Forum Groups

 

Forums / Talking it Over / mandatory insurance over 30 hrs

mandatory insurance over 30 hrs

6 posts
  1. Jon Gansen
    Jon Gansen avatar
    1 posts
    11/29/2012 10:11 AM
    Had a question on the Health Care Act. Cedar Falls Iowa had an article that the City would be cutting all hours of part time employees to 29 hours. This is to get away from mandatory insurance to avoid over 800,000 dollar cost. The law will not take effect till 2014 but due to the government going off previous year they must implement now.. Any one have the scoop on this.



  2. Melvin Waldron
    Melvin Waldron avatar
    43 posts
    11/29/2012 11:11 AM
    [quote">Cedar Falls' Meyer said the reduction in hours affects 59 year-round employees. "Let's say they all took out family coverage: The cost to the city would be approximately $850,000," Meyer said. "That alone, we'd probably looking at a 5 percent increase to property taxes just to fund that."

    A cost of $850,000 would amount to about 3.7 percent of Cedar Falls' general fund for the fiscal year that began on July 1. Meyer said the decision wouldn't require City Council approval until the city's next budgeting process.


    Jon, according to an article I just googled this appears to be true. I wonder, the manager quoted stated it could cost the city $850,000 if those employees chose to add their families. They must have their insurance plan set-up differently then ours. We as employees pay all of our insurance premium to add our family. The city will pay 100% of our premium. And our city is at 30 hours as well, if they are over 30 they get all benefits including pension.

    Now on doing a little research, a buisness doesn't have to offer the family members of an employee health insurance under the Affordable Care Act. Also if I read it correclty they don't have to pay 100% of the employee's insurance premium, some of that cost can be paid by the employee, now what percentage I don't know. Couldn't an employer technacally chose an insurance plan and offer it to their employees with some cost bared by the employee? Heck they would even get tax credits for it wouldn't they?

    As far as cutting employee hours back under 30, Isn't it based on full time equivulents? I thought I read if a business has people employed for 6,000 hours per month, they would qualify as a big buisness. Wether that is 75 people working 20 hour weeks or 38 people working 40 hour weeks. Would business cut their hours they are open to avoid the 6,000 hour mark? curious I am interpertating this correctly.

    I did hear of a guy that owned a bunch of Denny's in Florida who was going to add a tax to the cutomers bill to pay for the health care cost, yet he said he was going to cut everyone's hours so he wouldn't have to pay it. Sounds like a real jack hole in my opinion. Hey if you want to charge the tax, fine, customers can choose to come and dine at your resturant, but to charge the tax and then cut hours not to pay insurance why charge the customers then?

    Mel

    Melvin H. Waldron III, CGCS, Horton Smith Golf Course, City of Springfield/Greene County MO

  3. Melvin Waldron
    Melvin Waldron avatar
    43 posts
    11/29/2012 11:11 AM
    As I think of it, I guess for large employers that are easily hitting the mark for hours, cutting under thirty will make those employees part time for sure.

    Still wonder how it would work for those around the 50 employee mark.

    Mel

    Melvin H. Waldron III, CGCS, Horton Smith Golf Course, City of Springfield/Greene County MO

  4. Niemier Rick A
    Niemier Rick A avatar
    11/29/2012 1:11 PM
    Melvin Waldron, CGCS said: [quote">Cedar Falls' Meyer said the reduction in hours affects 59 year-round employees. "Let's say they all took out family coverage: The cost to the city would be approximately $850,000," Meyer said. "That alone, we'd probably looking at a 5 percent increase to property taxes just to fund that."

    A cost of $850,000 would amount to about 3.7 percent of Cedar Falls' general fund for the fiscal year that began on July 1. Meyer said the decision wouldn't require City Council approval until the city's next budgeting process.


    Jon, according to an article I just googled this appears to be true. I wonder, the manager quoted stated it could cost the city $850,000 if those employees chose to add their families. They must have their insurance plan set-up differently then ours. We as employees pay all of our insurance premium to add our family. The city will pay 100% of our premium. And our city is at 30 hours as well, if they are over 30 they get all benefits including pension.

