From Newsmax:
"Target Corp. said it will end health insurance for part-time employees, joining Trader Joe’s Co., Home Depot Inc. and other retailers that have scaled back benefits in response to changes from Obamacare.
About 10 percent of Target’s part-time employees, defined as those working fewer than 30 hours a week, use the company’s health plans now, according to an announcement posted today on the Minneapolis-based company’s website. Target said it would pay $500 to part-timers losing coverage and a consulting firm will help workers sign up for new Obamacare plans."
Target is the latest "big box" retailer to announce changes in their treatment of part-timers under the PPACA. Late last year, Home Depot, WalMart, and privately held Trader Joe's announced similar changes. These changes for Target go into effect on April 1, 2014.
So, what does this mean? Well, for starters, the first visible sign the public will see is reduced customer service. Why? The law requires that employees who work 30 hours or more be considered full-time for the purpose of coverage by employers who employ 50 or more employees, who now must keep part-timer hours in check. The companies will have no alternative but to dramatically cut those hours, therefore, fewer employees on the floor.
The impact to the employee, less take-home pay. That will further impact the employee because he will have less disposable income to pay more for his healthcare.
Further, since part-time employees will have reduced take-home pay, what do you suppose is the impact to the economy? Right, again, less money available to buy companies' products and services.
Did the geniuses in DC realize this when they wrote this stupid law? Apparently not. It seems that none of these superstars, like Nancy, Harry or Barry took Economics 101, and if they did, they didn't pass the course, and it shows.
Maybe in order to run for public office, that class should be a prerequisite, and get at least a C+ in order to display a basic understanding of how the economy actually does work.
Remember, when leading economists suggested that in order to remain profitable, companies would be forced to reduce their full-time staffs to part-time status well, this is the first step, folks. As full-time people leave for "greener pastures" which, sadly, does not exist, companies will replace with part-timers and cut those hours. Therefore, the cycle goes on and on.
Ultimately, this law will crash and burn because it doesn't make sense. People will be hurt more than helped because some of our elected fools thought that by tinkering with what worked, the government was showing it knows better.
The law doesn't ask people already feeling the pain in their wallets how they feel about it. Oh, and as an aside, in 2013, 20% of all Americans were enrolled in and used SNAP (food stamps). This represents a 50% increase in the number of participants since 2009.
Hmmm. Is the economy getting better? Why not ask the employees of the "big boxes". Apparently for them, it will only get worse.
You can take THAT to the bank, even if you don't have the money to deposit.
About 10 percent of Target’s part-time employees, defined as those working fewer than 30 hours a week, use the company’s health plans now, according to an announcement posted today on the Minneapolis-based company’s website. Target said it would pay $500 to part-timers losing coverage and a consulting firm will help workers sign up for new Obamacare plans."
Target is the latest "big box" retailer to announce changes in their treatment of part-timers under the PPACA. Late last year, Home Depot, WalMart, and privately held Trader Joe's announced similar changes. These changes for Target go into effect on April 1, 2014.
So, what does this mean? Well, for starters, the first visible sign the public will see is reduced customer service. Why? The law requires that employees who work 30 hours or more be considered full-time for the purpose of coverage by employers who employ 50 or more employees, who now must keep part-timer hours in check. The companies will have no alternative but to dramatically cut those hours, therefore, fewer employees on the floor.
The impact to the employee, less take-home pay. That will further impact the employee because he will have less disposable income to pay more for his healthcare.
Further, since part-time employees will have reduced take-home pay, what do you suppose is the impact to the economy? Right, again, less money available to buy companies' products and services.
Did the geniuses in DC realize this when they wrote this stupid law? Apparently not. It seems that none of these superstars, like Nancy, Harry or Barry took Economics 101, and if they did, they didn't pass the course, and it shows.
Maybe in order to run for public office, that class should be a prerequisite, and get at least a C+ in order to display a basic understanding of how the economy actually does work.
Remember, when leading economists suggested that in order to remain profitable, companies would be forced to reduce their full-time staffs to part-time status well, this is the first step, folks. As full-time people leave for "greener pastures" which, sadly, does not exist, companies will replace with part-timers and cut those hours. Therefore, the cycle goes on and on.
Ultimately, this law will crash and burn because it doesn't make sense. People will be hurt more than helped because some of our elected fools thought that by tinkering with what worked, the government was showing it knows better.
The law doesn't ask people already feeling the pain in their wallets how they feel about it. Oh, and as an aside, in 2013, 20% of all Americans were enrolled in and used SNAP (food stamps). This represents a 50% increase in the number of participants since 2009.
Hmmm. Is the economy getting better? Why not ask the employees of the "big boxes". Apparently for them, it will only get worse.
You can take THAT to the bank, even if you don't have the money to deposit.
No comments:
Post a Comment