The Department of Labor has officially updated the overtime regulations of the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act, or the FLSA. These updates are going to affect over 4 million workers in the United States—and by extension, their employers. Molly Kelley, Sr. HR Business Partner of Xenium, is our resident expert on the subject. She joins us to explain the current guidelines, break down the new language and its effects and offers next steps for employers and HR professionals to ensure compliance with the new regulations.

 
MP3 File | Run Time: 32:27

Tell us what you think!
red-survey-button
divider_5
Brandon: Welcome to the HR for Small Business Podcast, this is your host Brandon Laws. Thank you for the download today. We are doing an emergency podcast, and I have Molly Kelley with me from Xenium.
Molly: Hello!
Brandon: Molly, we’re going to talk about the new legislation that’s been passed at the federal level, the FLSA new regs. I don’t even know what you’d call it, what do you call them?
Molly: Final regulations.
Brandon: The final regulations. Just to give listeners some insight, on May 18th President Obama and Secretary Perez announced the publication of the Department of Labor’s Final Rule. And this has been going on for a long time.
Molly: Yeah, two years actually.
Brandon: So for two years you’ve been patiently waiting, and we’ll get to that in a little bit. But this is basically updating the overtime regulations which will automatically extend overtime pay protections to over 4 million workers, so it’s impacting a lot of people.
Molly: It’s massive.
Brandon: Which is probably why it’s so interesting. So it’s going to be implemented sometime, and you’ll talk about that. But this is huge news.
Molly: It is.
Brandon: What’s the fuss?
IMG_4338Molly: Oh my goodness! Well first of all, I want to correct you on something very important – you mentioned that I’ve been patiently waiting? I’ve not been patiently waiting, I have been impatiently waiting! And this has been kind of a hard row to hoe, and many of my clients will admit to that. But we got news two years ago that this change was potentially coming, but no specifics. And until the Department of Labor released their final, final, final regulations just this last Tuesday actually, Wednesday morning, we didn’t know what was going to happen. It’s hard to prepare.
Brandon: We had Dan Grinfas on the podcast a few months back and he’s so knowledgeable about all this, but even he was saying, he’s an attorney, he’s read everything there is to know about this and he was even saying that we just don’t know. We know it’s going to happen, but we don’t know what the result is going to be. We have the result now.
Molly: We have the result, yeah, that was actually a personal point of pride. When Dan doesn’t know what’s going on it makes me feel a little bit better! And yet we could kind of get some sense of where things were going, so there’s going to be later talk about some of the surprises, things we were expecting that didn’t happen. But, basically, the HR community and many employers have been watching this train coming down the track for almost two years now, it started in 2014. Big train, teeny tiny track, and no sense of what’s happening. What we’re talking about is the federal Fair Labor Standards Act.
Brandon: That’s the technical name.
Molly: Yep! It affects all states, all employers. And basically what we’re talking about is most employees that are covered by this must be paid at least 1.5 times their regular rate of pay for any hours they work over 40. And that varies a little bit by state, I know in California, for instance, it’s overtime after eight hours in a day, so not necessarily getting attached to that 40 hours. So you want to make sure you’re looking at your state’s specific laws. But essentially that’s the nexus of this, and the specific element we’re talking about is specific to overtime.
So back in 2014, President Obama directed the Secretary of Labor to update this overtime pay protections, to kind of simplify the overtime rules. And they published their first notice of proposed rulemaking – they love to give you “We’re going to do this! We’re going to do this soon! This is what we might do!”
Brandon: It prepares the business community, at least.
Molly: You’d think, right? But we’re still seeing shock and awe right now. So essentially they did that. On July 6, 2015 they published their notice of proposed rulemaking, and that was kind of the first “This is what we think we might do.” They invited interested parties to submit their comments by September 4, 2015, and I think this is amazing – they received over 270,000 comments in response to this. Some of them were supportive and a lot of them were from folks who were really concerned about it.
Brandon: And I can imagine there’d be people on both sides of the aisle on this one, but is it fair to say that this is probably a very outdated law and that’s why they are addressing it now?
Molly: Yeah, exactly. Actually, there was an adjustment – and I wasn’t even aware of this until I really started researching this for the podcast – but there was actually an adjustment previously that happened, I think, in 2014. I’m sorry – not 2014.
Brandon: 2004?
Molly: 2004, thank you! I’m getting my dates all switched up!
