explain what you mean here?

nonameag99 said:

---

62strat said:

---

maddiedou said:

---

TxAG#2011 said:

---

I'd pay her because I have a soul.

---

The reason you have a soul because you never employed people

If an employee makes 30 bucks an hour He. She. Cost the company 100 an hour at the minimum after taxes Vacation.

---

A 333% labor burden rate?

Do they have like 25 weeks of vacation?

---

Your profit margin is way to low in your calculation

I forgot that you are a Democrat that got banned from Houston

---

profit is in the employee 'cost' calculation?

Sounds like you really know what you're doing.

I get what noname is saying. If the business is billable hours, then OP could be charging 100 an hour to the customer and paying the employee 30 an hour plus, ~15 an hour in benefits. So normally he clears 55 an hour. If he pays the employee 45 an hour burdened but doesn't get to bill a customer, then instead of making 55 he loses 45 - a swing of 100 dollars.

Or maybe he still bills the customer but has to pay someone else overtime. In that case, he's paying 45 to employee 1 and 67 to employee 2 which means he's losing 12 dollars an hour to serve that customer. Or if it's not billable hours but he still has to pay 112 to cover that time period instead of the normal 45.

There are a few different ways to look at this, but the cost in a small business without spare headcount capacity will often be lost revenue and extra overtime, not just the labor cost.

I'm sure someone will say that he should just hire more people. That may or may not be true, but i wouldn't assume that. Usually the optimal solution already has over time built in, and for most businesses this is a bad time to take a risk by hiring more people.

The 5 COVID tests are a red flag that we might be looking at someone who is hoping to test positive to get two weeks paid vacation. The company I work for certainly had issues with certain employees abusing WFH, and I've known plenty of people who always have an excuse up their sleeve to get extra time off. There are people out there who abuse flexible policies, and sometimes they cry wolf so many times that no one believes them when they have a real reason.

that doesn't line up with this statement at all

Quote:

---

If an employee makes 30 bucks an hour He. She. Cost the company 100 an hour at the minimum after taxes Vacation.

---

Typical burden is around 33%.

Ulrich said:

---

I get what noname is saying. If the business is billable hours, then OP could be charging 100 an hour to the customer and paying the employee 30 an hour plus, ~15 an hour in benefits. So normally he clears 55 an hour. If he pays the employee 45 an hour burdened but doesn't get to bill a customer, then instead of making 55 he loses 45 - a swing of 100 dollars.

---

That's not even close to what he said.

He said a $30/hr employee cost $100 after benefits/vacation/etc. Then when I called him out on a ridiculous burden %, he throws back a profit margin argument.. but margin isn't even on the cost side of the equation.

As diggity said, burden is usually 30ish %, not including any bonuses of course (that can be 10-25% to infinity% all by itself)

62strat said:

---

Ulrich said:

---

I get what noname is saying. If the business is billable hours, then OP could be charging 100 an hour to the customer and paying the employee 30 an hour plus, ~15 an hour in benefits. So normally he clears 55 an hour. If he pays the employee 45 an hour burdened but doesn't get to bill a customer, then instead of making 55 he loses 45 - a swing of 100 dollars.

---

That's not even close to what he said.

He said a $30/hr employee cost $100 after benefits/vacation/etc. Then when I called him out on a ridiculous burden %, he throws back a profit margin argument.. but margin isn't even on the cost side of the equation.

As diggity said, burden is usually 30ish %, not including any bonuses of course (that can be 10-25% to infinity% all by itself)

---

Then he's wrong, but a missing employee can easily cost a small company multiples of their salary.

As us been mentioned, salaried employees aren't hourly. If they're getting the job done, they're earning. If they're getting it done too easily - find more for them to do. I'd drive myself crazy tracking salaried workers taking an hour here or there.

Now, I get this is a special situation but one aspect of this dumb lockdown I don't think will change is work from home. People have historically come to work "less than well" especially for small businesses. My take is those folks will start working remotely when that's the case. It sounds like you're phone based - get a VOIP system and you'll probably use it yourself and for more than this one employee moving forward.

