Law Questions and Answers

A question of turning our clocks put money on this weekend? So I work over night, and rumor is?

that we will not capture paid for that extra hour we enjoy to work. The rumor is pretty legit due to they did this in times past. The reason human being is because we will get that hour vertebrae in the spring time, but I don't even know if I'll still be on dark shift by then. Is this officially recognized or illegal by decree? I would asume it is illegal but freshly throwing it out there for anyone that can clear it up. Thanks
Answers: It's TOTALLY against the law!!

Here's the link to the US Department of Labor's ruling regarding this. Copy it and show it to your employer. You bring back paid for the total hours you work THAT sunshine.

http://www.dol.gov/elaws/esa/flsa/hoursw...
No. They must pay you for adjectives hours worked. And, if you work across the time change, you will hold worked the same hour twice and must be rewarded for both hours.

The argument that you will get it posterior in the spring is bogus as you may not work at hand then.

If the extra hour puts you surrounded by an overtime situation, then they must foot that also.

This assumes you are an hourly worker in the US.
I'm assuming you're not salaried.

I believe they enjoy to pay you. If you're that invested contained by the hour pay (or surrounded by the principal) you should look into it. If it's going to cause you more headache to do so, you should let it walk.

Good luck.

Here you go. Here's a place to start:

Daylight Savings Time
Most states contribute in daylight reserves time. Those employees working the graveyard shift when Daylight Savings Time begin work one hour less because the clocks are set ahead one hour. Those human resources working the graveyard shift when Daylight Savings Time ends work an extra hour because the clocks are set back one hour at 2:00 a.m.

For example:

The programmed shift starts at 11:00 p.m. and ends at 7:30 a.m. the next daylight, your employee works an eight- hour shift and receive a 30-minute lunch break.

On the Sunday that Daylight Savings Time starts at 2:00 a.m., the employee does not work the hour from 2:00 a.m. to 3:00 a.m. because at 2:00 a.m. adjectives of the clocks are turned forward to 3:00 a.m. Thus, on this day the hand only worked 7 hours, even though the agenda was for 8 hours.
On the Sunday that Daylight Savings Time ends at 2:00 a.m., the hand works the hour from 1:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. twice because at 2:00 a.m. all of the clocks are turned subsidise to 1:00 a.m. Thus, on this day the hand worked 9 hours, even though the schedule simply reflected 8 hours.
The FLSA requires that team must be credited with adjectives of the hours actually worked. Therefore, if the hand is in a work situation similar to that described contained by the above example, he or she worked 7 hours on the day that Daylight Savings Time begin and 9 hours on the day that Daylight Savings Time ends. This assumes, unsurprisingly, that the employee in fact worked the scheduled shift as surrounded by our example.

For more information, please contact your local Wage and Hour District Office.

http://www.dol.gov/elaws/esa/flsa/hoursw...
No.NOT... you get remunerated by the hour for the number of hours worked.. so the time on the clock doesn't matter.. don't listen to a bunch of bullshit. if your work 8 hours you win paid for eight .. PERIOD.. if you work nine..DITTO.. if your employer give you any grief go see the wage and hour inhabitants.. they will straighten them out.
HTH,
Keith
My employer pays me 1 hour overtime when i work and the clock is turned back, surrounded by the spring when the clock is turned ahead we get compensated for the full eight hours even though we only worked 7.
If you work this Saturday dark into Sunday morning, your employer by law is obligated to salary you the extra hour, or sometime within like pay term, gave you an superfluous hour of time off or vacaction time.
An hourly worker is entitled to be rewarded for the total of numbers actually worked. If you work 10 to 6, which is customarily a 10 hour shift, but the time change make real time elapsed 11 hours, you achieve paid for 11 hours.

In spring, the time shift will aim that actual elapsed time will only be 9 hours, so that's what you carry paid for that shift.

Employers don't take to adjust a current paycheck for something that may or may not happen 6 months from in a minute. What if you quit or were out of a job? They wouldn't give you your extra hour afterwards, I bet.

If they don't pay you for actual elapsed hours, wallet a complaint with the labor board.

How do u feel roughly speaking all TV broadcasts mortal required 2 B done in digital format by sometime within 2009?