    Now on doing a little research, a buisness doesn't have to offer the family members of an employee health insurance under the Affordable Care Act. Also if I read it correclty they don't have to pay 100% of the employee's insurance premium, some of that cost can be paid by the employee, now what percentage I don't know. Couldn't an employer technacally chose an insurance plan and offer it to their employees with some cost bared by the employee? Heck they would even get tax credits for it wouldn't they?

    As far as cutting employee hours back under 30, Isn't it based on full time equivulents? I thought I read if a business has people employed for 6,000 hours per month, they would qualify as a big buisness. Wether that is 75 people working 20 hour weeks or 38 people working 40 hour weeks. Would business cut their hours they are open to avoid the 6,000 hour mark? curious I am interpertating this correctly.

    I did hear of a guy that owned a bunch of Denny's in Florida who was going to add a tax to the cutomers bill to pay for the health care cost, yet he said he was going to cut everyone's hours so he wouldn't have to pay it. Sounds like a real jack hole in my opinion. Hey if you want to charge the tax, fine, customers can choose to come and dine at your resturant, but to charge the tax and then cut hours not to pay insurance why charge the customers then?

    Mel

    Mel,

    Here is a guy who is at least trying to do something. People will figure it out. Loopholes will be found. The world won't end as some people are suggesting. Good employers who want to keep good employees will figure out how to do it.

    http://money.msn.com/credit-rating/late ... 41f5ea4448



  5. Jon Gansen
    Jon Gansen avatar
    1 posts
    11/29/2012 2:11 PM
    That is how I read it Mel. I believe under 50 total employees it has no effect. I have maybe 2 PT that get 4o so will just add 2 more and spread the hours around. Not making anything political just wondering how many knew of this and concerned for the impact on our business. One thing that you said was full time equivalents did I miss something?



  6. Melvin Waldron
    Melvin Waldron avatar
    43 posts
    11/29/2012 3:11 PM
    Jon Gansen said: That is how I read it Mel. I believe under 50 total employees it has no effect. I have maybe 2 PT that get 4o so will just add 2 more and spread the hours around. Not making anything political just wondering how many knew of this and concerned for the impact on our business. One thing that you said was full time equivalents did I miss something?


    Jon, as I understand it, they used full time equivalent employees so companies would not do what they are trying to do to get away with not offering health insurance. So the number was 50 full time or equivalent, so you could have 100 part time employees doing the work of the 50 you had before, so you would have to offer them insurance as well. That's as I understand it, I might be wrong.

    I do wonder on companies that are near the border line of having 50 employees, do they not hire the extra 5 or so to stay under and can they offer overtime, or/and does that count toward their 6000 monthly hours?

    I know we haven't heard anything from our city as to seasonal or part-time employee changes. I would think the 120 days takes care of the kids we hire in the summer, I do wonder about those we hire for about 7 to 8 months, how that might affect them and will they have us cut them to under 30 hours.

    Rick, thanks for that info, I applaud him for trying. I do wonder, what would the cost be for a basic policy that would cover the employee, what percentage does the employer/employee have to pay, what kind of tax break does the employer get for providing insurance, even with the split in cost. Of course I think of 50 employees as not being a small business, but I can see it in the restaurant business depending on how many hours the place stays open, but in a lot of those cases they are hiring high school kids who probably don't want more then 15 hours a week so they can still be involved in school activities and keep their grades up.

    When we were back visiting for the holidays, family complained that their employers were only going to hire part time employees, (a bank and doctor's office) Also heard the complaint that the doctors office told schedulers only to take a couple of medicare patients a week because the pay .30 cents on the dollar. (to avoid an argument) I didn't question if that .30 cents was on the over inflated price for a procedure or not, but it was also funny that they stopped taking Blue Cross and Blue Shield patients because they weren't paying much either (better then medicare but not much). Eventually though the doctors had to start accepting them again because Blue Cross/Blue Shield held 70% of their market for those that were insured.

    Lots of questions for sure, I have to say in my opinion we had to fix the health care issue, I think we are moving in the right direction but that's only from my prospective, but I understand there is a lot to fix. I just wish we knew the answers to tell our legislature so the special interest groups don't screw it up benefiting one against the other.

    Mel

    Melvin H. Waldron III, CGCS, Horton Smith Golf Course, City of Springfield/Greene County MO

View or change your forums profile here.