Obamacare will force employers to only hire part time

That's also when the ACA's employer mandate kicks in. Under the health-care law, businesses will have to:

Offer a minimum level of health insurance to their employees after a 90-day waiting period, starting in 2014. This only applies to businesses with at least 50 employees who work "full-time," meaning at least 30 hours a week, according to Convenience Store News, which covers the retail industry. The health plans offered must comply with existing reforms, including coverage of dependents up to age 26.

www.reuters.com...

Its important to note that this only affects companies with 50 "full time" employees. I predict that many small businesses that can't afford this will force their full time employees to work less than 30 hrs a week so that they don't have to pay.

I think that this will be extremely bad for employees. Many people that work for small businesses are having trouble getting financially by right now. So what happens when their hours get cut?

The ironic thing is that I think this is exactly what the government wants. I say this for two reasons: First it forces these employees to seek government programs for help, thereby makin people more reliant on the government.

Second, it will give the appearance that more jobs are being created. This is because an employer that used to have one 40hr a week job to give will now give two 20 hr a week jobs. This will then be touted by the administration as a huge increase in jobs. As a side note, its not the number of jobs that help the economy, but the wages being paid out.

So again, the little guy loses. If you work for one of these companies, you will be forced to either seek government assistance or drastically cut back on your quality of life,. That or you get another part time job, so the you'll be working 50 + hours a week and you won't even be eligible for overtime pay.

I was thinking the same thing...or it could be worse..like the employer will fire everyone that is non-essential and only keep on a few..making them work twice as hard for the same pay..that would suck.

Originally posted by Neopan100
I was thinking the same thing...or it could be worse..like the employer will fire everyone that is non-essential and only keep on a few..making them work twice as hard for the same pay..that would suck.

Yeah, but they didn't need this law to pass. They were already doing that.

Employers have already been transitioning to only hiring part-time and temp workers. It has been gradual with the elimination of pensions, retirement, healthcare, vacation, and other benefits associated with a full-time position. This was occurring regardless of the health care reform.

Within a generation it will be common for most people to work several part-time or temp jobs, whose cumulative hours being greater than a full-time work schedule. They will receive little to no benefits or leave and will have less and less personal time with friends and family, essentially only going home to sleep. It will revolve around a culture of fear and duress resulting in distressful compliance.

Eventually things will even out, and the cost of living will stabilize but we will have less than now and will work ourselves to death. Corporations already purchase policy via our representatives, and once they bail out our governments world-wide, they will own them outright. From there it will be a reality of corporate enslavement as they will own all means of survival and will require unwavering loyalty and devotion in order to procure.

Unless there is a major change, the future will be bleak.

reply to post by Grambler


Most of the small businesses that you speak of already limit their employees to less than full-time employment just so they don't have to pay overtime. Not to mention the vast number of large employers, like Walmart, that do the same thing. Blame it on ObamaCare if you want to but that's just a big lie. It's GREED that causes employers to limit their employees to less than full time work and nothing more.

Bottom line is; If you're running a business that doesn't create enough revenue to provide the basic necessities of it's employees like decent wages and healthcare, then the business you're running is actually a drain on society and isn't worth having around.

Depending on how this plays out I'm planning on dropping to part time since coverage wouldnt be an issue anymore because you suckers will pay for it.

I just have to find out if owning a house will keep me from qualifying as "poor".

If I can still have my home and my land and cut back to 20 hours a week and have subsidized benefits I'm golden.

Originally posted by Neopan100
I was thinking the same thing...or it could be worse..like the employer will fire everyone that is non-essential and only keep on a few..making them work twice as hard for the same pay..that would suck.

Serious....You think they have not already done that?

This has been the way of employers for the past 20 years. Downsizing and outsourcing. Stripping employees of pensions vacation time benefits and insurance. And now these same entities stripping, downsizing and outsourcing are "people" who can amass funds to buy an election. You see where this is headed. Employee have lost rights to unionize to sue in a class action suit. Limits have been placed on the value of a human life when it is lost in the workplace. None of these decision favor the lowly worker. Workers are nothing. It is the business owners who are the real Americans.

i like it because employers will have another reason to hire service connected disabled veteran as they have the VA health care system

reply to post by Grambler


As an Australian I'm trying to learn about Obamacare.

For those against: why?

Those in support: why?

What are the advantages and disadvantages for all ages?

