Wendy's Franchisee Cuts Employee Hours To Avoid obamacare

[sactoking]

Some notes:

1) Wendy's is not cutting hours, a Wendy's franchisee is cutting hours. There is a big difference.
2) The employees will still have access to health insurance on the open market and on their state's exchange.
3) The employees may actually be better off. Employers who provide health insurance are required to pay 50% of the premium. If an employee gets insurance on the exchange and qualifies for a tax credit, the credit is tied to their MAGI and is calculated as a max out-of-pocket amount for the premium. Let's face it, many (most) fast food workers are going to qualify for the tax credit, regardless of how many hours they work. it is possible that the value of the tax credit could exceed the value of the employer contribution, making the insurance more affordable, even if the employee retains two jobs to continue working at an aggregate full time rate.

 

[sactoking]

Actually they will be forced to pay for the healthcare, the employees will obtain healthcare from the exchanges, and the government will bill the employers for the cost of the healthcare.

Not directly they won't; the employer will have to be subject to the employer shared responsibility mandate and penalty for the fed to recoup the cost.

 

[actuarial]

This:

..... another short sighted approach. All that would do is force many of the smaller employers (especially restaurants etc) to get rid of some of their employees altogether (instead of just cutting their hours). All completely logical and to be anticipated by anyone who isn't terminally stupid like those who pushed this law.

does not jive with this:

Businesspeople take rational steps to avoid costs imposed on them without any benefit to their business? Shocking!

If they could survive with less man hours they would already. Removing the part time exemption would mean it makes no difference whether you have four 20 hour a week employees or two 40 hour a week employees.

 

[crownjules]

This:


does not jive with this:


If they could survive with less man hours they would already. Removing the part time exemption would mean it makes no difference whether you have four 20 hour a week employees or two 40 hour a week employees.

Sure it does. Instead of 5 people working 38 hours a week, they'll have 8 people working 24 hours a week. They're not cutting jobs. They're cutting hours for their jobs and adding more PT to make up the difference. So not only do the employees not get HC benefits but they also get their hours reduced.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Too bad Wendy's headquarters isn't domiciled in Pelosi's district.

 

[Daverino]

Can I pay an extra nickel to have a healthy person make my hamburger? Please?

 

[RightIsWrong]

I agree with the OP.

This is solely based on the cost of Obamacare and has nothing to do with the economics of this single franchisee's beliefs that he might be able to squeeze out a couple of more pennies for himself at the expense of his low-cost labor.

As we all know, it wasn't until this stupid Obamacare package went through that healthcare costs rose. Prior to this, they were as stable as can be.

All we have to do is to take a look at the last couple of decades to see that we've done a great job of keeping costs right in line with inflation:

And it isn't like we've spent more than our fair share on healthcare in comparison to other countries that actually force everyone to have it without the helpful hand of a big insurance company to hold:

And, of course the employees that work (or should I say, used to work) there that are having their hours cut will have a lot more disposable income to buy the pink slime specials with.

 

[wirelessenabled]

+1+1+1

 

[actuarial]

Sure it does. Instead of 5 people working 38 hours a week, they'll have 8 people working 24 hours a week. They're not cutting jobs. They're cutting hours for their jobs and adding more PT to make up the difference. So not only do the employees not get HC benefits but they also get their hours reduced.

Right, but we're talking about the effect if the law was changed not to exclude part time employees. So those 8 people would still get health care.

 

[highland145]

Right, but we're talking about the effect if the law was changed not to exclude part time employees. So those 8 people would still get health care.

via the government.

 

[Incorruptible]

Too bad Wendy's headquarters isn't domiciled in Pelosi's district.

Good point, This just shows how corrupt the whole thing is and why obamacare should be repealed. 20% of the waivers are in her district, She doesn't believe in forcing companies to provide health insurance since it will hurt them but since she is corrupt she has to protect only her special interests.

Its also interesting that many labor unions are exempted from this.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...-dont-have-comply-obamacare-says-crossroads-/

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkai...thcare-waivers-are-in-nancy-pelosis-district/

 

[DrPizza]

Sure it does. Instead of 5 people working 38 hours a week, they'll have 8 people working 24 hours a week. They're not cutting jobs. They're cutting hours for their jobs and adding more PT to make up the difference. So not only do the employees not get HC benefits but they also get their hours reduced.

The problem for Wendy's and all the other places that do that is, where's the infinite supply of workers? At this point, there's a huge shift in rules for the market. It'll take a little while, but the market will go through some shifts and adjust. So, at first, they may resist by doing this - but eventually, they're going to run out of people to fill those positions, at which point, they'll have to improve their benefits to attract enough employees.

 

[cubby1223]

I don't "get" it...

With Obamacare I get health care insurance paid through my company which the costs are passed along to the consumer.

But I'm also a consumer which means I pay higher prices on everything to purchase other people's health care insurance.

So with these changes due to Obamacare, I pay $X more in higher prices and in return receive $X in value of insurance through federal regulations.

As opposed to me spending $X of my own money to receive $X in value of insurance on my own...

 

[GreenMeters]

The part to get is that $X is lower with a larger insurance pool (and increase reflects normal demographics of the country; more healthy people than sick).

 

[feralkid]

Does anyone ever take the OP seriously or is he a paid troll or something? I haven't figured it out yet.

Unpaid.

Who would pay for such a shitty product?

