Shaking the dead hand of the past

But, not heartily.  Though a recognition that's it's not 1938 anymore might be a start to making wages more flexible, and thus more responsive to changes in the supply and demand for labor.  Which is what is necessary to resolve surplus and shortage in that market (i.e., reduce the unemployment rate).  No surprise that it's Republicans taking the initiative, and Democrats, beholden to their big-union-boss clients, trying to portray the reform as pro-business, anti-worker;

It seems like a simple proposition: give employees who work more than 40 hours a week the option of taking paid time off instead of overtime pay.

The choice already exists in the public sector. Federal and state workers can save earned time off and use it weeks or even months later to attend a parent-teacher conference, care for an elderly parent or deal with home repairs.

Republicans in Congress are pushing legislation that would extend that option to the private sector.

Notice that word 'option'.  It would expand possibilities that might be mutually beneficial to both employer and employee.  Naturally, Democrats aren't having any of it--they have the moral high ground now; they're the protectors of labor...even if individual laborers were harmed in the making of this New Deal policy.

...the idea Republicans promote as "pro-worker" is vigorously opposed by worker advocacy groups, labor unions and most Democrats. These opponents claim it's really a backdoor way for businesses to skimp on overtime pay.

Judith Lichtman, senior adviser to the National Partnership for Women and Families, contends the measure would open the door for employers to pressure workers into taking compensatory time off instead of overtime pay.

The program was created in the public sector in 1985 to save federal, state and local governments money....