I’d add that, by ‘keep track of’ that should be done by way of, for example, keeping all her paystubs or something, from her employer, that details how many hours she works per week. Having that, in writing, will make sure it isn’t a he said/she said thing. She’ll have proof, from the employer, of how many hours she worked and that OT was not being paid.
As a somewhat unrelated example. A former employee of mine filed for unemployment WHILE HE WAS STILL WORKING FOR ME claiming that his hours had been ‘cut in half’. It took me about 5 minutes to put together a report of how many hours he’d worked every week since about a year pre-pandemic up to the current week and prove not only that his hours hadn’t been cut, at all, but that he’d been leaving early every.single.day for years.* Yes, that’s different than OP’s sisters case, but the point is, the case was super duper easy to defend with with proof in hand just as her case will be easier to make with proof in hand.
That’s the other important thing. If it were me, I’d even make sure the next job is lined up, especially if it’s in the same industry. She should count on losing her job over this. I know, I know, retaliation against employees for this kinda of thing is illegal, but it’s going to happen. Sure, she won’t get fired for reporting her employer to the DWD, she’ll get fired for something else, really soon, and as long as it was for something listed in her employee manual she’ll have to prove it was retaliation by proving that she shouldn’t have been fired for something the handbook explicitly said she’d be fired for doing (ie prove the rules/punishments are being applied unequally/unfairly/inconsistently etc).
Also, if she has even the smallest intention of doing this at some point in the future, she should brush up on her states OT laws.
She should brush up on Illinois OT laws so that if she moves forward with this, she has the right evidence ready to go.
In Illinois, for example, an ‘administrator’ is exempt from OT laws, but you can’t just have the title ‘administrator’, you actually have to being doing ‘administrator’ type things. However, an offer of a tiny raise and the title ‘administrator’ is a tactic sometimes used by bosses to skirt the OT laws. It doesn’t work, but sometimes employees don’t know that.
Secondly, this is about how much compensation she is, or should be, receiving. How much the owner makes or takes home is 100% irrelevant to the case. I understand that making less than you want to make (legally or otherwise) is even more frustrating when you see how much the owner is making, but it absolutely will not help her case in any way, shape or form. Just like how IMO, my former employee needing to borrow money every week likely fueled him to seek unemployment, it’s just that, an opinion, so I left it out of the the (multiple) UI cases he filed against me.
Plus, unless you’ve been to the bank with him, you don’t know what he’s got going on behind the scenes. Maybe that Mazeratti is going to be what pushes him into bankruptcy or maybe he has a 150 million dollars in the bank. But IMO, the only person that type of thing should be mentioned to is a lawyer so they can decide if it’s worth taking into consideration. If she’s just reporting this to the state, the only thing they want is facts directly related to the case.
My first thought as well was ‘well, cut back to 40 hours’. But even without OT, working twice as much gets you twice the money. Maybe she wants or needs the extra money.
*As it turns out, the week he made the original claim for he actually did work less than usual, because it was Christmas week and we were closed.