My Baby and AOL’s Bottom Line

[warrior1]

That “distressed baby” who Tim Armstrong blamed for benefit cuts? She’s my daughter.

http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2014/02/tim_armstrong_blames_distressed_babies_for_aol_benefit_cuts_he_s_talking.html

Late last week, Tim Armstrong, the chief executive officer of AOL, landed himself in a media firestorm when he held a town hall with employees to explain why he was paring their retirement benefits. After initially blaming Obamacare for driving up the company’s health care costs, he pointed the finger at an unlikely target: babies.

Specifically, my baby.

“Two things that happened in 2012,” Armstrong said. “We had two AOL-ers that had distressed babies that were born that we paid a million dollars each to make sure those babies were OK in general. And those are the things that add up into our benefits cost. So when we had the final decision about what benefits to cut because of the increased healthcare costs, we made the decision, and I made the decision, to basically change the 401(k) plan.”

snip

For the record: It was me. I don’t work for AOL; my husband does. One of those “distressed babies” was our daughter. We pay our premiums for a family health plan through AOL, which is why we had coverage on the morning I woke up in acute pain, only five months into what had been a completely smooth pregnancy.


snip

[TheBlackAdder]

1. This just saves money for EOY Bonuses. Any other excuse is just that.

AOL might be doing this because:


1) They can fire someone's ass on December 24th, giving them a nice Christmas present, knowing the employee won't even be able to tap into their 401(k) money in the event of an emergency. Saving the company that payout.


2) AOL might be able to save that 1.25% interest on the money they would have lost by paying gradually through the year.


3) BONUS POOL. They can decide who to fire in December to free up money to pay out in bonuses. If the returns aren't that favorable... fire a few more staffers and that 'saved' 401(k) money can be used to fund the bonuses for executives.

[jwirr]

2. Some years ago there was a Catastrophic Health law that they soon got rid of because of the high

costs. Does anyone know how that was filtered into the ACA? All across the US we have children born too early or with chronic health care problems like my daughter. She did not cost much when she was born but over the years I am sure she has used close to what this child has.

That the ceo used this to fired the parents of these babies is unconscionable. He/She should be fired.

[question everything]

3. What I don't understand - didn't they have insurance?

Didn't the insurance paid that "million?"

Interesting that the father of that baby works at Huffington Post. What does Arianna have to say, if at all?