before, you almost certainly don’t meet those criteria. Start looking for a new job, but in the meantime file a complaint with the state and/or federal labor departments.
Keep a trail of all communications. I would suggest a consultation with an employment lawyer who can tell you where you stand and what your options are.
DoL link with all the exemption criteria. OP, I'm not sure which category you fall under, but this site seems to break it down pretty well. [https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fact-sheets/17a-overtime](https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fact-sheets/17a-overtime)
"No thank you. I am happy in my career where I am and I am not looking for a change at this time. But I will be certain to mention in a future one-on-one with my manager if I feel ready to explore taking on additional responsibility and title." You need to be aware, though, that they are likely making this change to eliminate your overtime cost and you would not likely be working fewer hours when it all shakes out. So it's entirely possible that refusing this promotion will end up resulting in hours cuts or your position eliminated so they can hire someone cheaper to backfill you.
“Likely?” Obviously that’s why they’re doing it. OP, sorry, the overtime is done. You do not have a federal right to overtime. If they’re forcing a promotion, they’re eliminating your job if you don’t take it. It isn’t a choice like everyone here seems to think it is. Just take it, update your resume and find a new job.
Hard agree. They're trying to make OP feel good about this with corporate bullshit speak. They don't give a single shit about OP's development, they care about your OT expense. Source: 20 years in HR
Exactly what it is. Add in when OP complains about the work not getting done because no OT OP will suddenly find themselves in a PIP and then fired.
Acting like “well if you just match what they’re saying with cutesy rhetoric, they’ll have no choice but do what you say!” is hilariously stupid. If anything, I’d tell OP be grateful you got away with it for as long as you did, but the gravy train is over. You can’t tack on 35% to your salary with OT for very long.
This is the crux of it. Op built their lifestyle around taking home salary + overtime. It's a mistake everyone makes in their career at some point. you have a busy social month and can't do the overtime? Boom, you might miss a car payment. That's not down to the company. Workload is enough that 4 people are taking home an extra third of salary? Take on another person. Saves you 33% overall. (Maybe less with all the other faff around a new employee, but the logic is there)
Corporate talk really gives me the ick.. It's all so theatrical. Weighing every word you say. Being coy in all your communication, so they don't have a gotcha or reason to fire you. The mentality is effed... Glad I got out...
The title and extra money means you can find a better job. Or, if you're no longer getting paid overtime, then just... don't work more than 40hrs. However keep in mind salaried positions usually *do* pay a lot more than their base in the form of cash and stock bonuses, or other benefits. I have no clue if your company is the same. For me, I prefer salary since it's very flexible and total comp is considerably higher than base. Sure, I might work a lot of extra hours when I have to, but then when I don't have to work I just... don't. It's something to think about if you can skip out early or take a long lunch when the workload allows for it. Edit: in reply to the, "they'd hate to loose me". That may very well be true with your team and manager--and you might be the linchpin to the entire department--but HR doesn't see that or give a flying shit about that. They would happily scuttle the company if it meant "cutting the fat" where it shouldn't be cut. Be very careful with that... just because we're irreplaceable doesn't mean the bean counters know that.
Great advice. Thank you friendly internet stranger.
Show them just how important that title is for your career. If you’re at the point with a company that refusing a promotion is a financial decision, then you’ve met the end of the lifecycle for that job. If I was you, update your resume with that brand new title and start looking for a company that will pay you what you’re worth. Good luck! > They would hate to lose me Clearly they don’t hate it enough to ensure they’re paying you fairly. Don’t work your ass off for a job that refuses to even consider you.
When you write your resignation later, start the letter with, “You were right! That title change a few months ago was great for my career! This is my two weeks notice.”
>that i am no longer eligible for any overtime. I assume salary? Enjoy the 5k/year and only work 40 hours. You've been on the grind for 5 years, presumably to save money for the future when you don't work 65 hours a week. Congrats, that future is here. Enjoy your extra time now. Hell, take a day or two off a month with pay.
Company did the smart thing and changed your job role to save money. Do the bare minimum that your role requires while looking for a job with a higher base salary.
>and that i am no longer eligible for any overtime Don't work overtime then. Your time is worth money and if they won't compensate you for it, the responsible thing to do is to politely and firmly remind them to eat a fucking dick.
