Write a $500-$word minimum analysis of the case by answering the questions at the end of the case. Follow APA guidelines including a title page and reference page. Organize your paper into the following sections:

Introduction: One paragraph that provides an overview of the case.

Responses to Questions: Two or more paragraphs. Answer the questions at the end of the case in narrative form, using critical analysis skills, and using the textbook and$/$or outside sources to support your ideas.

Summary: One to two paragraph summary of the case, including any key practical knowledge you gleaned from the case.

Case: Should Private$-$Sector Employees Get Compensatory Time?

Employees who work for government agencies or municipalities have long been permitted to take time off, rather than receiving extra pay when they work over $40$ hours a week. This compensatory time option allows the employee to receive the equivalent of one and one half hours for each hour of overtime worked in time off. Law enforcement, fire protection, emergency response personnel, and employees engaged in seasonal activities may accrue up to $480$ hours of comp time, and all other state and local government employees may accrue up to $240$ hours. An employee must be permitted to use compensatory time on the date requested unless doing so would $$unduly disrupt$$ the operations of the agency.

A bill called the Working Families Flexibility Act $($H$.$R$.1180)$ was recently introduced in Washington that would amend the FLSA to permit private$-$sector employees the same options as those in the public sector. Employees would be entitled to one and one half hours of time off for each overtime hour worked. They would be able to accrue to up $160$ hours per year. The employee would have the right to request payment of any accrued compensatory time at any time. The decision to opt for compensatory time rather than pay would always be the employee$$s$,$ not the company$$s$.$ The bill explicitly prohibits employers from intimidating or threatening workers about whether to choose monetary pay or compensatory time off. The protections for workers in this proposed legislation are stronger than those already in effect for public$-$sector workers.

Proponents of the legislation point out that work has changed considerably since $1938$ when the FLSA was first enacted. The $40-$hour workweek is less typical of today$$s workplaces. With many individuals working from home and unusual shifts and alternate schedules, this would provide a way for them to better accommodate their personal and family schedules. Employees could plan ahead for anticipated maternity leaves, family vacations, and other events.

Opponents cite several concerns about extending comp time to private$-$sector workers. They believe that businesses would coerce their workers into accepting comp time rather than taking monetary compensation for overtime worked. They also dislike the fact that employers can decide when and if comp time can be used by an employee who has banked the hours. Employees must request in advance if they wish to use comp time, and the employer can deny requests if they unduly disrupt operations.

Consider both sides of this issue and answer the following questions.

Questions

What would be the advantages and disadvantages for employers to allow private$-$sector workers to utilize comp time rather than payment for overtime worked? What would be the advantages and disadvantages for employees if they were allowed to utilize comp time rather than payment for overtime worked?

Would you prefer to have the flexibility for comp time or payment rather than only being paid for overtime worked? If you were a line manager, would you prefer this for your direct reports? Why?