Brandon: I remember reading that somewhere.
Molly: Yeah, there was an adjustment back then. But this is, by far, the most massive shift that we’ve had and it’s catching up for years of inflation. So basically, the test that we look at when we’re deciding who is subject to overtime, meaning not exempt from overtime or non-exempt. Another commonly used phrase is hourly employees.
Brandon: I hear that one quite a bit.
Molly: Yeah, versus who is salaried or exempt from overtime, meaning they are not subject to overtime. We look at both what they’re doing, the amount of discretion they have or independence in their duties. Typically, for most positions, that’s something that we’re looking at. And then the other piece is just that very base level they have to be making X amount of dollars.
Brandon: What is that threshold?
Molly: For current regulations, until December of this year, the white collar employee exemptions must be paid $455 per week. Most of us don’t think of it in terms of weekly pay, we’re thinking about annual.
Brandon: Or even monthly pay.
Molly: Monthly pay, yes.
Brandon: Most of our household budgets are monthly cash flow.
Molly: Yep, yep. So that annual amount, if you take that $455 per week, is the equivalent of $23,660. That’s not very high. That’s essentially a pretty low threshold. And actually I haven’t heard anybody argue with that.
photo-1450897918656-527057db59d3Brandon: So, let me understand this, that threshold is the minimum in which you can be a salaried exempt employee.
Molly: Exactly.
Brandon: Meaning I could work 60 hours a week and the employer would not be at risk of any wage & hour laws.
Molly: We wouldn’t necessarily owe you overtime, provided your job duties meet some other tests. So there’s a series of tests that are available, we use this all the time at Xenium and attorneys are referring to this, that are carved out by the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Brandon: Duties testing or something like that?
Molly: Yeah, your job description – not the job title – the job description has to meet some certain criteria. And that was actually something else we were expecting, if you talk about one of the surprises, we thought that there would be a shift in terms of the job duties as well, that you had to spend, for instance, with a manager, 50% of your time managing people, 50% or more.
Brandon: Wow.
Molly: Most people are working managers so that would’ve been a big change.
Brandon: Absolutely, that would be.
Molly: That didn’t actually get included at this time. So they’re really focused right now on that salary piece. We’re looking at the money piece, the baseline for qualification basically.
So what happens is essentially that the official rules, the big changes, as of December 1, 2016 –
Brandon: Meaning, this is when it is in effect?
Molly: This is in effect, yes, on December 1st.
Brandon: So right now we understand, and you’re going to talk about what it’s going to, but just so it’s explicitly clear, December 1st is when employers need to have it.
Molly: They need to have an actual effective date of changes.
Brandon: Write that down!
Molly: Yes, write that down, December 1st! Which always seems to be the case, so that’s great for companies that are on a, you know, calendar year financially or fiscally. Many aren’t, so that makes it a little bit more confusing. But basically the three or four main changes are the salary – the new standard salary level is set at the 40th percentile of earnings for full time salaried workers in the lowest wage region. So what they did was they basically said, Where in our country are we typically seeing the lowest wages? And that was actually in the south.
Brandon: Let me see if I understand this correctly, they’re taking the Bureau of Labor & Statistics salary data?
Molly: Exactly.
Brandon: Isn’t is usually outdated by a year or two?
Molly: You know, actually, I don’t know. That’s a good thought, it probably is.
Brandon: So if you’re talking 40th percentile, maybe it’s even lower? Anyway, it’s probably a different discussion. But they’re taking the 40th percentile of the federal data?
Molly: Yeah, in a certain region, in the lowest region. So when we take the lowest of the low –
Brandon: So they’re giving employers the benefit of the doubt, to a certain extent.
Molly: Exactly. Then, essentially, that number that they landed on, the new number, in case you were just getting attached to that $23,660, the new number effective December 1 to qualify for white collar exemption would be $47,476 annually, or $915.
Brandon: I’m not a math genius, but that’s double what it was before.
Molly: Yeah, that’s why for many employers that haven’t been tracking this and for smaller companies, nonprofits, that essentially don’t have a lot of wiggle room in the budget or maybe are kind of getting by with a more robust benefits package or something like that, the sky is falling. This is a huge shift. That’s $930 a week.
Brandon: There are some things employers can do, and we’ll talk about that in a little bit.
Molly: Yes, we have a plan!
Brandon: We do have a plan for you! What else has changed?
