General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsPart-Timers Losing Health Insurance May Want To Thank Their Companies
Part-Timers Losing Health Insurance May Want To Thank Their Companies
By Rick Newman | The Exchange Fri, Sep 20, 2013 5:03 PM EDT
How terrible. Home Depot (HD) and Trader Joes have decided to stop offering health insurance for part-time employees, moving them over to Obamacare instead. More companies seem sure to follow. And more wailing about greedy, heartless corporations is sure to follow that. Some workers may start to drop dead from sheer anxiety before Obamacare even goes into effect on January 1.
Once the new health law has been in place for a few months, however, Part-Time America may issue a collective sigh of relief. Nobody ever held up todays part-time "mini-med" plans as model coverage. The majority of part-time workers dont even get health insurance, and those who do typically get diluted plans with limited benefits they still have to pay something for. You have to question whether thats really insurance, says Paul Fronstin, director of the health research program at the Employee Benefits Research institute. They may not cover prescription drugs, and if you get cancer or end up in the hospital, they probably wont help you a whole lot.
Insurance offered under the Affordable Care Act, by contrast, could end up being a much better deal. Obamacare is complicated, and it will require many people to do detailed research on their insurance options instead of having an employer do it for them. There have also been elaborate efforts by foes of the program to depict it as The Ruination of Everything. So its not surprising that part-timers being told their employer is cutting them loose and sending them over to Obamacare are a little jumpy.
Actually enrolling could calm them down, however. Obamacare was designed to make decent health insurance affordable for people who otherwise cant afford it, and whether you love or hate the program, it seems likely to succeed at that basic mission. Thats because the program subsidizes the cost of insurance based on your income, with the largest subsidies going to those with the lowest incomes.
http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/the-exchange/part-timers-losing-healthcare-insurance-may-want-thank-210354500.html
bluedigger
(17,086 posts)My employer didn't have enough respect for me to provide any explanation so I don't know if it was ACA related or just seasonal.
cbdo2007
(9,213 posts)that is the cutoff where you don't have to provide benefits.
bluedigger
(17,086 posts)Seems odd that it would be different than part time status, but I'm willing to take your word for it. Still pisses me off to lose almost a quarter of my meager income with no explanation.
enlightenment
(8,830 posts)So sayth the IRS . . .
CountAllVotes
(20,868 posts)He has worked there 40 hrs. a week for a long time. Now he is being cut to a less than 30 hr. work week and he will no longer be able to get the insurance once Obamacare kicks in and yes, that Co-op is unionized (you'd never know it would you?)!
He's just a tad bit p/o'd to say the very least (not that I blame him).
He voted for Obama X2 and feels like he's been "hoodwinked" as he put it.
Not good, not good at all, esp. if you happen to have a pre-existing condition as this young man does!
Something is very wrong with this picture!
SharonAnn
(13,772 posts)Can;t he get it through the exchanges?
CountAllVotes
(20,868 posts)He was really irritated and to make matters worse for him, he didn't know how he'd be able to make a go of it on a paycheck cutting his hours back so much. I don't think he earns much at that place which I don't particularly care for myself (they tend to sell old food hoping that you won't notice).
Jane Austin
(9,199 posts)stingy employer rather than at Obama.
I'll bet you anything his employer could afford to pay his insurance if they wanted to.
CountAllVotes
(20,868 posts)As I stated in a previous post, I don't particularly care for this Co-op.
They are cutting everything and raising prices on everything (apples at close to $5.00 a lb.!).
They have another store in an adjacent town and the last time I was in that place I was accused of shop lifting!
After that happened, my husband was really p.o.'d about it and said to the manager of this other (same) store that we won't be shopping here any more.
That said, I try not to shop at this place but I'm quite limited as to what I can and cannot do.
Still the same, you've nailed it, this Co-op sucks!
As for the young man (that I've become rather friendly to-wards), I feel sorry for him and have advised him to seek employment elsewhere. I'm sure the local Safeway would hire him and there are other stores too like COSTCO.
Sick greedy SOB's are who own this store and as for the shoplifting thing, they actually printed a newspaper recently and told about all of the shoplifting that is going on and how some of the biggest "criminals" are people that are over the age of 55 (as I am and as my husband is ... and as for my husband, he's about blind ... how the hell could he steal something?).
To add insult to injury, they've cut their senior citizen discount day from 10% off once a week to 5% off once a week and oh yeah, now they demand a photo ID when you are checking out if you ask to use your piddly assed 5% "discount". Big damn deal that is with apples at $5.00 a lb.!!!
And furthermore, they've also changed their policy. It used to be if you were age 60 or over you would qualify for the "old age discount" as my husband calls it (he hates having to use it!). Now they've upped that to age 65!
They piss me off and no, I don't shop there much any more!!
END OF RANT!!!
dkf
(37,305 posts)Sounds like they will have more participants than expected. If the system goes beyond what it can handle I expect we will see multitudes of very pissed off people.
On all counts. The ACA is pretty finely balanced and definitely requires X number of people to be insured through their employers - it will be interesting to see how the extra numbers showing up for subsidized exchange insurance plays out. The money for those subsidies has to come from somewhere.
dkf
(37,305 posts)Should be interesting to see how it plays out in the deficit. Maybe the projections are all off.
I wonder if there are enough doctors under the covered providers lists.
This could land up being a case of coverage but no access.
enlightenment
(8,830 posts)this article from 2012 lays out the proposed revenues from various taxes, fees, etc. Presumably that money is supposed to cover the anticipated number of people in the exchanges - not sure how that will work out if a significantly higher proportion of people hit next year.
http://www.pntax.com/funding-mechanisms-in-place-for-the-affordable-care-act
From what I've been seeing about plans cutting back on "in-network" physicians, as well as no guarantee (despite Paul Krugman - whose opinion I respect but didn't care for his latest blog posting on this) that a sufficient number of physicians will accept new Medicaid patients . . .
Then there's that report from July of this year that there is no requirement to verify (because they don't have the mechanisms in place) eligibility for the subsidies - apparently the exchanges will be on an honor system for at least the first year. That's not such a good idea, really.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/health-insurance-marketplaces-will-not-be-required-to-verify-consumer-claims/2013/07/05/d2a171f4-e5ab-11e2-aef3-339619eab080_story.html
I'm not terribly hopeful about this, and never have been convinced that it is a workable plan in reality despite how clever it looks on paper. And I anticipate that the "why don't you care about the children?!" folks will be around to correct me on the error of my ways shortly.
dkf
(37,305 posts)But since it is the law I would prefer it to be implemented without a whole lot of messes.
Seeing government in action is not building confidence.
enlightenment
(8,830 posts)"NHS" style healthcare coverage for, well, ever - so this plan doesn't thrill me at all. I don't buy the "this will lead to single-payer" argument because the only route from the ACA to single-payer is via Antares - the concepts are antithetical.
What concerns me about this plan is that it has become a political football, with both sides trying to score points. That's definitely not confidence inspiring.
Sienna86
(2,149 posts)Employees may be able to get better insurance at a better price under ACA.
Let's hope so. Will contact my Representative and send my thoughts.
Decoy of Fenris
(1,954 posts)Aetna treated myself and my family quite well, but now we're a little on edge thanks to the ACA thing. We're holding our breaths and hoping the ACA will work out for us, but until then, we just don't know.
tsuki
(11,994 posts)and insurance companies for successfully fighting the gradual implementation of Medicare for All.
Private Enterprise can do it so much better. Private Enterprise can do it so much cheaper. Rah, rah, rah, USA! USA! USA!
Thank you Papa John,
Thank you Walmart,
Thank you Land's End,
Thank you Regal Entertainment,
And a great big wet kiss to Wall Street and their GOP poodles.