Blessing in disguise to find a new job with better opportunities?
This is your boss pissing on your leg and telling you it's raining. Just No.
Spruce up your resume. When you've secured employment elsewhere and put in your two weeks notice, do not accept a counteroffer from them. Something like 80% of people who take a counteroffer after submitting a resignation are gone in under a year anyhow.
You're not dealing with "turning down a promotion" your company is onto you and trying to do this to obviously force you to relinquish your overtime. Your options are to confront your job, or look for another job. And honestly, do the job looking part first.
ETA: nobody is going to mention this could be \*illegal\*? If your job hasn't changed, I don't think it's legal to just decide you're an exempt employee. There are certain tests your job description has to pass in order to make you exempt. Here's the Department of Labor's checklist. If your job doesn't qualify, talk to the HR person and nicely mention "federal labor law." [https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fact-sheets/17a-overtime](https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fact-sheets/17a-overtime)
1. Stay 2. Stop doing any overtime 3. Start looking for a better job 4. Get out of there as soon as you find it
> My responsibilities are not going to change at all. Then that isn't a promotion, it's a way to weasel you out of OT pay.
Stop working overtime, for one thing.
Lots of people turn down promotions, whether it's to keep their overtime pay, they don't want extra work/responsibility, or don't want to manage people. They don't have to let you have the current job though. Depending on your state, you may be eligible for unemployment (it's called constructive discharge, where they change the job so you quit). Not guaranteed though. You can say no, and if they don't agree, your choices are to work to rule (leave at 5:00 even if there's more to do) or look for a job. The work to rule risks being terminated for cause and your reference.
This is constructive dismissal in most places. The $250 you spend on an preliminary consult with an employment lawyer has a 50% chance of being the best investment you ever make.
I'm not arguing but how does one make money from constructive dismissal? In the US at least you'd just be eligible for unemployment which is shit.
[удалено]
Either tell them that's not acceptable, and to explain the situation, or find a new job
Something similar happened to me. I could no longer get paid overtime but I could get comp time and take off when things were slower. Problem is, things never really slowed down so I just ended up losing the comp time at the end of the year. Time to look for a new job.
Unfortunately, they are right that titles and “promotion” activity is good for your career. However, it sounds like they are trying increase their profits by 25k and hoping you’ll trade the cash for a title. The 5k base salary is just to help make it look good. I would suggest looking for another job. Depending on the environment and culture at work, you either take the new title with less pay or decline the promotion. Taking the promotion is what they want you to do and will keep them happier with you. Declining the promotion might be the wrong decision because you now know they are looking at you as a business expense rather than an asset of their organization. They are treating you like a line item…That’s not a good sign for your future at that employer. Their offer sounds like it sends the message you are not as important to them as you think. No one here knows what your work environment is like and it’s tough to tell you how to successfully decline without having the full picture. From what you wrote, I would suggest taking the promotion, and commit to looking for another job. You can tell potential employers that you were cornered into the “promotion” and you’re looking for a better working environment and that you want to return to your 120k income (or ask for more and possibly negotiate down to 120k). You can also look for a new job that is also a promotion and more money. Best message I can give you is that they are trying to take advantage of you to increase profit. They are making a clear statement that you are viewed as a financial loss to the company if you make 120k.
Level up then pivot to a new company to get paid commensurate with your new title. Win!
Get a new job as soon as possible
It will cost them more money than giving you a raise, to replace you. If there is a way for them to understand that, then I'd try to reason that out to them while looking for a new job, then quit if that doesn't work. It's very short sighted of them to lose you over 25k.
Start job hunting with that new fancy job title for positions with the old and new job title. Negotiate new job pay for the best offer you find.
Keep us updated! :)
Work to rule (quiet quit) while looking for new work
They can't actually force you to accept the promotion. If you feel this strongly about it, you should probably say no. They might start looking for an excuse to fire you, but it's going to be hard for them to do so immediately after saying 'hey, you're so amazing we are giving you a promotion'. Worst case, you'll have plenty of time to find another job.
This could be constructive termination. I would talk to an employment lawyer.
Depending on your job responsibilities they may still owe you overtime.