Molly: So the other changes were that there also was a requirement around the total annual compensation requirement for highly compensated employees. That number had to be, it was, actually at I think $100,000; I don’t actually have data on that with me now.
Brandon: Yeah, I remember seeing that number.
OvertimeMolly: Something around there, and it now is $134,004. Don’t forget that extra $4! So that’s a big shift as well, almost a $30,000 increase.
The other piece that I found really interesting was they’ve also established mechanism for automatically updating. And honestly that’s a relief to somebody in the HR field or an employer because we don’t want to be in this boat again 20 years from now where we’ve got a threshold that’s way, way out of date. If we settled on that $47,000 and remained there, we’d be in this conversation again in the future. So what they’re doing is they’re basically having an automatic review, I think it’s every three years. So there’s a bump in 2020, which sounds like eons away from now but it’s not that far, it’ll increase to something around $50,000.
And then the other piece that’s really different in terms of how we used to review jobs and duties and also specifically salary pieces for compliance with this law was we were really talking about the base salary. And they’re now including an amendment that employers can now use nondiscretionary bonuses and incentive payments, including commissions, to satisfy up to 10%. So there is a limit.
Brandon: That helps a little bit, though.
Molly: You can’t be commission-only and satisfy this. But up to 10% of that can account for that new salary level, so that’s helpful because that wasn’t in play previously.
It’s a lot, it’s a lot.
Brandon: Wow, there’s a lot going on! So let’s go back a little bit. Before we started recording I was telling you, we didn’t want to make this a political thing, but there are people on both sides of this saying We need this! or This is going to kill businesses! And I think both are very valid arguments. But if you look at the “why,” why we’re even going down this road in the first place, why are we?
Molly: Good question. It’s a heck of a lot of change.
Brandon: And my argument would be, why can’t we have the market dictate it? Employers.
Molly: Yeah. That’s a good question.
Molly: So, I’m going to give you the – I actually did a little bit of research on this – I’m going to give you the government’s stated reasons, the department’s stated reasons. So the department said, essentially, We seek to update the salary level to ensure that the law’s intended overtime protections are fully implemented, to simplify the identification of overtime eligible employees, and essentially making the white collar exemptions easier for employers and workers to understand. Whether it’s spelled out in that statement or not, there was a real intention to ensure that the salary threshold was updated for inflation, that there’s a system for ensuring that it doesn’t lag going forward.
The pro-side, the folks that support it, and actually I’m at heart one of them, with some caveats around that that I’ll share in a minute, it’s not uncommon for me to see somebody at a $28,000 salary. They’re making $28,000 and they’re working 60 hours a week. This happens a lot. You know, there’s this sense that in an hourly world, every hour I work is worth something, and if I’m going to go above and beyond 40 hours or, in some states, eight hours a day or what have you, that that time is worth more, that time and a half overtime rule. But there’s a whole group of folks that are on the lower salary end that haven’t had the advantage of having that time and a half payment for anything above 40, anything above eight, whatever it is by state. So I think it  adjusts where a lot of time having passed and having had no shift in that salary,  so that makes sense, you know, time is money.
Brandon: To me, and I totally see those points, to me I’m sort of looking at this like the reason why maybe it was so unfair before is there’s so much grey area involved in this.
Molly: There is.
Brandon: I always make this analogy because I think it’s an easy one and I love football—the reason why I like the NFL, why we love football, why people in America love football, is because the rules are the same for everybody.
Molly: That’s true.
Brandon: You’re either out of bounds or you’re not. In football and in other sports there’s no grey area. You win or you lose, you did the penalty or you didn’t do that penalty. And when you start getting into business and these regulations, if there’s any ounce of grey area, I think that’s what makes it confusing, and then employers could be on the edge of that grey area. I think that’s maybe where we are at. So maybe having those rules defined a little bit better is, I think, so important.
Molly: It is and it’s funny you say that. As a complete incompetent I have no idea about football, but I imagine—
Brandon: Bottom line, rules are rules.
