Obamacare Mandate: Anyone Who Works 30-Hour Week Is Now 'Full-Time'

Obamacare Mandate: Anyone Who Works 30-Hour Week Is Now 'Full-Time'

Well it gets worse before better they say.

Now a newly discovered ObamaCare mandate is coming to light.

It somehow defines "full time" as 30 hours or more.

That means employers can cut you down to less than 30 hours and force YOU to buy health insurance on your own !!!

And I bet you won't get a raise so fast either

Now we will see "Part Time" eventually become the normal work week sooner than we think.

(CNSNews.com) – A little-known section in the ObamaCare health reform law defines “full-time” work as averaging only 30 hours per week, a definition that will affect some employers who utilize part-time workers to trim the cost of complying with the ObamaCare rule that says businesses with 50 or more workers must provide health insurance or pay a fine.

“The term ‘full-time employee’ means, with respect to any month, an employee who is employed on average at least 30 hours of service per week,” section 1513 of the law reads. (Scroll down to section 4, paragraph A.)

That section, known as the employer mandate, requires any business with 50 or more full-time employees to provide at least the minimum level of government-defined health coverage to those employees. ..............

Obamacare Mandate: Anyone Who Works 30-Hour Week Is Now 'Full-Time'

What are they trying to prove anyway ??

Most entry level, non skilled jobs are already prone to hiring only part time, or through temp agencies ( to avoid having to provide benefits ). So what's new?

As far as the analysis of this law and the idea that it will "force" businesses to hire only less than thirty hour per week employees... Isn't that logic not unlike the abusive husband saying "Quit making me beat you up!"? Nobody is forcing businesses to take the cheap way out. It's their own greed doing it.

~Heff

As you know, the purpose of this new definition is to bring even more businesses under the Obamacare regulations. I could go into a speech about his destruction of freedom in the US, but people who don't get it by now probably won't.

Thanks for the thread.

Originally posted by Hefficide

Most entry level, non skilled jobs are already prone to hiring only part time, or through temp agencies ( to avoid having to provide benefits ). So what's new?

As far as the analysis of this law and the idea that it will "force" businesses to hire only less than thirty hour per week employees... Isn't that logic not unlike the abusive husband saying "Quit making me beat you up!"? Nobody is forcing businesses to take the cheap way out. It's their own greed doing it.

~Heff

Good point.

But one possible problem is that most workers are full time and are not new hires.

I wonder what that percentage is right now.

It's the existing full timers that need to worry.

I bet they are the majority.

Top 10 U.S. states with full-time employees:

1. Oregon (86.1%)

2. West Virginia (83.7%)

3. Georgia (83.6%)

4. Maryland (83.5%)

5. Virginia (83.4%)

5. Arkansas (83.4%)

7. Oklahoma (83.2%)

7. Texas (83.2%)

9. Delaware (83.1%)

10. New Jersey (83%)

U.S. states with most part-time, full-time employees

in contarst:

Top 10 U.S. states with part-time employees:

1. Michigan (24.9% of employed)

2. Rhode Island (24.4%)

3. Maine (24%)

4. Vermont (23.9%)

5. Utah (23.8%)

6. Idaho (23.5%)

6. Massachusetts (23.5%)

8. Minnesota (23.2%)

9. Washington (23%)

10. Wisconsin (22.8%)

reply to post by xuenchen


How unique - Romney and Ryan's home states are both on your list of part-time workers...

"Putting America back to work, 29 hours at a time," should have been their slogan.

Originally posted by Evil_Santa
reply to post by xuenchen

 

How unique - Romney and Ryan's home states are both on your list of part-time workers...

"Putting America back to work, 29 hours at a time," should have been their slogan.

That certainly is interesting.

How have either of them actually enacted policies that made it happen ?

Obamacare needs to be scrapped. Let the insurance companies compete for our business. Those with the lower rates, will have the most business....

Des

Originally posted by Destinyone
Obamacare needs to be scrapped. Let the insurance companies compete for our business. Those with the lower rates, will have the most business....

Des

Lets just demand the consolidation of insurance companies, cell phone service, internet service, etc.

Bring them together and pool resources instead of the tired, and outdated divide and conquer mentality.

A guy can dream

reply to post by Destinyone


I would agree with this idea if they were not allowed to price fix with each other,
the problem i have run into is that even the so called affordable health insurance
is just completely ridiculous, your average worker in the US has an income of
what 28k i think is median or very close, to factor in health insurance in that
along with normal bills that are already putting a strain on those who earn that
much or less is not realistic, not at the current rates anyway.