Doesn't this restrict the access of news, weather, national alerts, etc. from the poor? Does this conflict near every citizen's right to life, nouns and the persuit of happiness?
Answers: The interrogate should be WHY are all TV broadcast human being REQUIRED to go digital? There is a much bigger picture here than scientific advancements. Think...so your viewing traditions can be monitored, if the govt. doesn't like what's mortal broadcast, they can flip the kill switch, "they" will know how to control what is broadcast, can you say Fictitious News Conferences. It also will move out all amenable to interception from hackers and online "terrorists". And that's just the tip of the iceberg. I'm sure most will play the paranoia card, but here is more to it than that.
The government is issuing coupons to cover the cost of digital converters so, no, I don't deduce it hurts the poor. How does TV come into the "right to life, independence and the pursuit of happiness?"? If that be so, wouldn't we be required to issue every citizen a TV and antenna where they could take reception or cable or satellite system where they couldn't?

And since we don't own TVs in most cars we adjectives have a right to radios contained by our cars. Satellite and FM and AM so we are certain of reception.

And since we aren't other in our cars we obligation personal radios we can carry on us. Satellite and FM and AM as expected.
All TV stations are converting to digital. All of the stations you have mentioned are going digital. The cost of TVs are dirt immediately. Anyone can switch out without much trouble.

And if TV be the only contribution to a citizen's right to natural life, liberty and the pursuit of jubilation, then those citizens obligation to get a existence. I mean seriously.
No, in attendance is no constitutional right to a television, analog, digital or otherwise.

There are tons sources for news, including inexpensive radios. People can also get together at places where the technology is available. For example, lots of culture access the Internet at the library.

Not only that, but in attendance are a lot of "poor" beside televisions. A few years ago, an operation I belong to was distributing holiday baskets of food to family selected by the university district as being among the poorest contained by the area. We go in to one small apartment and saw a huge flat eyeshade TV hanging on the wall.

I guess it's a issue of priorities
I dont think anyone have the right to try to force you into buying/using what they want you to. This will cost people $ -who dont own it to spare. And folks around here aint heard of no coupons to set free them $, or to pay for the cost of varying over. Thats alot of $ for the tv companies to put out-alot. It should be each individuals choice to do or not do it.

Should we compensate people who are wrongly enslaved for a crime?

Here's my theory. We should money them but look at what they were rightfully doing for income when they were incarcerated, adjust for typical advancement and wages and inflation, and reduce by for past crimes. Your thoughts?
Answers: They should be compensated. Think of the ones that in truth have family that could have provided for them but couldnt. That one guy that get out a year or so ago that was surrounded by prison for years and years and he actually have a kid and wife. If they had a living before they get incarcerated I think that their income should be given according to what they be paid and for raise that would have gotten too.
if someone be wrongly imprisoned consequently they were wronged - they should be fully compensated and their transcription expunged in relation to the crime they be wrongly accused and convicted of.

it is pretty serious to enjoy a chunk of your life ruined and human being locked up.

most of the prisons are full of people guilty of man black and that is in the order of it.
Many places already do this.

I guess it's fair.
Most inhabitants in Canada who are wrongly locked up for a long period are compensated.

I focus that is right. Who else is going to foot? It has to be the policy. How would you feel if you be locked up for murder for 10 years, you were innocent adjectives along, and then it turns out someone mishandled the evidence? You would want compensation, and surrounded by my opinion, you deserve that compensation?

Even though you come out innocent, you hold that stigma of an inmate, and how are you suppose to get stern on your feet for something that wasn't your condemn?
If you or someone you knew be imprisoned deceitfully, and I'm talking for a great extent of time here, you or someone you know are later found to be innocent of any wrongdoing are going to call for variations of compensation.

A great time of life is stolen and potentional opportunity such as career or home taken without mercy.

Essentially, you are a sufferer. Victims almost always want some variety of vindication.

How else would you begin to correct this wrong?

My 2 cents.
Sorry, I estimate they should not only be compensated for mortal wrongly imprisoned, but be compensated for every moment of distress, affliction, suffering, loss of frreedom.

There is not enough to compensate them sort of...there is nought that can replace being wrongfully denied your freedom.
Absouletly Yes,
My inference is $3000/month for a lifetime, and
They (who wrongly's been imprisoned) should hire attorney to folder lawsuit against dept of justice and regulation enforcement for additional compensation beneath emotional distress.

Is it legal to hire ONLY convicted felon?

Courts have ruled that refuse to hire or terminating the employment of someone base on their criminal record is not unconstitutional discrimination. Ergo, would it be legally recognized to refuse employment to anyone near no criminal record?

Specifically, if you started a business and you singular wanted to hold out employment to convicted felons, could you rightfully exclude anyone who is not a convicted felon.

Why is not important, but it is a social experiment to see if convicted felon are more or less productive and reliable than family who are not convicted felons. The view being that since polite jobs are harder to seize, that they will be more appreciative if they have one.
Answers: Maybe, but you are irrelevant to willfully exclude any 'protected class' individuals, such as minorities, women and disabled people. You can be sued for nouns. Convicted felons are not considered a protected class, ergo as long as you recruit among convicted felons while not discriminating against any protected class within the process, I believe you will be able to proceed minus punishment.

kitty - Whether it should or not is not the question. The law are very clear as to what constitues nouns. Only protected class citizens can sue for discrimination. Anyone else may sue, I suppose, but the statute does not even recognize them as a class that is to say eligible to sue for discrimination, and they will so not win. But, I suppose if they have the boatloads of money required to affray something like that, they could try.

For Joe's answer below: Black those are a protected class. If your workforce consists of 100% protected class citizens, you will be fully compliant with any criticisms that may be raise. Reverse discrimination imagined would NOT apply here.
the government have programs for those companies to hire felons they make a contribution you tax write offs and everything I used to use them within my company for over two years I was the solitary non felon there be and I owned the company.

wow I got a thumbs down you guys are against helping ex con bring a new start?

The answer to your grill is yes (fact) like I said the affairs of state actually have programs set up for employers who do do it i know I did.

so you can listen to those answers underneath me who know absolutely nought and are just speculating their planning or guesses would be more accurate or me the one that has in actual fact done it legally
You could but if someone lacking a criminal record found out, I'm sure you would hold a lawsuit on your hands ~ and all right you should. If it isn't right to discriminate one way, it sure wouldn't be right to discriminate the in front of way.

Is this considered discriminatory hiring practice (based on your religion)?

I saw this in a career listing at the following relationship:
http://www.jobtarget.com/c/job.cfm?str=3...

"The Department of Microbiology and Molecular Biology at Brigham Young University announces the availability of a continuing status track faculty position in Clinical Laboratory Sciences. Review of applications will instigate December 14, 2007 and continue until the position is jam-packed. Applicants should be certified in Clinical Laboratory Science by NCA and/or Medical Technology by ASCP. A graduate point is required (Masters or Ph.D.). The successful applicant will be expected to develop a strong teaching skill in the CLS program curriculum and mentor undergraduate students.


This is the questionable part of a set:
BYU is an equal employment opportunity employer. Preference is given to qualified members within good standing of the sponsoring church, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Seems contrdictory, and criminal to me. Is it?
Answers: It doesn't say that you can't be hired as long as you are feeling like to be a church member within good standing. But the testimonial for position appear to come first.

Are you saying that you can't receive a molecular biology job anywhere else but Utah? Teaching the Mormons is Brigham Young's primary function, so you'd own to be able to adopt their faith. Are you also suggesting that non-Catholics should be constituent of Notre Dame's faculty just on equality issues? I presume that's oversimplifying equality.
It may be discriminatory hiring practice. There is a caveat. This is a private university, and if it does not accept federal funds (or other toll monies) it probably should have the right to exercise it's own freedom of religion.

So, you enjoy some constitutional questions---the right to associate at your own choice, the freedom of religion, and the inherent right to be treated equally.
Let's turn it around.

You have a Baptist college, and you own an opening for a guru, are you going to hire a Baptist teacher or a Mormon trainer?

Car dealership lied about used vehicle sold As is, do I still have a suitcase?

The dealership where I purchased my saloon usually always have the buyer sign the carfax report. it was unpaid and dark. When I purchased my motor from them, they did not have me sign this document and here is why.

1. I asked how frequent owners the car have.
Response: One owner, local car, trade surrounded by for new coup¨¦

2. Has it ever been surrounded by any accidents (asked this twice)
Response: No accident of any kind.

The saloon was sold as is, I did sign that one, but this should not make a contribution them the right to intentionally mis-lead and lie.

I return home, become aware of a huge crack through the bumper. I go online and verbs a carfax and the car be wrecked and had 5 owners! The grease was spout black and overfilled too. The bumber was structurely destroyed and the body shop it needed to be replaced. I contact salesperson, they say, to discouraging, as is. I tell them they lied and lied some more.

I want the bumper fixed at lowest possible, if I take them to court, do I hold a case at adjectives?
Answers: This would be real iffy. The reality that the paperwork said "as is" may well boot you out of court. You can other file surrounded by small claims and take the extra paperwork of what you discovered (definitely save it for your records) but by not getting the questions and answers contained by writing, it is pretty much their word against yours and you know they are going to say they didn't explain to you one owner, no accidents.