Molly: Yeah! Rules are rules, but at the end of the day you know, and probably you would agree, that the referee can determine whether or not somebody’s out. Until we have video playback and play by play, but essentially for years that’s what’s been going on. So whether the referee is an employment attorney or an HR professional or, often, managers, trying to navigate these very complex duties tests, the duties tests that are the other portion of this or the other portions of determining whether somebody qualifies or not, it’s up to the referee. And so my interpretation of how much independence you have in your job, how much flexibility you have to make decisions may vary very much from the employee I am assessing. So I think the salary adjustment does make it much clearer. You know, if you don’t make this basic salary, you don’t qualify. Period, end of story. The flip side, you ask me to kind of play devil’s advocate, and I’m seeing this. As somebody who actually supports an adjustment, I’m living this right now with a lot of my nonprofits that are very budget bound. And frankly a lot of my for-profit clients that also are living within a very, you know, monetarily limited scope to provide people with salaries.
Brandon: They’re strapped, yeah.
Molly: They want to provide a living wage, and yet, the reality is that they’ve had a need for people to work 50 hours a week and be paid $40,000 for a salary. That hike, then, to $47,000 is a huge burden if you’re talking about multiple employees.
Brandon: It is, and that’s why I’m, you know this about me, I’m more of a market-oriented person.
Molly: You are indeed!
Brandon Laws-18Brandon: But so when you have that sort of situation coming up, it’s, to me, wages should be relative to what you bring in, and it’s going to vary business to business, industry to industry. When you have these sort of blanket approaches to laws about wages in particular, I don’t know, it seems like, especially for a nonprofit or maybe somebody who doesn’t have a lucrative industry, I’m thinking of someone outside of the financial sector where maybe revenues, profits aren’t plentiful and something like this could really impact especially a small business.
Molly: Absolutely. So they’re either faced with essentially continuing the exempt status, which means hiking a salary up, right? That’s one of your choices. Or they’re faced with the alternative which is to basically go to that exempt employee and say, You’re no longer exempt from overtime, so now we have to pay you for overtime if you work over X amount of hours in a week or in a day. Essentially at that point in time they become an hourly employee, and of course, most employers, when you look at the pure dollars for time and a half, they’re going to say, So now we’re either going to limit your weeks to 40 hours, but if that person had been working 50 hours a week, that’s 10 hours.
Brandon: And what if they’re a super high performer, too. But yet their budget’s constraining them, so yeah that’s a huge dilemma.
Molly: True. Yeah, it is, it’s going to be a huge challenge. And again, there’s other pieces to this. I’m not a wage and hour geek, I don’t really get excited about this.
Brandon: Let’s leave it to the attorneys!
Molly: Right?
Brandon: We could put our opinion on this all day long on this kind of stuff.
Molly: Yes. You have all kinds of HR folks that are very compensation focused or very savvy with very complex things, like math, that I don’t understand. But I do understand people at the end of the day, so for me what I want to mention also is that I’m less watching this myself personally from a Oh my goodness this is going to have a massive financial impact! That’s certainly true, it’s pretty obvious to me. But I also am really going to be interested to watch how it pans out on an emotional level. Because if you’re coming to somebody who has been a salaried employee for the past five years with your company and you’re saying, Brandon, you know, unfortunately with this legal change, we’re going to have to make some adjustments. We can’t afford to bump your salary up to the new threshold. You’re now a nonexempt hourly employee. I need you to start keeping track of your hours via timecard, I need you to limit your work week to 40 hours a week, I need you to make sure you’re taking a lunch and also taking some breaks throughout the day, and you’re no longer considered a salaried employee.
Again, there’s all kinds of benefits to that: we should be eating lunch, we should be taking a break. It’s healthier.
Brandon: But it’s forced.
Molly: It’s forced. It has to happen at certain times in your day.
Brandon: We in the HR industry, we talk about work-life balance all the time. I remember starting my career in hourly and then going to salary. It’s funny, when you go to salary you have so much more flexibility. Like if I had an appointment, I could just leave. And I know I’m either going to be working at night or making it up somehow, and so there’s a lot of flexibility throughout the day that maybe an hourly employee wouldn’t have.
Molly: You know, I would go a step further and say, and I’m always amazed by this because I’ve had many conversations prior to all this when we realized in analyzing a job description somebody didn’t fit the bill, they were misclassified, we had to go to them and say I’m sorry, you’re really an hourly employee. It’s interesting—many employees feel like it’s a blow to their esteem, like something’s being taken away. It’s not just the flexibility or the onus of having to track time, it’s that you’re no longer part of this salaried, elite class. That’s not how I look at it, but people think that way.
Brandon: I think that’s the perception, Molly: salaried people are elite. But to your earlier point on why this law’s coming into effect, those people have been taken advantage of, to a certain extent.
Molly: Exactly, I agree.
