Thread regarding State Farm Insurance layoffs

TL OT Requirement

For TL, we're required to work a certain amount of OT hours per team but only actual hours over 40 per handler count toward the total. So if you take PTO your hours dont count toward the total. They tried to say it's related to being over budget and trying to limit expenses, but how does that add up? Paying people regular time vs time and a half is obviously cheaper. Any leadership willing to tell the real reason behind this weird rule? Sounds like someone's trying to drive up the expense for the last quarter.

by
| 3086 views | | 44 replies (last ) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1jry8j1c

44 replies (most recent on top)

@2gkq+1jry8j1c

Wow it’s almost like you learned corporations run off bottom lines.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @5ckh+1jry8j1c

Such a difference between the old Farm and the new. We met with every BI claimant within 5 days, flat rated the estimates, paid the first party bills under PIP, handled the sub when you were done paying the claims. We only had a quarter of the inventory but the quality and accountability were high. It’s all relative. The lawsuits that forced us to honor the time card laws were a good change.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @3tzz+1jry8j1c

@2rqe….I just love it when the kids think they know what it was like long before their time. Even more when they lecture those of us who were here, and are still here, about then vs now.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2gwz+1jry8j1c

Ok nimrods. No one said everything is better. It was just pointed out that it IS BETTER when you work more than 40 hours and get paid overtime. Wow, no wonder you are struggling-you can’t even read.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2ksk+1jry8j1c

Things did NOT get better for the customer nor the employee. We completed more detailed investigation, more in depth analysis, met personally with the customer, and had a much much smaller inventory. There was also more claim accountability with corporate audits. Nah I'll pass on the illusion that things got better. Not only that 40 hours a week max during heavy loads. Maybe two or three times a year come in and work a 1/2 day Saturday. Blowing smoke up a newbie maybe?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2ope+1jry8j1c

Just because it's better than it was 40 years ago has no impact on today's situation. You oldies didn't have near today's workload or metrics to be held up to. So shut it.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2rqe+1jry8j1c

Things got better from an hours worked and pay standpoint. Prior to that it was not unusual to work a 50-60 hour work week during weather events with no overtime because we were salaried and exempt from overtime.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2gkq+1jry8j1c

Things got better? You're nuts!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2cyy+1jry8j1c

Claim handlers were salary until the suits for time worked were filed in the 90's and forced all to timecard to be accurately compensated for time worked since there were those working beyond 40 hours on a regular basis. So technically there was no OT. So I guess things got better.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2ddf+1jry8j1c

@2bws-Actually is was 84 years when Fair Labor Standards Act was enacted that required employers to pay at least 1.5 rated of pay for hours worked in a week beyond 40. Prior to that SF could require you to work any amount of hours and not pay overtime. And to clean up another of your mis-statements- inflation is 8.2 %, not double digit.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2wvl+1jry8j1c

Can't you see they don't care about you, your family, your physical and mental health. They used to.....not anymore. Welcome to the all about me generation.....the PuNk Rockers are now leading and boy does it show.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2guc+1jry8j1c

What a brilliant observation! And I'm sure they had forced mandatory OT 80 years ago, where you have to work 1.25 regular until you get your OT, crushing metrics, not to mention nasty supervisors, cr---y wages that do not keep up with the double-digit inflation we are seeing now. What a horse's a-s.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2bws+1jry8j1c

It's still not a 40 hour week morn, hence the OT starts at 40 do I really have to spell it out for you? Ashl*e.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2ocg+1jry8j1c

the number of hours in a standard work week (38.75) was established 80 years ago when the leadership at the time people to get off earlier to be home with family and OT is based on weekly not bi-weekly hours worked. It's call the law. This site is overrun with mo--ns.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2pxl+1jry8j1c

@2jqz. Absolutely! That's wisdom!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2lbg+1jry8j1c

It's the whole reason we work 77.5 hours every 2 weeks and not 80, so they can get the extra 2.5 out of you in regular time before you hit OT.