Originally posted by Flatfish

Bottom line is; If you're running a business that doesn't create enough revenue to provide the basic necessities of it's employees like decent wages and healthcare, then the business you're running is actually a drain on society and isn't worth having around.

One of the most ignorant and misinformed statements I have ever read on this site.

Since you know so much about running a business, it's safe to assume you own at least one, most likely several. To speak with such authority on the subject, chances are you are very successful, correct?

Whats the name of your business?

Who are we kidding, you don't own anything

Businesses have no obligation to provide anything other than minimum wage to their employees. If an employee wants to have the "basic necessities", that is up to the individual to obtain those. Naturally businesses pay more in order to attract top notch talent, but the notion businesses should be providing anything else for their employees is indicative of zero experience in the business world, and thinking like that is usually only found on college campuses.

reply to post by Flatfish


I understand that large corps like Wal Mart have been trying to higher people part time, but is that true of small businesses. I will try to find some stats on it, but I will say that most small business owners I know have almost exclusively fulltime employees. As long as they are not working over 40 hrs a week, they don't have to pay overtime.

As far as your other point that if a business can't afford this they are worthless: so say good bye to local businesses altogether then. According to you, all that matters is how much profit a company makes so they can offer more services to there employees.

What about people just trying to start up? Most small business owners barely clear profits for their first couple of years in business because of startup costs and such. So these people are worthless? The world you envision looks rather dismal, with small business all but being replaced by mega corporations that control all of the wealth, but hey, at least they throw us a bone and give us healthcare. But the good news for you is it looks like we are heading in that direction.

Originally posted by FreeFromTheHerd


Businesses have no obligation to provide anything other than minimum wage to their employees. If an employee wants to have the "basic necessities", that is up to the individual to obtain those.

And if you guys had your way, you wouldn't even provide your employees with that. Why doesn't the GOP just come out and admit that they're in favor of slave labor?

Eat the poor.

Originally posted by FreeFromTheHerd
One of the most ignorant and misinformed statements I have ever read on this site.

Since you know so much about running a business, it's safe to assume you own at least one, most likely several. To speak with such authority on the subject, chances are you are very successful, correct?

Whats the name of your business?

Who are we kidding, you don't own anything

While I don't feel obligated in any way to explain my previous business dealings with you, I can tell you this; My business experience is greater than you may imagine. I retired in 2005 at the age of 48, but while I was still in the swing of things, I had over 300 employees under my belt and I had fiduciary responsibility and liability over the investment and administration of employee benefit funds in excess of $500,000,000 dollars. So while my previous business experience may not be as vast as yours, I think it's more than adequate to debate a business's obligation to it's employees, not to mention to society as a whole.

Originally posted by FreeFromTheHerd
Businesses have no obligation to provide anything other than minimum wage to their employees. If an employee wants to have the "basic necessities", that is up to the individual to obtain those. Naturally businesses pay more in order to attract top notch talent, but the notion businesses should be providing anything else for their employees is indicative of zero experience in the business world, and thinking like that is usually only found on college campuses.

What your professing is that I should be able to run a business, pay minimum wages and no benefits to my employees, keep all the profits for the business and when my employees retire or become sick, just let the rest of society pick up the tab for those cost. Yeah right! If a person's employment won't pay for the cost of living then the job isn't worth having and in most cases, neither is the product they're making. It's mentality like yours that got us in the pickle we find ourselves in now.

Originally posted by drwizardphd


And if you guys had your way, you wouldn't even provide your employees with that. Why doesn't the GOP just come out and admit that they're in favor of slave labor?

Eat the poor.

I am not a member of the GOP, so I cannot speak on their behalf.

That being said, you realize the computer or the phone you are typing on was most likely made by people overseas working under slave labor conditions right?

Since you are so against the idea of cheap labor, you should throw away everything you own that wasnt made by someone making $20 or $30 or $40 an hour, or whatever hourly wage and benefit package you believe is correct.

Have an Iphone? I do.

It's well known that they are made by people working in very poor conditions, and in fact, there are a great number of suicides by employees of the factory in which they are made. Cheap labor is a good thing, or are you only against it if it is inside the U.S.?

