Trade union members and their employers know what's expected when it comes to overtime pay, because terms and conditions of their employment are spelled out in their collective bargaining contract.

Not so for millions of other workers, who may wish for a union contract after the Bush Administration and congressional Republicans get through with them.

Unless the U.S. Senate blocks the measure, the Bush Administration is set to push through new workplace rules that could end the ability of up to eight million white collar and other workers to earn overtime pay.

Under the Bush proposal, workers, including nonunion police officers, nurses, store supervisors and many others, would face unpredictable work schedules and reduced pay because of an increased demand for extra hours - for which employers would not have to provide compensation.

According to a labor-backed Economic Policy Institute report released June 26, workers making more than $22,100 a year could be denied overtime pay under the proposed changes if they are simply reclassified as "professional," "administrative" or "executive" employees exempt from federal overtime rules, as Bush's proposal would allow.

A majority of the U.S. House approved the legislation. However, the House also rejected a Democratic-sponsored amendment, by a 213-210 margin, that would stop the Department of Labor from issuing any regulation that takes away overtime rights. The amendment would instead have allowed the department to freely broaden overtime protection for more workers, plus clarify the rules in a way that does not take away overtime from those who now have it.

"We regret the House narrowly defeated this amendment," says AFL-CIO President John J. Sweeney. "Many Democrats and Republicans have expressed outrage over the administration's attempt to deny workers overtime pay to help support their families. The legislation is a crucial step in protecting the 40-hour workweek and overtime pay for working families who depend on this extra income to pay their bills.

We wholeheartedly support this legislation, which would block Bush's outrageous assault on workers' overtime pay."

The Bush Administration touted the plan as a major benefit to low income workers, who earn less than $22,100 per year and who would have their rights to overtime spelled out. But AFL-CIO Secretary-Treasurer Richard L. Trumka pointed out that most of those workers are already eligible for overtime pay.

"Just because we have high tech jobs, just because more people are working in an office doesn't mean we should become a nation of workers who never see their families and spend 50 or 60 hours a week" at work, Trumka said. "The 40-hour week and overtime pay are the legacy of some of the greatest uprisings of workers in our history to demand that they be treated with respect."

Another labor leader said Bush's plan would give employers "a financial incentive to have workers work longer hours with no additional pay," rather than hiring more people to do needed work. "It's an incentive to corporate greed," he said.

Under the current Fair Labor Standards Act regulations adopted in 1938, most U.S. workers - an estimated 79% as of 1999 - are guaranteed the right to overtime pay, or time-and-a-half, for every hour worked beyond the normal 40-hour workweek. For white-collar workers, three tests determine whether they are exempt, and thus ineligible for overtime pay. The rule changes proposed by the Bush Administration would make drastic changes to these tests, vastly increasing the number of exempt employees and making it likely that millions of them will work longer hours at reduced pay.