Mayfield Heights -based PSC Metals may dump company-paid health insurance, push workers to Obamacare

[OhioChick]

Source: Newsnet5

Posted: 6:32 AM

MAYFIELD HEIGHTS, Ohio - Workers for a Mayfield Heights-based company may soon find themselves without health insurance, forcing them to turn to Obamacare.

That’s because PSC Metals plans to drop its health coverage for employees, online trade publication American Metals Markets reports .

AMM.com says it confirmed the information with the company CEO Robert Brewer but he declined further comment on the move.

If PSC drops its health insurance, the company would face a penalty of $2000 per employee under the Affordable Care Act.




Read more: http://www.newsnet5.com/dpp/news/local_news/oh_cuyahoga/Mayfield-Heights-based-PSC-Metals-may-dump-company-paid-heath-insurance-push-employees-to-Obamacare

---

Snip~ "And that’s not all. Sutton adds, “The Obama Administration has postponed the employer mandate penalty until 2015.”

That means, if a company cuts its health insurance now, they have a whole year without both the insurance payments to make or the penalties to pay."


From their site:

"Our people are our greatest asset."

http://www.pscmetals.com/inside_psc_metals/about.html

[ChromeFoundry]

1. Lovely...

All Employees take a pay cut (no benefits)...

Employer gets a $2000+ bonus per employee.

I will bet that their executives will still get their benefits packages.

[Comrade Grumpy]

2. Any company that drops health care coverage for its employees...

...needs to be giving them a big fat wage increase. That is an actual benefit lost.

[on point]

3. Single payer is answer

[littlewolf]

4. you are going to see more of this ... nt

[Diego_Native 2012]

5. This is NOT a bad thing.

Disconnecting health care and health insurance from the control of employers is a good thing. Workers need to stand up to their employers and demand a dollar for dollar offset wage increase. A Union sure would be helpful in getting that done.

[ChromeFoundry]

7. Yes, it IS a bad thing.

The workers wages will not be offset in the time frame where they will have their benefits discarded as part of their employment agreements, and the problems with the exchanges and the ever changing extensions to the employer penalties for not abiding to the law is not helping. Oh, and if they are going to drop health insurance they are not going to be too keen on letting their scrap yard workers for a union without a brutal fight.

For you to say that this is a "NOT" a bad thing... try turning off Faux News and the radio talking heads long enough to see around the blinders.

[Bandit]

8. In the very immediate future you might be correct but very short sighted...

There is absolutely no reason for employers to pay for employees health insurance. None. No other country works like that. It makes our companies less competetive our goods far more expensive..If everyone had to get their own Health Insurance and had complete government assistance as became necessary EVERYONE in america would benefit.

[Yo_Mama]

10. Actually most countries do have some employer contribution to health insurance

Usually there is a payroll tax, as in Germany, part of which is paid by the employer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payroll_tax

In France there's a 13.1% tax which covers health and so forth, plus an employee payroll tax of .75%. In Germany it's around 7.3% employee, 8% employer. In many countries with socialized health care systems, the employer payroll tax which pays for health and retirement and unemployment can range as high as 28-31%.

I think in the UK it's just below 14%.

[Bandit]

12. We have that already with our own Payroll taxes.

For Social Security and Medicare. FICA. That is entirely different than companies paying for health insurance and then demanding what can and can not be covered in those policies.

[Yo_Mama]

13. 1.45% is all employers pay on wages for healthcare (Medicare)

Under current US law employers have no other responsibility for medical care, and even in 2015, the flat $2,000 tax won't apply to part-time employees.

This is the fatal mistake of ACA. It allows corporations to completely duck their responsibilities, and makes it very cheap for them to hire part-time workers.

[1StrongBlackMan]

6. Well …

Does Ohio have an exchange? (in the short-run, that a benefit) … and in the longer run ... this is one step closer to de-coupling health insurance from employment and one step closer to single-payer.

So sad that people have to suffer so that society does the right thing.

[taught_me_patience]

9. I wonder if the workers will blame the shitty company or Obama? n/t

[Alhena]

11. Someone remind me why we're defending Obamacare ...

is it not just a poorly conceived law, no matter how well intentioned?

When I see stories like this and notice how insurance company stocks are skyrocketing, it's hard for me to say it shouldn't be repealed.

[Yo_Mama]

14. Yes, it shifts the burden to the public from the companies

It also institutionalizes the Walmart strategy of hiring only part-time, paying crappy wages and basically getting the public to pay for welfare.

It's a terribly flawed law. It's hard to believe that some corporate payola didn't show up in it.

It also shifts the responsibility for more sick individuals either to the public or to those indiividuals who have to buy private insurance, thus making private insurance more expensive.

And then there are huge coverage gaps.

Fiscally, it cannot be sustainable. It does do a lot for McDonalds and Walmart, Target and so forth. But for the average citizen it is not a good law.

[geek tragedy]

16. So many rightwing talking points. My favorite may be calling it 'welfare.'

Though, your "let the sick die" comment is also a winner.

It also shifts the responsibility for more sick individuals either to the public or to those indiividuals who have to buy private insurance, thus making private insurance more expensive.

Yes, with the alternative being that people who get sick either die or go bankrupt and then maybe die anyways.

I'm sure the thought of the public being responsible for making sure that sick people don't die gives you shudders.

[Yo_Mama]

17. No, I think we need universal coverage.

I would be okay if we did that with an ACA type system if it didn't allow companies to evade their responsibilities so that the system was fully funded.

Another problem with ACA is that a lot of people who really need the subsidy aren't eligible for it, and many of those who get the subsidy will then be forced into high-deductible/high copay policies that will prevent them from actually getting healthcare.

I'm totally commie on this one, and I know for a fact that a lot of corporations paid a lot of money to try to "structure" healthcare reform in a way that was favorable to them.

Corporate money talks big in Congress. President Obama wouldn't have chosen a lot of the provisions in ACA, but he could only sign the bill he got. I don't blame him. I do blame Congress.

You are so far misrepresenting my views that I had a good laugh over your post.

[geek tragedy]

18. "that will prevent them from actually getting healthcare"

Very low deductible/low copay plans are available, but they're more expensive. Also, even under the cheapest plans preventive care is covered.

Tying health insurance to employment status is one of the major structural weaknesses of the whole system--it would make zero sense to double down on that.

[geek tragedy]

15. "it's hard for me to say it shouldn't be repealed"

You and everyone you know must be extraordinarily privileged and blessed with good health.