If someone isn't earning what they believe they should, it isn't the fault of the employer. That employee is free to seek different employment, or work a 2nd job. I worked 2 jobs for 8 years until I decided I had enough and started off on my own. I pay my 8 employees what I believe they are worth to me. It is more than market value for someone in a comparable position with a competitor, but I believe they are worth it. If they begin to start showing signs of slacking off, or not upholding their end of the deal, out they go.

Originally posted by Flatfish

What your professing is that I should be able to run a business, pay minimum wages and no benefits to my employees, keep all the profits for the business and when my employees retire or become sick, just let the rest of society pick up the tab for those cost.

Your previous comments give doubt to your alleged "business experience"

You said:

Bottom line is; If you're running a business that doesn't create enough revenue to provide the basic necessities of it's employees like decent wages and healthcare, then the business you're running is actually a drain on society and isn't worth having around.

That is indicative of a very limited knowledge of the business world.

Businesses aren't in business to provide the necessities for their employees.

You also said this little gem lol

! If a person's employment won't pay for the cost of living then the job isn't worth having and in most cases, neither is the product they're making. It's mentality like yours that got us in the pickle we find ourselves in now

Really??????

Grocery stores operate on very very thin margins, and they typically do not pay their employees megabucks.

Are you saying that the products found in a grocery store aren't worth having?

Think all of the cashiers believe that isn't a job worth having?

Want to know what actually got us into this current pickle? It's the mentality a large number of parasites have. It's the belief that people are "owed" something.

No one is owed anything. When I worked for someone else, I never believed I was owed something.

I have 3 full time employees and 5 part timers. I do not owe them anything other than the wage we agreed upon when they were hired. They do not owe me anything other than the services I hired them for. I do not provide health insurance benefits for my 3 full time employees for a number of reasons, chief among them being : It would be prohibitively expensive, it would reduce the funding I put back into the business in order to make it grow, thereby creating additional jobs, and it would reduce my personal income.

My business. My capital. My risk.

While I do value my employees, and consider them friends, my business, my capital, my risk, and my family come before my employees 100% of the time.

Originally posted by FreeFromTheHerd
Your previous comments give doubt to your alleged "business experience"

Make no mistake about it, I'm not looking for your approval. Furthermore, the topic of this thread is hardly about my business experience. It's really more of a common sense issue that I'd hardly expect you to comprehend.

Originally posted by FreeFromTheHerd
Businesses aren't in business to provide the necessities for their employees.

Nor are they in business to prey on their employees and/or society as a whole. Why should my tax dollars be utilized to keep your un-insured employees healthy and productive while you walk away with the loot?

Originally posted by FreeFromTheHerd
Grocery stores operate on very very thin margins, and they typically do not pay their employees megabucks.

Are you saying that the products found in a grocery store aren't worth having?

Think all of the cashiers believe that isn't a job worth having?

No one ever said anything about "megabucks" and their margins aren't as slim as the GREEDY ones would have you believe. Krogers for instance, one of the largest grocery store chains in America, happens to be union. Despite the slim margins you speak of, they seem to be able to do the right thing.

Originally posted by FreeFromTheHerd
Want to know what actually got us into this current pickle? It's the mentality a large number of parasites have. It's the belief that people are "owed" something.

Actually, it's the re-birth of the slave master mentality. You know, where employers owe nothing more than subsistence level income to their employees and they should be forever grateful for that.

Originally posted by FreeFromTheHerd

I have 3 full time employees and 5 part timers. I do not owe them anything other than the wage we agreed upon when they were hired. They do not owe me anything other than the services I hired them for. I do not provide health insurance benefits for my 3 full time employees for a number of reasons, chief among them being : It would be prohibitively expensive, it would reduce the funding I put back into the business in order to make it grow, thereby creating additional jobs, and it would reduce my personal income.

My business. My capital. My risk.

While I do value my employees, and consider them friends, my business, my capital, my risk, and my family come before my employees 100% of the time.

If this is how you treat them, then you sir have no true friends, at least not among those you employ. What you have is a Master/Slave relationship with those who were dumb and/or desperate enough to be hired by you. I'm not even sure you understand the meaning of the word "friendship."

Originally posted by Flatfish


Make no mistake about it, I'm not looking for your approval. Furthermore, the topic of this thread is hardly about my business experience. It's really more of a common sense issue that I'd hardly expect you to comprehend.

lol, yes because your posts authenticate your expertise and familiarity with common sense.

Nor are they in business to prey on their employees and/or society as a whole.