What does this retirement argument have to do with the post?
I thought people who were nearing retirement were supposed to be mature!
Retire when you want, no amount of money is worth your mental or physical health. IMO time is such a precious commodity and more important than money any day.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2jqz+1jry8j1c

Sounds like a question for one of your 3 financial advisors😂

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1avb+1jry8j1c

You're so wrong. Tell me how much money do I have banked?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1pti+1jry8j1c

Not as much as you left on the table ! Oh well my taxes will support your poor decision making as you fall further and further behind and require more social services.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1sez+1jry8j1c

Your MAJOR FAILURE is you obviously don't know how much money we banked.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1esz+1jry8j1c

Troll.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1tyi+1jry8j1c

If you paid 3 different financial advisers for the advice you described you got ripped off! Yet another financial failure. NO financial advisor would ever criticize a clients decision of when to retire. You are either lying or you got played - 3 times apparently.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1hit+1jry8j1c

Most people make good financial decisions often with the advice and help of others. You are the exception and should be the example to others to not just blunder, stumble through life altering decisions .

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1wye+1jry8j1c

Okay mo--n! I'll let you know. I went to THREE financial planners before I retired. I left upset because every last one of them ran their programs and ALL THREE asked why I didn't retire at 55. That upset me because the crooks got 2 extra years of my life that I could have done something I wanted to do instead of what I believed I wanted to do. All three financial planners said: no worries about social security. You can take that when you want. So smarta$$, you're definitely talking cr-p. Plus, I talked to Alright, and everyone. I got the benefits the hires 1 month after me will never get including what I assume is you if in fact you work for them. Boy, am I happy I am at in the screwed up progressive nonsensical world we are in now. I can weather a depression if need be. I am fine. The one's I'm concerned about today are the one's coming into the game. They do not have the benefits I was blessed with.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1vno+1jry8j1c

Oh yes! You still haven't learned to keep your nose out of everyone's financial decisions that you have no clue what decision they make.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1dsl+1jry8j1c

Oh no-you made another stupid financial decision. Wow. You should have gotten some professional advice before making those dubious , life altering decisions. How sad. Every day you live it gets worse….

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1dyl+1jry8j1c

Hey d-mba$$! My financial decisions are none of your business. CLB,CC,OR CF. KMA!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1ewo+1jry8j1c

Hopefully you did not take social security early too-that would be double stupid in light of your pension decision. The Company appreciates you letting them off the hook for hundreds of thousands though.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1njn+1jry8j1c

You are a jack A$$! You have no clue as to my income nor cash flow. I'm smart enough to know I don't meddle in others financial decisions especially without knowing jacksh!t about it.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1dxp+1jry8j1c

As long as you die sooner than later you are right. The longer you live the worse your decision for you and your spouse. You traded less time at work for a lot less retirement income- not criticizing just pointing out the obvious.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1agu+1jry8j1c

Life is too short, working in he-l is too hot, and staying in he-l until you’re in your 60s is too long.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1bix+1jry8j1c

Really! You just don't get it. My financial business is none of yours. I did just fine.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1zdn+1jry8j1c

No one hides tables. To miss out on 35% for a lifetime annuity that passes on to your spouse is not a brilliant financial move, regardless of what you have amassed in savings. In your case the Company won and you lost in terms of payout.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @zjf+1jry8j1c

Brain dead: take less live longer....take more live shorter. Look at the tables they hide. 2 pensions, house paid for, 2 social security checks and a boatload in three accounts to last with no divorces, no kids, no addiction issues and so on. Brain dead not. Brain dead for thinking that. Keep working ..... you'll figure it out. Amazing how many people don't know the full story and rush to judgment. Laughable and they handle claims. Bahahaha!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @rik+1jry8j1c

Admit you were forced out. Anyone that leaves at 57 and takes a 35% haircut on their pension is brain dead.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bai+1jry8j1c

It's obvious this site is loaded with mgmt Kool aid.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @cfs+1jry8j1c

Forced out? You lost that one egg head! I went on my terms laughing my way to the bank. Jealous much? Still haven't figured out how to use your tool loser.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @uml+1jry8j1c

@e-l-LOLyour answer explains why you were forced out at 57😂😂😂

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @lhv+1jry8j1c

Sorry but the law is the law-your spirits must involve Halloween.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @rfa+1jry8j1c

Spirit of the law and letter of the law are different. Live by the sword....

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @evl+1jry8j1c

Post a reply

: