Results 1 to 9 of 9

Threaded View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    27

    Default Exempt Employee's On Call, FEMA and Nuclear Duties

    I'm an engineer in the nuclear power industry and have a couple questions.

    I'm looking for advice if the below scenario's are legal by my employer to force upon employees.

    Scenario 1:


    All companies operating nuclear power facilities are required to have an Emergency Protection plan. This is a requirement established by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). This covers having an emergency response plan if there was ever a significant event (think Chernobyl, Three Mile Island).

    To achieve this, a communication system is required to contact employees at all times, including "non working" hours.

    This evolution requires periodic cycling per a schedule who is "on call" and require to respond to a pager within a certain time frame specified by their designated position. That position arbitrarily assigned based on where they decided to obtain residency and only in a few positions, technical background. I.E. one wouldn't put a janitor in a position required to evaluate nuclear reactor or fuel barrier integrity. They are not specified at the time of hire but some period after.

    While on call, it's claimed to be REQUIRED within your responder radius. I.E. 1 hour, 2 hours, 3, hours... and so on and one MUST respond to the page (test pages are sent) within that time period. One must specify during that page how long it would take to reach their designated responder post.

    While on call, it is claimed to be REQUIRED to be physically and mentally capable of performing your role. I.E. One cannot drink any alcohol whatsoever.

    If one wishes, they can attempt (but not guaranteed) swap to another employee who will respond for them. I.E. Hi, i'm going out to dinner, i want to have a glass of wine, can you cover for me until ____. I.E. My grandma had a heart attack, I we've got a 1 hour responder requirement, the hospital is 2 hours away. Can you cover for me so I can go to the hospital (no guarantee the other will accept), but if one goes without finding someone else to cover they're in violation.

    Above, I'm trying to guide this activity does in fact greatly restrict personal activities, lifestyle and ability to plan ahead; it's encumbering with work duties while even physically not at work. It's also responsibility of the employee to find an alternate. Opinion: A non encumbering system would be something like calling a designated employee responsible for the program and say, "I'm going out drinking, find someone else. Bye."

    Also, there is the ability for us to get paid overtime. If the item above would be considered work hours, hypothetically we could get reimbursed for those hours. Currently we do not.

    Opinions on if this can be forced upon the employee above and beyond their normal work?

    Scenario 2:


    This is somewhat a continuation of the scenario above. In the recent past, the story changed and we are now told even if we're not the person "on duty" above, we're required to not only respond to the emergency page, but also respond to any other page. I.E. technical questions. Usually these calls turn into "can you come in" or "please come in" to work.

    The original requirement of this communication system was only for the specified emergency protection plan mandated by the NRC.

    This requirement is something else and gets abused quite frequently. I've somewhat given in and don't squalk about the emergency coverage (out of kindness), but the other really is troublesome. They even use the words "on call" for anything while you're "on duty" for emergency activities.

    Again, is this considered work hours if it's a required activity.

    I found this link but it appears to be more guided for hourly employees:

    http://wagehourlaw.foxrothschild.com...t-compensable/

    items worth mentioning:

    Factors considered include:

    1. geographical restrictions;

    Scenario 1: We are certainly restricted.

    2. required response time;

    Scenario 1: We have required response times.

    Scenario 2: We are required to respond.

    3. frequency of calls during the period;

    Scenario 1: They send out test pages on occasion.

    Scenario 2: Not frequently.

    4. use of a pager (which gives the employee freedom to be away from a telephone);

    Scenario 1: Pager required, but must call back (so must be near a phone).

    Scenario 2: Pager required, but must call back (so must be near a phone).

    5. extent personal activities are actually engaged in during on-call time;

    Scenario 1: I can do yard work, stay within my radius, but cannot leave my radius. I must wear my pager. I.E. Technically if i was swimming out in the ocean and left my pager on shore for more than an hour, it would be violating my role.

    Scenario 2: No restriction, must wear pager. Could i go swimming at all?

    6. provisions of any employment agreement as to treatment of on-call work;

    Scenario 1: No clue.

    Scenario 2: No clue.

    7. length of time employee is on call (i.e. periodic duty versus continued on-call status);

    Scenario 1: Periodic however scheduled.

    Scenario 2: While on "duty" someone decided we're also on call for work related assignments as well. So ~1 week a month, however we've got conflicting information we're essentially required permanently to carry and respond to pages.

    8. degree to which employees can trade on-call responsibilities; and

    Scenario 1: can trade, but not guaranteed. Cumbersome process.
    Scenario 2: When they call you, they want you and not someone else.

    9. whether the nature of the work precludes the employee from engaging in certain activities, such as drinking alcohol, while on call.

    Scenario 1: Restricted greatly. Distance, alcholol.
    Scenario 2: One can be drunk over the phone, but not come on site.

    Summary:

    I'm wondering if my hiring contract does not specify I'm required to perform duties both in scenario 1 an 2, if i'm required to actually perform them. Or if i do perform them and overtime is available if i complain, if my employer is required to compensate me for time. I.E. maybe it's minimum wage, but required by law.

    this last paragraph was edited, it didn't make sense.

    If this is "just the way it is" I'll probably be interested in looking for another job. It's a bit beyond what I seemed to be agreeing to and additional "expectations" get tossed on. If i'm required, so be it but at least i know i'm not getting outright screwed over.

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Similar Threads

  1. Compensation and Overtime: On Call Compensation for a Non-Exempt Employee
    By jaywhite778 in forum Employment and Labor
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-06-2011, 08:04 AM
  2. Compensation and Overtime: On-Call Pay for Non-Exempt in Texas
    By Duckwora in forum Employment and Labor
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-29-2009, 06:10 AM
  3. Job Duties: Exempt Manager Forced to Perform Hourly Employee Duties
    By spiderpig in forum Employment and Labor
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-23-2009, 03:14 PM
  4. Compensation and Overtime: How Do I Determine if I Am an Exempt or Non-Exempt Employee
    By FeelingLikeADoorMat in forum Employment and Labor
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-13-2009, 11:45 AM
  5. Compensation and Overtime: Non-exempt: OT, On-Call, And Comp Time
    By Amethyst Beauty in forum Employment and Labor
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-10-2008, 09:32 AM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources