June 23, 2008
Over the years this issue continues to raise its ugly head. Some dealerships will have a lead body shop person or tech agree to have a portion of his wages taken out and paid to a helper. We all know that these employees love it because they can get more done and as a result make more money. I honestly believe that this practice is going to create havoc one day. It’s simply a bad idea. Having one employee pay for the wages of another employee is opening the door for some anal retentive department rep or attorney to pursue this issue in a class action lawsuit.
I suggest, and some have taken me up on this, that you restructure the payment arrangement so that each individual in question gets a certain percentage of the commission. The lead, as an example, may get 75% and the helper gets the 25% balance. Just remember as long as the helper never gets less than minimum wage and is paid for any overtime (if appropriate), you should be fine.
If we need to discuss this further, let me know.
June 10, 2008
PULEEZZZZ disable this feature!! I have preached this issue sooo many times and now a dealership is in truoble, because they continued to use this “feature” which is not advantageous to your interest!!! If you have an automatic lunch deduction in place you are not going to remember every single time that the employee in fact took lunch. I have tried to talk to the Reynolds & Reynolds reps that I have seen at ADOMA over the years but they were sales reps and not the decision makers for such matters.
March 11, 2008
We have a dealership who was visited by the DLSE. They requested to see time records. They were specifically looking for when techs were taking their lunch periods. As a result, they are now directing the client to conduct a 3 year, self-audit, on all time records. Each violation will cost the dealership one hour of pay for each violation per individual.
February 4, 2008
As if employers didn’t have enough to worry about!! There is a recent case about an employee who felt ill at work because the employer had sprayed the environment for bugs the day before. The employee asked for permission to leave early and on the way home she rear-ended another vehicle. She told the police that she had felt lightheaded before the accident. The person she hit sued the company for her injuries! Heck, that driver went to the deepest pocket. Another aspect of this case is the fact that the employee could argue that she had a “work related injury” because the fumes caused her to be ill. What’s the end result? Pay attention to any illness or injury complaints that might be related to work.