 

[KlokWyze]

1) Wendy's is the most important resource America has. (spicy chicken nuggets, 1/4 w/ cheese, chilicheese fries)

2) America's problem w/ healthcare costs isn't w/ Obamacare(though it's far from perfect), it's with practices/big-pharma charging ever increasing prices to the insured for simple procedures/pharmaceuticals, who don't pay the total costs. It's simply out of control and we need to make our system more efficient. DUUUUUUUURRRRRRRRP

 

[chucky2]

The problem for Wendy's and all the other places that do that is, where's the infinite supply of workers? At this point, there's a huge shift in rules for the market. It'll take a little while, but the market will go through some shifts and adjust. So, at first, they may resist by doing this - but eventually, they're going to run out of people to fill those positions, at which point, they'll have to improve their benefits to attract enough employees.

No, we're still importing willing slaves from Mexico. Plus we've got people who are lazy, stupid, or otherwise need a low skill job. Between all 4 of those and whatever I didn't list, we've got shitloads of cheap labor.

 

[KlokWyze]

No, we're still importing willing slaves from Mexico. Plus we've got people who are lazy, stupid, or otherwise need a low skill job. Between all 4 of those and whatever I didn't list, we've got shitloads of cheap labor.

I'd rather collect unemployment then work at Wendy's.

 

[exdeath]

I find this funny, it's all the people who make a career working shitty jobs because they dropped out of school who rallied for Obamacare and higher minimum wage, etc. instead of going to school.

Now look what they got instead.

 

[Jeff7]

Businesses shouldn't be providing healthcare. It creates an uncompetitive job market. People are not as free to work where they want because they will lose their healthcare or their benefits will change. It puts all the power into the hands of big business, the small businesses can't compete for quality workers.

The single best thing this country could do that would help everyone is to have a single payer nationalized healthcare system. Of course that won't happen because the anti socialism morons put their ideology first before their country.

Nah, let's fully privatize health care instead!
Because large companies have consistently demonstrated that they truly care about the sentient, whiny expenses that they have to deal with, expenses which tend to call themselves "people."
Insurance companies too are quite good at this. "You're in good hands. As long as it won't cost too much, or unless we can find a way out of our obligations."


The unfortunate downside of course is that government seems to be quite prone to being inefficient, and it can be just as corrupt as the private sector - and even moreso when extremely wealthy members of the private sector act to directly corrupt the government in their favor. Dollars count more than votes.

No good solution really comes to mind at the moment.


Health is just another investment. If the population is capable of working, whether it be from being well-educated on using new technology, or even making new technology, or from being kept in good health, their quality of life with theoretically improve, and they can produce more stuff, growing the economy. Problem is, these returns aren't easy to measure on a quarterly report, partly because they're simply difficult to directly quantify, and because they take time to see the benefits. Therefore they effectively don't exist, at least in the eyes of a society's that's come to fully embrace satisfying immediate needs by sucking the future dry.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Cut out the exception for part time employees, force the employers to pass the costs onto the consumers.

I have an even better idea! Why don't we do what every other first world industrialized nation is doing and just enact real socialized medicine and cut out the massive amount of waste and inefficiency from our current pseudo-market system?

By reducing the amount of market-based waste in the 17% of GDP we spend (which is far higher than all the other nations, both in % of GDP and real dollar amounts) we could cover 100% of the population. However, we would have fewer healthcare and insurance company executives with third and fourth homes and yachts. (Oh, the humanity!)

 

[Chris A]

I have to wonder that for every one of these that we read about. There has to be a huge amount that are silently just doing this.

 

[drebo]

I have an even better idea! Why don't we do what every other first world industrialized nation is doing and just enact real socialized medicine and cut out the massive amount of waste and inefficiency from our current pseudo-market system?

By reducing the amount of market-based waste in the 17% of GDP we spend (which is far higher than all the other nations, both in % of GDP and real dollar amounts) we could cover 100% of the population. However, we would have fewer healthcare and insurance company executives with third and fourth homes and yachts. (Oh, the humanity!)

That makes too much sense.

But, the reality is that our government of professional politicians and elected aristocrats will never do that. It would eat too much into their bottom line to cut out the insurance and pharma lobbyists.

Seriously, I never understood why this liberal government who proclaims to hate corporations has just given the biggest dole in the history of our nation to the insurance industry.

If the government wants to provide health care, they should just fucking open hospitals and PROVIDE FUCKING HEALTH CARE DIRECTLY. Forcing us to use the hugely inefficient and woefully inadequate insurance industry is nothing more than pork for the insurance industry. I'm sure Pelosi was paid hansomly for pushing this rubbish down our throats. And I'm sure she and many others will receive a seat on quite a few boards as a result of it.

Our country's lawmakers are a fucking joke.

 

[Jaskalas]

The problem for Wendy's and all the other places that do that is, where's the infinite supply of workers? At this point, there's a huge shift in rules for the market. It'll take a little while, but the market will go through some shifts and adjust. So, at first, they may resist by doing this - but eventually, they're going to run out of people to fill those positions, at which point, they'll have to improve their benefits to attract enough employees.

I hear there's something called unemployment in this country, lest we forget.
They won't find workers?

Oh, and second point against your post... these part time workers need to find work elsewhere. A second job for each of them. So these workers will be crisscrossing each other's jobs at different locations. Essentially filling their own gaps. No new workers are needed from outside the industry.

 

[drebo]

I hear there's something called unemployment in this country, lest we forget.

They won't find workers?

IMO, the government should force people on welfare and unemployment to work as temps for companies who contract them.

Basically, companies would call the unemployment office and "hire" temps and pay the government to use people on unemployment or welfare on a temporary basis. That'd help subsidise our useless entitlement programs and would provide this cheap labor.

Then the government can provide childcare vouchers to these people, so that the money goes to local small businesses (childcare providers) instead of people sitting on their ass all day.