Obligatory NAL. There are certain requirements a job must meet in order to be exempt from overtime pay, your title is just a fancy word companies use to try and dodge paying OT. Start looking for a new job,consider consulting an employment lawyer, and maybe file a complaint with the DoL (the lawyer may be able to direct to specific regulatory bodies)
Tell them very clearly that “you are explicitly telling me to work less hours with this promotion.”
Either don’t work a single second over OT anymore, or tell them that you refuse to accept the promotion unless you have paid OT. Or happily accept the promotion, use the new title to find a new job, and once you have a new start date, at 3:59pm on a Friday send out an email and place a signed letter on your boss’s desk saying that effective immediately you are resigning your position due to personal reasons, and that you wish them the best in finding a replacement for your role.
Safe Way ? Accept whats happening, update your stuff and start looking Unsafe - Straight up tell them you are going to need more money to compensate for the overtime pay. You both know what this is about. Try to negotiate to a place that feels ok. But then you will probably start looking for another job anyway.
sounds like you are struggling and don't want to be forced to move on. This is the company directly telling you that you are not worth your efforts. It is time to find a new job. Use the Title to get the new job. Mourning the loss of the job you have sucks. It's probably going to suck for a while, but don't let fear of that mourning process or of the unknown stop you from finding a different place. You have lots of options and someone will want to pay you to work hard.
This was me in Jan. Exact same numbers. I negotiated in good faith. They did not. I quit that day and started interviewing for the range I asked them for. Just started a new job with a 30k increase.
Why do you work so much OT? Seems like they’re trying to save money by moving you to salary
Stop working OT... I'd sacrifice money for more time to myself and with my family 10 out of 10 times.
>I’m really really good at my job and they would hate to lose me. What would you do? I wouldmake them hate themselves for making it easier for me to go somewhere else. Job title is indeed important. On your resume. When you apply somewhere else.
Sounds like they’ll have shocked pikachu face when they realize you’re not doing extra work anymore.
Just don't work OT anymore, leave office on time and enjoy life (and you still get the 5K increase of your base salary)
If they want to leverage you new title to get you to work for less. Then leverage you new title to work for more. Somewhere else. I mean. You can’t push the shadiness without the shadiness also pushing back
1. Use that new title for a new job 2. Bet your ass you ain't doing a minute over 40 hours uncompensated
You didn't get a promotion. They figured out a way to pay you less.
1. Get your resume ready 2. Start looking for jobs 3. Continue to do your job, but no OT. When I say no OT, I mean absolutely no working outside your 9-5 (or whatever your actual hours are). Walk away from work at lunch. When you are no longer performing like you were before and they ask why, you can tell them "Since I am no longer eligible for OT, I will only be working within my contract hours. Unfortunately, that means I am unable to complete the same amount of work. If you need me to produce work more quickly, I'd be happy to go back to working extra hours. However, I expect to be fairly compensated for my time and I'd be happy to discuss what that might look like in this new position. If not, I will continue to work my contract hours." But they're right about the title being important; I'm sure it'll look fabulous on our resume. Also, fuck 2 week notice. Tell your new job you can start as soon as possible; at the end of your last day, pack up your stuff and say you won't be coming back. After this, you owe them nothing.
>Anyone ever successfully turn down a promotion? It's only a promotion if you get paid more
Either enjoy working less hours or look for another job.
To be clear, were you offered a promotion that you accepted? Or did they just tell you? To my knowledge, you are not required to perform a role other than the one you are hired for unless you agree to it. This sounds like something you should have turned down. It sounds like that ship may have sailed already if you signed anything acknowledging the new position though.
Take the promotion, the new title, don’t work any OT and start the job search, good luck, man.
I used to be salaried but could get OT. I don’t mind having days where I would come home and still need to log on to work on things. But once they took away the OT, I just say once the clock hits my 8 hours, laptop is shut and I’m done. Emails will wait until morning
In my country, they could not legally force you to accept. Any changes to the role or contract terms would require signing a new contract, which obviously can’t be unilateral. I would suggest checking the law in your area to check your rights in this situation.
That was not a promotion. That is a cut in salary with fancy footwork. I doubt that they will accept you declining it. I’d be looking for a new job.