Brandon: That’s a blanket generalization, but…
Molly: But one that I certainly see happen. I think the care and the concern around how to communicate this is well warranted. Dan provided us years ago with a really nice letter that would back up a conversation that you’re having with employees around how this works. Because you want to do it to document the change and make sure they’re clear about keeping track of hours, things like that.
There’s all kinds of alternatives that are out there that you can possibly play with around flexible work weeks so people don’t feel like they’re losing some of that flexibility piece. Because work-life balance is really critical to most of us as well.
As we focus on the big changes, there are some things we were expecting that didn’t happen that are going to be interesting to see play out. So, again, we were expecting the duties to be reassessed as well. That didn’t happen. And honestly, many of us were expecting a much, much higher threshold and then a faster timeline. A lot of attorneys–
Brandon: Yes, this drug out forever, didn’t it?
Molly: It drug out forever and we were hearing that it was going to be going into effect in July. So this is kind of a relief that we have until December to play with things and look at it and make sure that we’re balanced in our approach.
Brandon: I want to hone in on that, the word “play.” It’s interesting because I do feel like, to a certain extent, that’s what’s going to happen. You’re sort of going to have to figure out on a case by case basis. You’ll dive into this, but one of the first steps will probably be, let’s take a salary report—
Molly: Who’s affected.
Brandon: Yeah, who’s affected.
Molly: So the first step for employers is really to run a payroll report of the employees who are currently classified as exempt from overtime. So the salaried folks in your company. Anybody who is making less than that $47,476 per year, they’re going to be affected. So by December 1 we either have to give them a bump to that amount in salary and keep them as exempt employees, or more commonly what’s going to happen is people are going to become non-exempt hourly employees.
Brandon: So, for those listening, let’s pay attention this part. Molly’s giving you some good tidbits on what to do next, so let’s just restate that. First step would be—
Molly: Identify your affected folks.
Brandon: And the best way to do that is to export maybe a report from your payroll system and then maybe sort or flag the ones that are over that $47,476 threshold.
Molly: Yeah, so anybody who’s making $47,475 and below is exempt.
Brandon: Good point! So $47,475 or lower and anybody hourly and salaried or just the salaried?
Molly Kelley on Onboarding ProcessesMolly: Good point, your hourly folks are fine. If they’re non-exempt, meaning they are already not included under the FLSA in that exempt class, you don’t have to worry about it. But if they are being classed as salaried – and we’re not talking about salaried non-exempt, I’ll explain that in a minute – but basically if they’re being paid on a salary only, they’re not keeping track of their time and they’re making less than the threshold, those are the folks we’re honing in on.
So that’s where we start, and then we really think about how we want to class that. And I mentioned this idea of salary non-exempt, I’ve never been a massive fan of that, although I think we’ve done that at Xenium for years where basically we’re paying people who are hourly on a salary basis but they’re still keeping a timecard, they’re still paid overtime – that’s the most critical piece, that if somebody who is in that salaried, non-exempt role works overtime, they’re being paid overtime. I’m not a huge fan of that. Our payroll team would be howling at me, because I think it does create some consistency from a payroll standpoint. But at the end of the day you’re still tracking your time. It’s still an element we need to look at as well.
There’s the administrative burden on this piece. And actually a colleague, Suzi, pointed that out as well, and I wasn’t even thinking about that. It’s a whole shift for companies who have just been paying everybody across the board a salary. Regardless of how many hours they work there’s now a whole piece of this around timekeeping and all that.
Brandon: Yeah, I could actually see it in a couple different ways. First off would be this initial figure out who’s affected, make adjustments as needed, and you’ll keep talking about that. But then the second part would be building a system around tracking this going forward. And then third, and more importantly, a compensation philosophy long term.
Molly: I agree. Yes, Suzi raised that as well, and that’s the weakness of an emotional HR employee relations, especially! But this didn’t even occur to me, but it makes sense. And we’ve got a whole compensation division on our team here at Xenium that would be thinking about this too, but you know, if the approach is, let’s say, for example we have somebody who’s making $45,000, a currently exempt employee. We want to keep them exempt because they work way too many hours for it to be viable for us to pay them time and a half.
