Skip to main content

View Diary: SOB cancelled our health ins (241 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I believe there is an ACA provision to discourage (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    La Gitane, jdld, terabytes

    Employers from switching their employees to part time.  However, it does this by looking back to the previous year.  So now is the time for businesses to switch to part time employees if a business also wants to avoid the penalty for switching employees to part time.

    The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

    by nextstep on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 08:41:57 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  ah - that would make sense (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      but any business owner who makes labor decisions for his/her business based solely on policy is an idiot.

      I really think these businesses that are making these stupid impetuous threats are either going to renege on them, or their businesses are going to suffer.

      "Mediocrity cannot know excellence." -- Sherlock Holmes

      by La Gitane on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 09:52:32 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  asdf (0+ / 0-)

      Do you have a link to something that explains this? Thanks in advance.

    •  The formula in PPACA for (0+ / 0-)

      "fining" the business 2000 per employee is based on total number of employee hours.

      total hours by all employees divided by 2080

      Any remainder at all round up.

      So, if an employer cuts hours to 29 for every employee and then hires a few more people to make up the hours (as they probably still need all of the production hours) they will likely end up with the same approximate total employee hours had they not gone the whole part-time charade. That is, it would make no difference in the calculation of full-time equivalent workers.

      Any business doing this crap has a rude awakening coming and clearly doesn't understand the PPACA.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site