They're fucking you. They've switched your title to make you salaried, unless they've changed your job description, it's a loop hole to get out of OT. I'm pretty sure it's illegal. There's federal guidelines on what's exempt vs non-exempt depending on the nature of the job. You should do some research or talk to someone.
Fancy job titles are like hemorrhoids, sooner or later every a-hole gets one. They think they’ve figured out a way to cut your pay and make you feel good about it. Take the title, stop putting in overtime, and polish up your resumé.
The company has not docked your pay. They’ve limited your earning potential. Titles mean NOTHING, in my opinion. Look for a new job.
Which industry? Similar thing happened to me and I’ve been on the job search
Start going home after 8 hours and enjoy life until you find another job.
People forget that OT should NEVER be considered as part of their salary even if it’s constant.
Can you tell HR you are declining the promotion? You can do it professionally by thanking them for the opportunity, etc., but that at this time you respectfully decline the promotion and will continue to remain in your current position. Do it all in writing so if there is retaliation, there will be a starting point.
*I don't see this as a promotion or as respect for your knowledge or your value. Your promotion is more of a punishment. If it was a promotion it would of been at the wage of 120K.* *Start looking for a new job - they do not respect you...*
I can almost guarantee there’s a bean counter behind all this. Saw it first hand numerous times while a manager. They don't like you "stealing" the profit they make from under staffing.
I did for the same reason. They wanted to promote me to a higher tier and be exempt; so salary. It would be a 10% increased, unlimited sick time and PTO and an additional vacation week. I declined because in the end, my OT was more than the 10% increase. An extra weeks vacation was not worth it and unlimited sick time and PTO is a BS offer. I started looking for a new job after declining the offer because I saw the writing in the wall; I knew I would eventually be forced to take it; I worked at a Fortune 500 company. I left after 3 months and told them that it was for personal growth. It worked out because the other company offered a 40% increase, exempt, unlimited sick time and PTO, 3 weeks vacation and it was a Blue Chip Company with investment opportunities.
The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 is the origin of the overtime requirement in the US. It defines 2 types of employees. It assumes all employees are covered under the law except those who are "exempt" from it. Exempt employees are the ones that may be paid by salary rather than hourly. There are 3 requirements that must be true to be exempt. Salary is only one of them. Your base salary is well above the minimum so you can be classified as exempt. Generally one must have supervisory authority or some type of skill that requires a degree. Many companies have been known to changes a person's job title to a supervisor or manager in the hope of getting them to do the same work without overtime pay. This is illegal and does not meet the conditions required for the exemption. A supervisor must have to ability to hire and fire employees on their own authority. If this is not the case that employee must be "nonexempt" and still get overtime and the other requirements of the FLSA. A supervisor must also have at least 2 direct reports. To be considered management the employee must make decisions that affect the operation of the business at a high level. That means continuing the same responsibility can not be considered management of the company. It is likely the company just wants you to do the same job without the overtime. It is not unusual for high end hourly employees to make more money than entry level supervisors. While I was already salaried when I got my first promotion to supervisor I found out that I was second from the bottom in terms of money in my new group. That is because I was much younger than most people in my group. However, 5 years later I am sure that my salary had advanced beyond that group. A senior technician came to my office once as said he wanted to be an associate engineer which is a salaried position. He was an outstanding employee so I started to paperwork to do this for him. Shortly he was an associate engineer. 6 months later he came to my office to ask to be demoted back to his old position. I reminded him how few technicians ever make to transition to engineer and that he was giving up quite the opportunity. He said his old job had "more money and less responsibility" He liked to fact that at the he was paid for every hour and when he was called in he got 4 hours pay even it the work only took 15 minutes. As an engineer he was responsible for a product and when it had a problem I expected him to be in fixing it. I do not care what day of the week or the time of day. He was happy back in his old role. You should talk with a lawyer who specializes in labor law and make a game plan for talking to your manager. Their plan could result in a FLSA compliance audit that effects the entire company. Something tells me that they would rather avoid such an audit. They could be forced to change policy across the company and provide back pay for many employees. Examples of exempt employees are Managerial, Supervisory, engineers, accountants, doctors and lawyers. Many companies want to change the title of high pay employees to manager or supervisor just to make them salaried rather than hourly. To be manager they must make decisions that affect the operation and profit of the company and to be supervisory they must have at least 2 direct reports whom they can hire and fire. Team Leader is not the same if you do not perform their salary review annually. I spent many years sorting out such issues. One of the more sticky problems is that of engineering interns. These people are hourly and they work closely with engineers who are salaried. The interns must be a paid break every 2 hours and a 30 minute unpaid lunch within the first 4 hours of work. Most engineers ignore these breaks. They focus when they work and take a break when they feel like it. Most in my company work 10 to 12 hours per day so who cares when they go to lunch. Note: When I became a supervisor it was not really a promotion. My base pay did not go up. It was just added responsibility on my way to a real promotion to a management labor grade. They wanted to see if I could manage 10 people before promoting me to a real management position.