Employees are free to leave at anytime. No one is being "preyed" upon.

No one ever said anything about "megabucks" and their margins aren't as slim as the GREEDY ones would have you believe. Krogers for instance, one of the largest grocery store chains in America, happens to be union. Despite the slim margins you speak of, they seem to be able to do the right thing.

Ah, so in your twisted little sense of reality, giving into unions equates to "doing the right thing"?

Actually, it's the re-birth of the slave master mentality. You know, where employers owe nothing more than subsistence level income to their employees and they should be forever grateful for that.

If an employee is unhappy with their wage, it is their right to seek employment elsewhere, or to make the smarter choice and that is learn additional skills and make yourself more marketable. That will be rewarded with higher wages as more experienced and more valuable employees are in demand, and with that demand comes a bigger paycheck.

You have made it abundantly clear you have never ran any sort of business, except for possibly a lemonade stand when you were a kid.

Using my business as an example.... If there comes a time I or my business needs a new skill set, or a new license/certification, and one of my employees wants to obtain it, naturally they would be rewarded with a bigger paycheck. They are making my life easier and in turn making the business more profitable. If none of my employees showed the initiative, and I was forced to hire another employee who would make the business more money, my current employees shouldnt cry when they dont make as much as the new hire.

If this is how you treat them, then you sir have no true friends, at least not among those you employ. What you have is a Master/Slave relationship with those who were dumb and/or desperate enough to be hired by you. I'm not even sure you understand the meaning of the word "friendship."

Putting the needs of ones family before their friends is the responsible decision. Then again, I'm debating this with someone who thinks unions are a good thing, so in all reality the chances you know anything about responsibility, common sense, or running a business are nil.

reply to post by FreeFromTheHerd


I own a small business.

I tend to agree more with flatfish.


A business should not expect to run and make a profit by paying the bare minimum to it's employees and letting the rest of society provide subsidies to said employees.

Illegal immigration is a prime example of this. Pay these people less, and artificially drive down wages for others, thereby reducing taxable revenue. Then the immigrants need help from the government with education and healthcare.

I have seen the above in my industry.



As the owner, it is my responsibility to surround myself with good people, and good things happen.

My business may be different than yours, employees and subcontractors need years of training but it applies to retail as well.


I learned about a company that puts it's employees first, at a seminar on how to beat the big box stores.

I was told managers average 100k a year and sales people average $45,000.

The Container Company

Originally posted by FreeFromTheHerd

Putting the needs of ones family before their friends is the responsible decision. Then again, I'm debating this with someone who thinks unions are a good thing, so in all reality the chances you know anything about responsibility, common sense, or running a business are nil.

Tell me this, do you apply your moral code universally or does it just apply to you and your family? Does your family have medical insurance paid for with proceeds from your business? When one of your employees is unable to show up for work due to the fact that they are sitting in an hospital emergency room waiting to get treatment for their un-insured family member, (which by your own moral standards, they value more than their friends and/or work) do you tell them; "that's OK, just take care of your family and return to work when you can?" I doubt it! Or how about when he/she misses work to stay home with a sick child for which they cannot afford childcare? I doubt it!

I thank you for your willingness to clearly demonstrate the problem with egotistical employers like yourself. Employers like yourself somehow believe that your employees should be content devoting their labors to make your life better while totally disregarding the needs of their own.

Your family is no more important than theirs, you are no better than them. You don't love your kids any more than they love theirs. If you don't believe me, just ask them.

Your business model professes that the needs of one family can only be met by the collective of the labor of at least five people, yet you expect your employees to do it on the minimum wage salary of one. What a joke of an employer you are. Don't mean to burst your bubble, but you and everyone like you, are a modern day slave masters and nothing more.

Maybe what this country needs is a MAXIMUM wage ratio between business owners/CEOs and their employees in order to keep people like yourself from stealing the fruits of the labors of others. If I didn't know better, I'd think I was in a debate with Mitt Romney himself.

Originally posted by texasgirl

Originally posted by Neopan100
I was thinking the same thing...or it could be worse..like the employer will fire everyone that is non-essential and only keep on a few..making them work twice as hard for the same pay..that would suck.

Yeah, but they didn't need this law to pass. They were already doing that.

QFTW. Also I assume healthcare is only one piece of the cost for employers. It is still to be seen, if hiering 2 part timers who work the same hours as a fuller will really be more economic.