LA Times: Part-timers to lose pay amid health act's new math
Posted: Thu May 02, 2013 5:21 pm
It's not a good situation (and as I've mentioned before, this is something I'm looking at with my employees), but how can it be an unexpected one?
While the goal of having everyone insured is a noble one, if you do it by making it more expensive for employers to employ people, isn't it an economic certainty that they will do whatever they (we?) can to reduce that burden?
While the goal of having everyone insured is a noble one, if you do it by making it more expensive for employers to employ people, isn't it an economic certainty that they will do whatever they (we?) can to reduce that burden?
Many part-timers are facing a double whammy from President Obama's Affordable Care Act.
The law requires large employers offering health insurance to include part-time employees working 30 hours a week or more. But rather than provide healthcare to more workers, a growing number of employers are cutting back employee hours instead.
The result: Not only will these workers earn less money, but they'll also miss out on health insurance at work.
Consider the city of Long Beach. It is limiting most of its 1,600 part-time employees to fewer than 27 hours a week, on average. City officials say that without cutting payroll hours, new health benefits would cost up to $2 million more next year, and that extra expense would trigger layoffs and cutbacks in city services.
Part-timer Tara Sievers, 43, understands why, but she still thinks it's wrong.
"I understand there are costs to healthcare reform, but it is surely not the intent of the law for employees to lose hours," said the outreach coordinator at the El Dorado Nature Center in Long Beach. "It's ridiculous the city is skirting the law."
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-p ... 8617.story