• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Child support an overtime

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

bigone41

Junior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? I live in NC can overtime be included in child support if not garunteed ?
 


WittyUserName

Senior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? I live in NC can overtime be included in child support if not garunteed ?
Um, I think the magical Mr. Mistoffolees already answered in your last thread:

You defend yourself. Argue that the overtime may not occur in the future and child support should not be based on it since it may not happen - through not fault of your own.

But she certainly has the right to ask for more money if she wishes (as long as she meets the requirements for asking for CS to be recalculated).
 

CJane

Senior Member
And, even if it's not "guaranteed", if it can be shown that OT has been available consistently in the past, it will be assumed to be an indicator of available OT in the future as well.

Saying that consistent OT shouldn't be factored into the calculation is like saying that your hourly wage shouldn't be included because it's not guaranteed.
 

nextwife

Senior Member
I'm curious: if one has been getting overtime either due to a temporary staff shortage, now rectified, or a tempoerary bump in the market conditions, can the courts consider the now changed situation as making continued overtime now less likely? Example: my friend had a lot of overtime for a year because of a co-workers illness and the need to cover her responsibilities while out for radiation and chemo. She is back to work, and overtime virtually eliminated after a year of getting it. I get overtime now, but as soon as the housing market turns, I will not have the need to put in so many extra hours. Of course, I DON'T pay child support, nor do I intend to EXPECT the overtime money nor plan for it, as next year it may not be there. If I were a NCP, would wise budgeting practices be different, should I presume dollars that I know may very well not be there a year or two from now? I also know someone in a small staff, whose coworker just adopted a baby and took several months family leave time, so for some months she will have overtime opportunites that will evaporate when coworker returns.
 

CJane

Senior Member
I'm curious: if one has been getting overtime either due to a temporary staff shortage, now rectified, or a tempoerary bump in the market conditions, can the courts consider the now changed situation as making continued overtime now less likely? Example: my friend had a lot of overtime for a year because of a co-workers illness and the need to cover her responsibilities while out for radiation and chemo. She is back to work, and overtime virtually eliminated after a year of getting it. I get overtime now, but as soon as the housing market turns, I will not have the need to put in so many extra hours. Of course, I DON'T pay child support, nor do I intend to EXPECT the overtime money nor plan for it, as next year it may not be there. If I were a NCP, would wise budgeting practices be different, should I presume dollars that I know may very well not be there a year or two from now? I also know someone in a small staff, whose coworker just adopted a baby and took several months family leave time, so for some months she will have overtime opportunites that will evaporate when coworker returns.
Well, here's the deal.

There is OT available to me throughout the year, during our seasonal spikes. So summer is craziness and I could work 24 hours/day and not stay caught up. Inventory twice/year always affords at least a couple Saturdays to be worked.

So, if I average out all of the OT available to me over the course of a year, it comes out to about 3 hours/week. Which is around and additional $4700/year. And yes, it was figured into the calculation for the CS I pay as well as the CS I receive.

However, grand scheme of things, $4700/year doesn't make that big of a difference in the final child support amount.

For example, in a state where NCP income is the only consideration, and NCP is to pay 20% of income in CS...

Assuming a net of 35K, NCP would pay 583/month
Assuming a net of 35K + 5K in OT, NCP would pay 667/month

That's only a difference of $1008/year.

So, this is one of those things that one must really do a cost/benefit analysis on. Is it worth the fight to pay an extra $80/month or whatever it works out to be?
 
Last edited:

mistoffolees

Senior Member
Well, here's the deal.

There is OT available to me throughout the year, during our seasonal spikes. So summer is craziness and I could work 24 hours/day and not stay caught up. Inventory twice/year always affords at least a couple Saturdays to be worked.

So, if I average out all of the OT available to me over the course of a year, it comes out to about 3 hours/week. Which is around and additional $4700/year. And yes, it was figured into the calculation for the CS I pay as well as the CS I receive.

However, grand scheme of things, $4700/year doesn't make that big of a difference in the final child support amount.

For example, in a state where NCP income is the only consideration, and NCP is to pay 20% of income in CS...

Assuming a net of 35K, NCP would pay 583/month
Assuming a net of 35K + 5K in OT, NCP would pay 667/month

That's only a difference of $1008/year.

So, this is one of those things that one must really do a cost/benefit analysis on. Is it worth the fight to pay an extra $80/month or whatever it works out to be?
To be fair, there are times when it might matter.

For example, what if someone works in retail or some other seasonal job. They might get 60 hours per week for 3 months, and then be lucky to get 40 the rest of the year. If they tried to use the paychecks during the rush period to calculate support, it could be a big discrepancy.
 

CJane

Senior Member
To be fair, there are times when it might matter.

For example, what if someone works in retail or some other seasonal job. They might get 60 hours per week for 3 months, and then be lucky to get 40 the rest of the year. If they tried to use the paychecks during the rush period to calculate support, it could be a big discrepancy.
That's why I said that it should be averaged throughout the year. Child support, in my experience, is rarely based on 3 months pay, but rather on the annual income.

So, rather than basing child support on $15/hour * 2080, and considering any OT as "extra" that can't be included, one should take their annual income and divide by 12. It evens out the ups and downs.

And still... usually it takes a dramatic change in income to change child support enough to hire an attorney to fight the ordered amount. Which is why I generally advise people to do a cost benefit analysis before fighting the order.

Yes, sometimes it's worth it, financially. But oftentimes, it's just not.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top