So we bump them – let’s say they’re a relatively new hire, maybe they’re a recent college graduate, they don’t even have a lot of experience under their belt yet necessarily. So we’re going to take them, my solution as an employer, take them from $45,000 to $48,000 which matches the new threshold, right? And I completely forget that their manager, who’s a long tenured seasoned employee with lots of experience, is making $50,000. So there’s a $2,000 delta between the salary of the direct report and the salary of the manager. That, basically, is wage compression, and it’s going to create a big issue for us down the road. So there’s some complications to saying let’s just raise everybody’s salaries as well, because we’ve got to think about all the folks that are not getting that raise and where does that leave them, too.
Brandon: So as far as what employers should be doing next, we’ve obviously talked about running the report, making adjustments as needed. So let’s hone in on the adjustment piece really quick. What are a couple options?
Molly: So we either make maybe the most standard—and maybe I’m missing some, that’s why we have great experts here at Xenium.
Brandon: And attorneys as well.
Molly: Yes, attorneys are a great resource for this. But the two most obvious options are to either increase the salary to meet the new threshold, so they can remain exempt from overtime, stay a salaried employee, or to alternately reclassify them as non-exempt employees. And essentially that piece makes them an hourly employee, they’re tracking time, they’re subject to overtime.
Brandon: To your point earlier, that’s the more complex decision because they’ve got to meet those duties.
Molly: Yeah. And we could probably find some resources and post this online for folks too, but there are actually resources that are out there for calculating what that would look like, so taking somebody’s salary, calculating an hourly rate.
The harder part, though, and one of the nice things that’s beneficial to an employer around a longer implementation timeline is that some of us have no clue about how much our team is working overtime. So taking a month or two and looking at that piece around how many hours is Brandon working of overtime? I think tracking that for a month or two would be really helpful, because we’ve got to know what we’re talking about. If we’re not tracking hours – and I’m not saying we’re tracking that necessarily having them do a timecard, we don’t want to jeopardize exempt status right now as it stands, but being aware of how many hours of overtime an employee would be working or how many hours they’re putting in at that exempt level is helpful when you’re looking at whether to go one way or the other on this.
Brandon: We’re running long, we probably need to wrap up, but unintended consequences—do you see any of those in this situation?
Molly: I do, I do. I mean, I think the wage compression piece, from a very kind of logical standpoint. I think the other piece is the obvious emotional impact on employees that I’ve mentioned as well, between either losing that status or if other folks are getting bumped when other people are remaining at the same threshold because they’re above the new threshold. How do we walk through that piece?
Of course, the unintended consequences on the budget – you know, companies’ profitability, or if it’s a non-profit, just our pure ability to manage the workload and the finances at the same time are going to be pretty complex.
Brandon: Yeah, I’ll be interested to see what happens and I’m sure we’re going to hear stories about whether it’s helped or hurt.
Molly: Yeah. It’ll do both. At the end of the day I think it will absolutely help. And certainly if you can frame it up for those folks that are moving to that non-exempt status that this is essentially making sure that we’re paying you overtime for all of the hours that you’re working, that we’re adjusting to that, that we’re taking care of you financially. It truly is a financial benefit. It’s how do we square that off with an impact to the company and also an impact to them in terms of flexibility and managing their hours. But there’s pluses and minuses on both sides, absolutely.
Brandon: Well this has been awesome, Molly! And I appreciate you doing the emergency podcast on such a quick turnaround! I think people will appreciate it and we’ve actually had listeners reach out and say Hey, can you update on this? So it’s actually kind of funny, all of that happened at the same time as when the laws actually came out. And then you were prepared, because you were not patiently waiting!
Molly: I was not patient! I was impatiently waiting and I have always wanted to be a first responder so this makes my day!
Brandon: Awesome! Anything else you want to mention before we part ways?
Molly: No, other than I think, really, to avoid a panic situation if you’re feeling panicky, really reaching out to your resources. There’s a ton of work being done in the legal community by employment attorneys as Brandon mentioned, and certainly the team here at Xenium stands ready to support you as well. But we’ll work through it, we’ve got time to think through it. It’s so recent that there’s going to be a lot that’ll come out in coming weeks and months even around strategies and thought process behind this. So we’ll get through it, don’t anybody panic, the sky is not falling!
Brandon: Molly, appreciate it, and for the listener thank you so much for the download! If you like what you heard go on iTunes and give us a review if you don’t mind. And definitely share it with people in the HR community. I think people could really value from this podcast so if you don’t mind sharing we’d appreciate that! But again, Molly, thank you, this was a lot of fun.
Molly: Thanks Brandon!