Then the other side of the problem is that allot of those companies wont honor their
end of the deal, my father ran into this when he had to go in for open heart surgery,
i dont remember the why of it but they were not going to pay for his hospital visit
even threatening to take him to court and fight it, my father has been insured by this
company for a long time but when it came time for them to pay back out to him it
was an immediate refusal and legal issue, luckily the doctor my father had
was a kind hearted person and offered to hire a lawyer and fight it should it come
to that, once the insurance company got wind they backed off and all was well.

the simple fact is that insurance is one of those few services you can pay for
all your life and be flat out thrown to the curb when you need it and if you
arent well to do enough to fight it, oh well. i am tired of battling this entire
issue anyway, the healthcare bill obama passed will not fix it either as it
has been influenced by the very people who take advantage of those who
cant fight back.

we need some realism in this world badly, if i could afford health care you
bet i sure as heck would have it, the problem is its not affordable, so if i ever
need healthcare i go to the ER and with no insurance i end up with a bill
that will take years to pay off, on top of still not being able to afford insurance
so it becomes a cycle, worse with every visit and completely unfixable by me.

this problem has become one of almost a "let them eat cake" mentality if you
really look at it.

Part time is the new full time according to this administration and the latest job numbers that Obama has been bragging about is a direct reflection of that notion.

So..... Now employers will cut hours and pay yet again. When I was younger I remember being scheduled the max number of hours that kept me just below full time (40 hours). Now with the bar being dropped even lower schedules will simply be cut yet again to keep people below 30 hours.

How will this work for those earning less while not qualifying for full time benefits...???

reply to post by jibeho


just another clever way to hedge the unemployment number to look better. if you say 30 hours is now full time work, you can make them look much better far quicker and take less heat from those who know better.

hey look suddenly half of the work force is now full time what a great recovery we have here.

This just means that peoples hours will now be lowered to 29 hours per week to keep them from receiving benefits... Not good news for the American people.

I fail to see how less mandated working hours are bad for Americans.

Wait...I thought everyone received benefits, whether full-time or part-time, if the company has more than 50 employees. Am I wrong? (Affordable Healthcare Act, starting in 2014)

This isn't anything new. I haven't worked a job (full time or otherwise) in 11 years - but back at the turn of this century it was the same: under 30 hours a week = no healthcare benefits. Many fast food and retailers try to keep their work force under 30 hours a week so as to avoid paying for healthcare benefits.

ganjoa

Originally posted by texasgirl
Wait...I thought everyone received benefits, whether full-time or part-time, if the company has more than 50 employees. Am I wrong? (Affordable Healthcare Act, starting in 2014)

edit on 22-10-2012 by texasgirl because: Clarified statement

From the link .....

(a) Large employers not offering health coverage
If—
(1) any applicable large employer fails to offer to its full-time employees (and their dependents) the opportunity to enroll in minimum essential coverage under an eligible employer-sponsored plan (as defined in section 5000A (f)(2)) for any month, and
(2) at least one full-time employee of the applicable large employer has been certified to the employer under section 1411 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act as having enrolled for such month in a qualified health plan with respect to which an applicable premium tax credit or cost-sharing reduction is allowed or paid with respect to the employee,
then there is hereby imposed on the employer an assessable payment equal to the product of the applicable payment amount and the number of individuals employed by the employer as full-time employees during such month.

(2) Applicable large employer
(A) In general
The term “applicable large employer” means, with respect to a calendar year, an employer who employed an average of at least 50 full-time employees on business days during the preceding calendar year.
(B) Exemption for certain employers
(i) In general An employer shall not be considered to employ more than 50 full-time employees if—
(I) the employer’s workforce exceeds 50 full-time employees for 120 days or fewer during the calendar year, and
(II) the employees in excess of 50 employed during such 120-day period were seasonal workers.

(4) Full-time employee
(A) In general
The term “full-time employee” means, with respect to any month, an employee who is employed on average at least 30 hours of service per week.

Not good for American workers...

The full time window is closing

The part time door is wide open

Originally posted by ganjoa
This isn't anything new. I haven't worked a job (full time or otherwise) in 11 years - but back at the turn of this century it was the same: under 30 hours a week = no healthcare benefits. Many fast food and retailers try to keep their work force under 30 hours a week so as to avoid paying for healthcare benefits.

ganjoa

True.

Not "New" for many, but the majority of workers Are full time.

Over years, the full time jobs will dwindle.

The costs of insurance will skyrocket.

Guess who pays.

Well...that is good news now isn't it? I also want my six weeks paid vacation. (End Sarcasm)

Now, the job I loved, part-time, but paid a livable wage and then some is now possibly on the chopping block.

Make no mistake, businesses will cut back hours and lay off both part-timers and full-timers.

Get your BOB's ready. It's going to get ugly if this self-destructive Admin is re-elected. But if Romney is elected, keep those BOB's handy as he will just slow things down, not stop them.

Crap! I hope I'm wrong.

Explanation: Simple solution to all of this ... just executive order that any work by anybody at all is considered 'full time'!

What would the businesses do then?

Personal Disclosure: I'm a rotten bitter commie. You Freedom L♥ving Maniacs Are ON YOUR OWN!

I get how this is going to make people pretty furious, but:

1. Some corporations have already been granted an exemption from Obamacare.

2. Some corporations already offer benefits to workers working 32 hours per week, so it probably won't affect them that much.

3. A lot of corporations work on the chain model. Fast food comes to mind here. Every individual little chain is probably going to have less than 50 employees, meaning that they'll be exempt.