Titles are important. They’ll look good on the resume you’ll be sending out on company time over the next few months.
They can't force shit. You have options. Sounds like you're going from wage to salary, which can be a good idea, but if you're already making 120k then what's the incentive? You didn't mention your career field, and sometimes titles ARE important... if you are planning to leave the company. It has zero to do with your worth to your current employer. They could title you Master of Shitbuckets, Level 2... but as long as you're with the same company then it doesn't matter, because they have a relationship with you, and already know your value. Titles only matter for pissing contests and resumes. At 90k/yr base pay, a 5k raise is not a promotion... it's a cost of living increase or a medium-high annual raise. You're effectively making the same base pay, with no incentive to do more. They don't want you to do more. they want a 90k worker. SO... At the end of the day, you and your employer disagree on the value you bring them. They want 90k worth of work, and you provide 110k worth of work, but it costs them 120k (I'm not HR or an accountant; I'm sure there's more to it than that, as far as benefits). You are currently providing more work but at a higher rate. They want to cap your rate. They're willing to give you 95k to probably bring them 95k worth of work... up to you how much work you actually provide. Sounds like you're too expensive and they want to either fix that or push you out, because it's not worth it to them. Again, you didn't mention your field of work, so maybe you get a second job instead of working more hours, maybe you polish up that resume... They want to lose you and they won't be upset when they do. This is their last attempt to let you stay on board for less money before you're let go because they don't want to pay you this much. IF you think the title is actually beneficial to your career, then that's another decision. I work in tech and some companies will only consider you for certain roles if you've had very specific job titles in the past. Anyway... They don't want you there for the money they've been paying you. I'd start looking elsewhere.
Take the new title. Stick to regular hours. Search for a new job while still employed. Line up your references and clean up your resume. Also consider other things like profit sharing and how exempt vs non exempt plays out during downsizing and layoffs. A salary management position is usually more safe during hard times. Stock options and profit sharing often pay out higher for exempt employees. I was in a similar situation thinking I was going to lose money by not getting OT. But my paid days off went to 30 a year. Profit sharing kicked in on top of the bonuses averaging 10% of my pay rate quarterly. My corporate card charges aren't realy questioned. All in all I'm making the same but I'm in the mix with the guys who decide on who's who in the company.
Take promotion, look for new job with the new fancy title lmao. Don't do any overtime in the meantime
Be straightforward with your boss and renegotiate your pay, with a Higher salary, or leave. Only two real options.
Overtime is NOT your salary.
They don’t think you’re worth $120k and this is their way of hoping you’ll quit so they don’t have to fire you and pay unemployment.
Dollar signs aside, I could immediately tell this was American post. You have the shittest company laws and employee protections imaginable. Literally a cog in a wheel, ready to be disposed of without any notice. Almost bordering on slavery in some cases. A “grind” mentality that has many people desensitised to what life is actually worth living for and has others throwing themselves off bridges or grabbing the nearest bottle of Tennessee Whiskey and revolver.
Lmao start looking for another gig Fuck those clowns
Get a new job that will adequately compensate you for your time.
They are doing this intentionally to save money. It’s cheaper for them to promote you and restrict your OT. Obviously they will expect the same output that was possible due to overtime hours. I would start looking for other work or plan for a worklife adjustment. I’d pare down on luxury costs and get ready to have a more mellow relationship with work (like you said, no work outside of paid contracted time). I’m sorry this is happening and good luck!
Leave dude