While COVID has brought the issues front and center for many employers small and large there remain numerous issues an employer should deal with via policy and benefits.
Specifically, an employer who lacks a qualified salary continuation plan will eventually pay for the lack of planning.
Treating employees differently in the same situation is a dangerous precedent. In the absence of a qualified salary continuation plan pay continued may not be deductible as a business expense and in the case of an owner can even be considered a dividend thus subject to double taxation. How long should pay be continued? Small employers who ignore this question invariably wind up dealing with this issue after a situation occurs after which a policy gets enacted which is frequently funded at some point by disability income insurance. Generally speaking some form of paid time off followed by short term and then long term disability. Usually an employer is best served by limiting paid time off in scope since it is purely an entitlement and cannot be managed. The advantage of outsourcing the disability decision to an insurer allows even a small employer to limit their legal and financial exposure and assure employees have a benefit which protects their income.

only question: is it more expensive to replace her than to pay her?

Keeper of The Spirits said:

---

Thoughts and prayers for anyone who has to work somewhere that they think maternity leave and not docking pay for a doctor's appointment or going to see ur kid in a school play is a benefit

---

hold up. you shouldn't be paid for leaving work to watch a school play.

I am sure that we could all find things to do other than work, but we shouldn't be compensated for doing them.

less expensive in terms of salary because we'd hire someone with no experience and be able to pay them less. of course, there's training involved. current employee is pretty good at sales, so in the long run who knows if we gain or lose (and how long) with the newbie.

as for your comment: "I am sure we could all find things to do other than work..." with seven employees in our office you're right, someone could potentially be gone from work for a few hours all the time.

Yesterday an employees' uncle fell off a roof. She left at 9:30 a.m. to be with her aunt at the hospital. Called and said she'd need to miss the rest of the day. Salaried employee. Has already used up 2 weeks vacation, all her sick time and 3 personal days. Plus we've paid them to sit at home for about 3 weeks during the beginning of corona. We are close to just installing a timeclock.

i'm not arguing, just saying that it all creates bad morale in the office. AND... we need her here to work. So in the end I have some decisions to make. And the grass isn't always greener.

As someone who has been an employer and is now an hourly employee... I am an hourly part time employee. When I have to take time off I don't expect to be paid and we were essential workers so I didn't get a break. I will be the one who takes off time for kids. That being said I've not missed more than 3 days this year. My kid had to get tested for Covid. My mom and mom in law have been sick as hell. I'm saying this as someone who is saying your worker is taking advantage of this. Just like you I have a great employer that pays me to miss work bc it isn't frequent:

Great post. I especially agree with the part about putting in the time to get something resolved ASAP.

The employee who comes in on the weekend to take care of the customer is far more valuable than the employee who makes the customer wait till he gets to it on Monday.

Most things can wait till Monday, but occasionally things need to be done right away. When the crap is hitting the fan, give me the employee who doesn't mind a couple hours on a Saturday.

She get fired yet?

Sadly, lots of people are gaming the system due to "covid." Sister in law in Iowa works HR for a light industrial company. She's dealing with lots of hourly workers calling in "with covid" having to miss weeks at a time. Legally they can't ask for proof that they're testing positive.

Also had employees not come back to work b/c they were making more money on unemployment.

NoahAg said:

---

She get fired yet?

---

no. the obvious for me is the missing work shortcomings and I didn't fire her. But she's pregnant. I can just see getting into some pregnancy discrimination issue.

that's why it's always a better idea to hire light bulbs than women.

Not necessarily OP, but lots of conflating of hours worked and work results on here.

Two employees:

One: accomplishes all assigned work in 4 hours and takes the rest of the time off.
Two: accomplishes all assigned work in 9 hours and is late for dinner every night.

Which is the better employee? From the employers perspective, they're equal. From a holistic approach, one is much better and really needs more to do. That's on the boss; not the employee.

If you're referring to OP, he didn't give us information about that which is probably fair since he wants to preserve some privacy. That said, I assume his frustration is arising from the fact that he or someone else is having to step in and handle this person's work while they abuse a lenient policy.

If you're referring me, I'm assuming the two employees are similarly productive while they are working. I'm talking about people who want to achieve top 1% careers, and for that your competition isn't the average person, it's people who are really efficient and work really hard.

My experience is that in any role that leads to exceptional career outcomes, the work often comes in batches with tight deadlines, and there is always more to do in terms of improvements and long-term projects. And I don't really want to hire someone into a senior role if they require external motivation to find things to do.

No matter how thoughtfully, fast, and long I work, my list of stuff to do only gets longer over time. It may get less immediate, but the more I do the more I learn, and the more i learn the more ways I think of to improve the company.

Related to this;

Our secretary said she was feeling sick, went home, then a day or two later said she tested positive for covid.

Several days later, she couldn't produce a positive test from her doctor. That turned into, well we aren't paying you without a positive test, because you've used far more sick days than allowed this year and already had a warning.


Yesterday she quit.

Probably better now than later