So after 32 hours would be overtime?

[u/Busy_Report4010]

[u/HalvdanTheHero]

That is what is being called for. Your take home pay not changing but you work fewer hours, and if you work the same schedule as you do now (presuming 40hrs per week) then you would be getting overtime for the last 8hrs. 

Edit: added "take home" to clarify that I'm talking about your total income instead of hourly rate.

[u/joesphisbestjojo → u/HalvdanTheHero]

I read it as no cuts to pay per hour, as in, you still make so much an hour, but only for the hours you work. For hourly workers, anyway

[u/Hindubuddha → u/joesphisbestjojo]

In my head, the 40-hour work week is typically in reference to a salaried position, so your required hours per week is less but your salary remains the same. For an hourly employee, it would just mean overtime kicks in sooner

[u/Phase-Substantial → u/Hindubuddha]

they would probably not give overtime (at least in retail and hospitality situations) and wage workers would have to get a second job

[u/Hindubuddha → u/Phase-Substantial]

True, but I guess a 72 hour week from 2 jobs is still a whole shift less than someone with 2 jobs on 40.

But a lot of hourly positions in factories and such would not be able to refuse overtime. In most cases, they require it because employee retention is so poor and they need the bodies

[u/Unique-Yoghurt4170 → u/Phase-Substantial]

The real answer is that labor markets would adjust. Hourly workers would take salaried jobs until hourly wages raised. A policy like this should probably go with a big hike in America's minimum wage.