[nfw2]

I have never worked 40 hours or less in a salaried role. That should be my choice. That has afforded a level of expertise that has given me a lot of bargaining power. People should be free to unionize, and I should be free not to.

To your point about government needing to backstop working conditions, the minimum wage in Indiana is 7 dollars an hour, and yet I can get a job paying 18 dollars an hour at Taco Bell. Why do you imagine that to be the case if employers have so much bargaining power?

[pixl97]

These laws may not do much protecting when the economy is relatively good and people may have a lot more freedom in changing out abusive jobs.

There is something I call the restaurant quality economy measure, a tracking method of how the economy is doing. If you go into a place like Taco Bell, or some otherwise middling restaurant and the service is really bad, and take this as a trend over a lot of eateries then is very likely you live in good economic times. Now switch that, if the average crappy place you go into has really good service then that's a good sign things have gone wrong.

Quality workers have moved down the economic ladder of employment. These people would gladly be doing something that paid more and had more prestige, but that employment doesn't exist.

What does that have to do with your statement. It's when the economy goes really bad employees realize they are in the position of power. It's this pretty much this way right now in most computing related employment, most companies have tightened down and invested more in AI than people. This means your workers will put up with a lot more bullshit in order to not be fired. And when the economy is doing bad all over, that's when the employers break out the abusive bullshit because they can? Are you going to go get a different job?

Be glad the law exists then.

[nfw2]

Top down laws from the government preventing people from entering contracts that they are eager to take 1. contribute to the "bad economy" you refer to as if it's some unpredictable moon cycle and 2. affect my ability to find a good job if the economy does turn bad.

So no, to hell with that paternalism.

[redserk]

Not sure why you are deliberately misrepresenting the proposal here. You're free to continue working the extra hours. Maybe spend a few fewer hours working and repalce it with practicing basic reading comprehension.

[nfw2]

I think you are misunderstanding what the implications of the proposal would be in practice. It says I can increase my hours on my own accord. Cool. I can't leverage my willingness to do so to my benefit because the proposal will make being the counterparty in that discussion illegal. A company may want to hire someone who can be always available, but they can't find that person, i.e. me, because they legally can't make it a job requirement.

I got a perfect score on the SAT reading comprehension section. Thanks for that valuation contribution to the discussion.