The House of Representatives has refused to stop the Labor Department from stripping time-and-a-half overtime pay from millions of American workers.

The House, on a 213-210 vote July 10, rejected an amendment to the Labor Department?s appropriations bill that would have prevented the department from spending money to amend the Fair Labor Standards Act in a way that reclassifies entire categories of workers as exempt from overtime pay.

President George W. Bush threatened to veto the entire appropriations bill if it contained the overtime amendment, which was sponsored by Congressmen David Obey, D-Wis., and George Miller, D-Calif.

Congresswoman Betty McCollum, who represents St. Paul and its suburbs, called the president?s veto threat a ?cruel attack on working families? that ?demonstrates the true compassionate conservative values of this administration ? tax cuts for the wealthy and salary cuts for working people.?

Congressman Martin Olav Sabo, who represents Minneapolis and nearby suburbs, said: ?This administration seems determined to gut the hard-fought rights of American working men and women. Their callousness towards working families simply astounds me.?

McCollum, Sabo and Minnesota?s other Congressional Democrats ? James Oberstar and Colin Peterson ? voted to block the new overtime rules, as did Democrat Ron Kind, who represents western Wisconsin. All of Minnesota?s Congressional Republicans ? John Kline, Mark Kennedy, Gil Gutknecht and Jim Ramstad ?voted to let the new rules take effect.

Rules could kick in this fall
The failed amendment could have blocked new rules the Bush Administration wants to implement without Congressional approval. Those rules would strip more than 8 million American workers of their right to overtime pay after 40 hours a week, according to an analysis by the Economic Policy Institute. The Labor Department says ?at least 644,000? workers would lose overtime eligibility.

The rules could take effect as early as this fall. The Bush Administration proposed the rules March 30, but refused to hold even one public hearing on the issue.

Even so, more than 290,000 workers sent letters to the Labor Department opposing the attempt to abolish overtime pay ? the most mail the agency has received on any such issue in a decade, the AFL-CIO said.

One proposed rule change would eliminate overtime pay for anyone making at least $65,000 a year, or $1,250 a week. Another change would deny overtime pay to millions of workers who earn between $22,100 and $65,000 by reclassifying them as managers, administrative, or professional employees.

This proposal would cut off workers making as little as $425 a week if they have even minimal supervisory duties, advanced education or specialized training, the AFL-CIO says. Jobs potentially affected include retail managers, nurses, medical therapists, firefighters and police.

Another proposed change would guarantee that any worker earning less than $22,100 automatically qualifies for overtime pay. That is up from the current guarantee, which only covers workers making less than $155 a week. But many workers making less than $425 a week already qualify for overtime pay under different rules based on the nature of their jobs.

The AFL-CIO calls the new rules a direct attack on workers? pay. Overtime pay makes up about one-fourth of the average weekly earnings of workers who receive it; losing paid overtime would cut their average pay by $161 a week, the labor organization says.

Related article
Thousands of workers challenge changes to overtime law