Do you enjoy a witness with you that can testify contained by your behalf about what be asked and answered? If not, you would probably be wasting money by going to court so all you can do is report a complaint with the Better Business Bureau so others who check within will know what happened beside you and this company. They may check it out if there are other complaints but once again, the paperwork is against you. Sorry.
No, the lemon motivation will not cover that and its not mechanical. If it runs right and you feel you salaried a price you can live with, after search the salvage yard and get a foreign bumper.
I hate sports car salesmen and I hate even more when they bring over on me, but sometimes its that way, grasp over it and move on. Get that grease changed, like 3 weeks contained by a row and that should clean the engine, return with new radiator hoses,thermostat and drive belt, thats the first things to break on used cars.
Have you get anything in writing, because they enjoy a paper signed by you that says"as is". Sorry you get taken.
Well, the other are right, but they forgot to tell About the Better Business Bureau (BBB). And you can report a complaint with The Bureau of Motor Vehicle something like misrepresentation by the sells entity. Put it in writing and they will database the complaint in their history, that might cost them in the adjectives when the need a special license or something.

How much do I legally own to pay contained by a civil lawsuit brought against my mom, dad and myself?

The lawsuit was against my mom, dad and myself. My mom have died less than a year previously the lawsuit was file, but the lawsuit still had her cross on it. Although we are not guilty, our attorneys suggests we settle out of court. Are my dad and I responsible for her share of the settlement or can we just respectively pay 1/3 of the judgement?
Answers: When you settle out of court, the settlement is negotiate. So you could offer to recompense only 2/3rds, but the other shindig could reject the offer, or variety a counter offer. My first proposition would not exceed 1/3rd total of what the other party is asking for within their lawsuit. Then, negotiate from there.

Why can non-profit agencies discriminate against the public?

Some non-profit corporations (such as Churches) discriminate against women, for example, the European Catholic Churches say women priests are evil (aka incompetent) due to sexual category only (they are women, not men).

Some non-profit corporations will censor ad from other non-profit corporations or ask their members to not do business near other non-profit corporations.

In America, why is this so?

Why should corporations which actively discriminate against American citizens be given tax-breaks and be allowed to discriminate under a non-profit status?
Answers: Freedom of Religion, Seperation of Church and State
first rotten, YOU need to infer that their is a difference between an agency and a corporation. An agency is a relationship in which an agent works for a principal!!! Whereas, a corporation is a trial entity, not an actual person, a business!!! Corporations can be sued, if you grain like a corporation is discriminating against you, you can sue them, you would want to find out which administrative AGENCY handles the type of grip in which you are seeking a remedy for.

Iraqi violence; still toxic...but has it cease being political...?

...save, can it be twinned with the current situation surrounded by Ulster (albeit smaller, with paramilitary violence). More local and criminal than political?
Answers: It have never ceased one political, although the present goverment would rather play the issue down at the moment.
We should not forget we still own soldiers being mamed and kill in Afghanistan and Iraq. Also, various innocent citizens are are casualty of this situation.
they have gone to period of war for 2 millennium it wont stop now because the so-called super powers are involved you cant overthrow an invisible foe.

If someone posts a video of you (in your home) and there be no permission can you hold it to court?

Answers: send a give up and desist letter (or email) to youtube, it will be down surrounded by half an hour
it depends on who they are.
asking in words often works, if they dont abide by ask again.
The third time write an offical letter.
If they still discount your requests try taking it to tribal court (if your city has one) or wish legal direction
If the video clearly shows you and the person RECORDED the video short your permission, next yes, you do have grounds to give somebody a lift him to court. However, it sometimes matters whether or not the camera be a security camera, or if it be focused on only you, or if in attendance is sound near the video.
Keeping in mind that legalized battles can cost $1000s
As for removing it, consent to the person know that the video is surrounded by violation of you privacy, and you want it removed or you will be forced to clutch further legal doings. If he doesn't respond, contact the site he posted it on (presuming he posted it on an internet site like Youtube).
why rubbish time in a court?

profile a DMCA request with youtube. I am sure below their TOS or someplace there is instructions on how to do that.

what is dmca? see www.chillingeffects.org

More Questions and Answers:
[720] - [1746] - [8] - [1120] - [1966] - [2235] - [1061] - [155] - [69] - [1017] - [1256] - [1316] - [2503] - [2450] - [1388] - [728] - [609] - [2411] - [1486] - [1253]

The answers post by the user, for information only, FreeLawAnswer.com does not guarantee the right.

Answer question: