Post
Experience Project iOS Android Apps | Download EP for your Mobile Device
freeed freeed 61-65, M 10 Answers May 21, 2012

Your Response

Cancel

Sometimes there is not enough work to hire another person full time so overtime would be cheaper

Best Answer

Sometimes, yes, but when done ongoing it seems another worker could get off the unemployment rolls.

Best Answer

In that case I would think it is poor management...

Best Answer

I pay overtime because I know some of my employees need it. Sometimes an employees skill set just can't be matched.

Best Answer

Its more efficient to pay OT!......

Best Answer

IDTS :)

Best Answer

It's cheaper to pay overtime than it is to pay full wages to another full time employee, and if there are benefits, to pay benefits for the additional worker. OT is usually sporadic, at least it has been in the places I've worked, so it's not a constant thing, whereas an employee would need to be paid all the time.

Best Answer

My experience is admittedly limited to myself - where OT was EXPECTED, and my brother, who gets it almost every week.

Best Answer

Around my area they will fire people or pay them off to retire earlier and then they will<br />
not pay over time it is cheaper for them to hire a new person and pay them less money<br />
than to pay over time.

Best Answer

I was fired from my job when I reached the top pay after 5 years of increases. I presume the new person started for the least rate again. There is no loyalty in USA, unlike Japan which values its workers. They now make more cars than USA. HA!

Best Answer

Because of the 'pain in the @ss' factor.

Best Answer

it's cheaper in the long run because by paying a current employee they don't have to interview, train, clear, or pay for insurance like they would for a new one.

Best Answer

If the employee stays those costs amortize but the overall pay rate decreases.

Best Answer

Right, if they stay and if they are needed to stay

Best Answer

Related Questions