I’m certain that the resolution for this is months, if not years, away.

It’s such a complex issue and so worthy of true discussion.

As a business owner I sympathize with the leadership team at Sun. As a worker bee in software environments who has dealt with the deadline issues and the effect it can have on real life (parenting, let alone single parenting, to mention one) I sympathize equally with the tech writers.

My strategy as posted above would be to simplify the procedures that the technical writing team has in order to provide better quality of life for such a busy environment.

Bottom line for employers - while you can’t make everyone happy, by making your work environment better than anyone else’s around, salary versus hourly becomes a non-issue.

You’re comment posted on the 19th was automatically dumped into my spam folder by Akismet - I didn’t even notice (it got lost with the other 63,808 spam messages I got that day).

I tracked it down and re-posted it for you. Thanks for the research!

Here’s a link.
http://charlesjeter.com/2008/05/20/

Summary:
Personally, I tend to view this as a problem that needs a solution. Were I negotiating this matter I would bring up two specific issues which could have prevented this from occurring, or which could lessen the expectations of management.
First, one thing that Adobe does do right is that they allow telecommuting. This allows a 60 hour work week to be reasonably managed along with a busy life schedule because employees can manage their lives around the time they put in on their home systems.
Second, by having a workflow that allows input remotely without endless face to face meetings (the absolute largest waste of time I observed while working as a tech writer for a nameless military contractor) and proper collaboration, a lot of this time saved reflects working smarter, not harder.
Getting Granular about Exempt Status
I found the following definition of exempt status online:

EXEMPT means the job is NOT subject to payment for overtime hours worked. Employer policy may elect to compensate incumbents in these jobs for their overtime, but there are no restrictions on rates used or quantity of hours paid to incumbents in exempt jobs.
Overtime requirements apply to the JOB not the EMPLOYEE. It is the responsibility content of the job that determines if incumbent employees must be paid for the overtime they work.

There is a Highly Compensated Job exempt status but it only applies to Public-Sector Employees.
Legally, exempt employees are due overtime in California law if it can be proven that they regularly cannot complete their normal assigned tasks without working overtime. Two years ago a roommate of mine ended up winning a similar judgement simply by making a phone call to an attorney and having them contact the HR department where he was working.
What it takes to document your situation is at the very least, logging your hours worked along with the tasks you are assigned. Regardless of exempt/non-exempt status, in California the Overtime law states that you cannot be expected to be working for free, which is what regular overtime without pay is.
Summing up, legally Sun is responsible, at least to one employee. The judge’s court order has the attorneys searching for a second employee, a reasonable request given the frequency with which John Edwards-like trial lawyers tend to overuse the class action.
The lawyers will win one person’s case, that’s a given. A landmark ‘blow for Sun techcomms’ it may not be unless they find another employee to sign on the line.
Yet, as this attorney states on his blog in reference to the IT lawsuits:

In this situation, is it any wonder that, increasingly, some California companies are moving jobs across the border to work in other states where employees don’t have to be paid special overtime rates?
Just like the ridiculously high workers’ compensation rates hurt job creation in California several years ago, the overtime pay requirements are doing the same thing in the IT industry.

Sorry I didn’t manage to comment by 19 May.

I personally wouldn’t dream of speaking for other tech writers. As the comments to this post show, some have no problem with being exempt while others feel it’s inappropriate. I’ll let the readers post and/or contact you with their own answers.

At the end of the day, it probably comes down to whether or not your environment (employers/coworkers) is one that takes unfair advantage of the exempt classification. Mine tends not to, but naturally I’ve heard of some who do. Everyone at some point has put in a monster week or two as a deadline approached. A couple of years ago I had a 200 hour timecard period, for instance. It was important work, and it had to be done.

But if you’re an exempt TW and putting in 60 hour weeks on a regular basis (not by choice), then your employer/management/team is either (1) incompetent in some fashion, or (2) taking advantage of your exempt status.

Would you be able to speak with me today, 5/19 (I’m on a tight deadline!), or even just comment on this via email? Here is what I’m interested in:

(1) Do tech writers generally understand the terms of employment, that they are not entitled to overtime and are exempt professionals, when they’re hired?

(2) Is it the industry standard for tech writers to be classified as exempt? Are there some technical writers who legimitately can be considered non-exempt?

(3) Is there a sense among you and other tech writers that you have somehow been wronged or taken advantage of by your employer(s)?

(4) Would you rather be classified as non-exempt? Why or why not?

-Steve Tanner
916/741-9571

By nature many technical writers are good communicators on a one-to-one basis but need to work more on one-to-many to make sure people know who they are, what they do and just how valuable they are (and will continue to be).

On the other hand, I think people should stop hiding behind laws and just go tell their boss they won’t work 60 hours for peanuts. (Or be on call 24/7, or do any of the other asinine things that we’re asked to do all too much out here).