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


#1

Obamacare Mandate: Anyone Who Works 30-Hour Week Is Now ‘Full-Time’*By Matt Cover
October 18, 2012
Subscribe to Matt Cover’s posts

[FONT=Verdana] [/FONT]
http://cnsnews.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/medium/images/64179.jpgPresident Obama signs the Democrats’ health care bill into law in the East Room of the White House on Tuesday, March 23, 2010. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
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 lawreads. (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.
In other words, a business must provide insurance if it has 50 or more employees working an average of just 30 hours per week, which is 10 hours per week fewer than the traditional 40-hour work week.
more: Obamacare Mandate: Anyone Who Works 30-Hour Week Is Now ‘Full-Time’ | CNSNews.com

[LEFT][/LEFT]


#2

This has MAJOR ramifications for anyone in business who employees part time folks, the law reads IN ANY MONTH!!!


#3

Friggin geniuses who thought they had employEES covered aren’t near as smart as they think they are by far.
Yes, keeping track of empoyees’ hours is more difficult on a monthly basis than a bi-weekly basis, but there’s little concern that employers will get that one figured out.

What the geniuses DIDN’T think of is that the employers WILL. Therefore, people who USED to get 34 (or 39) hours a week won’t even get that because there’s no way businesses are going to incur the expense of insuring their employees if they can get around it.
And they will.

***Please note: The above is in no way to be construed as anti-business. More to the point is the unintended consequences of moron ‘do-gooders’ who never stop to think before they act.
They just screwed a LOT of people out of 40+ hours a month that they could otherwise be getting paid.
At $8/hr., that’s $320 bucks that a LOT of POOR PEOPLE could really use to help pay their rent, feed their families, or pay their utility bills.

34hrs x 4 wks. = 136 hours.
29hrs x 4 wks. = 96 hours.
136 - 96 = 40.
40 x 8.00 = $320.

Yet, the Dems keep claiming they’re “FOR THE POOR.” and millions of morons keep falling for it.
:fuming:


#4

YOU ARE DEAD ON!!!

As founder and CEO of several companies and as a senior VP and consultant here is how I see it: We generally hold our PT employees to about 32 hrs a week. The reason why is how the IRS views part time. When you try to work folks much more than 32 hrs for more than 6 mo a year the IRS takes a HARD look and you run the risk of having them treated as full time. Keep it down around 32 4 days or less per week and you pass the IRS scrutiny.

So applying that general rule and experience will push PT’ers at least to 24 hrs per week if not less. Much will depend upon the IRS and how they see the overall business model.

The IRS generally frowns on PT’s that work year round, in their view often they see that as you are trying to doge the full time requirement. The results is that this is going to hurt corps and folks looking for part time word, the old 32 hr rule is now gone and will most likely drop to 24 hrs per weekx 3 days. For a lot of folks that is losing a days pay…


#5

Or is it possible this is a feature and not a flaw? Would this not mean a higher number of shorter hour jobs?
IE:
“Look how many jobs are being created!”


#6

Actually, when I saw the headline, that was the 1st thing that crossed my mind.
And yes, they are evil enough to knowingly put millions out of working hours while pretending to give a damn so long as it keeps them in power.
After all, doesn’t MORE people needing gov’t assistance all the MORE contribute to their sick crave FOR power?


#7

You are right and you are right more jobs are being created.

But like most PT jobs, no benefits, no time off, no nothing. Sounds like a good socialist plan for sucking the govt teat!


#8

In France, where it is law…


#9

Under my jobs plan, we’ll have more jobs than Americans*

*May require 2+ to cover food, housing, etc


#10

Yup. Double wammy. Dems have become perfectionists at claiming how they help while burning the working man. And what’s worse. actually getting credit FOR it!
:fuming:

But thanks for not taking my previous post as being anti-business, but simply as a fact of life, and businesses will do what they must to profit.
Living in a ‘tourist trap’, it was quick to see what all businesses were doing by keeping their by-weekly paid employees from getting over-time or benefits.
59 hours one week; 19 the next. 78 diveded by 2 is 34. NOPE, not over time or benefts for you!

While I wasn’t impressed, it was easy enough to see through, so what I really didn’t get were the fools who kept falling for it and complaining - as if at this NEXT job it was somehow going to be different.
(Yeah, repeating the same mistake and expecting a different outcome.)

What really, REALLY got me is two women who decided to go into business for themselves, thinking they’d make all the profit, instead of handing it to a ‘corporate boss.’
(Two separate women, separate enterprises.)
They both fell flat on their faces.
I’m thinking you can guess why.


#11

We figured out a long time ago that it was far cheaper, and much more effective parenting, for me to stay at home; helping Mr. 2 part time.
Sadly, math and common sense don’t enter into enough households.


#12

The drift is to more and more micro regulation disguised as law. I am a capitalist and believe in a free market and very little govt intervention. Oddly enough we are seeing the govt continually reduce the size of small business. If bammy gets a 2nd I would not be surprised to see it drop to 25 employees rather than the current 50 and maybe as low as 15…but wait, let your 7 year kid open a lemonade stand and it now a police matter and in fact has led to the arrests and fines of children…while the finger can be pointed at a city, the FACT is it rolls down from the very top and in this case the seat of the dictatorship…WH!

The only role the govt should be playing is to keep businesses from getting to big to fail…where is Teddy ‘Trust-Buster’ Roosevelt when you need him. Instead we are seeing the seeds of GOVT-CORP being sown by Obama…part of the plan for his hybrid govt of Fascism-socialism. Had Hitler not allowed his narcissism-ego to get in his way with dreams of world domination I would not doubt that the NAZI flag would still be flying. I suspect the the many successes the Nazi’s had has not been wasted on Obama, Soros and the rest of the former communists which surround the WH today.

The auto industry should have been allowed to fail, it would be healthier and the anchor which is dragging GM down (Chevy Volt) would be gone. Instead we are seeing a merging of the WH and the Financial, manufacturing and green industries. All standing in the doorway of epic failure…


#13

Oaks, I’m not going to argue a single word you had to say. How could I? It’s all true.
However, you may have missed my point on why those women’s businesses failed.
They each went into business hating Mr. Big Business Owner who they were sure took advantage of them; and sure they had a better way…With NO business experience, and no CLUE how profits are made.
They’re still poor.


#14

My comments were strictly an adjunct to your post. I agreed with you completely

You might notice after a while that if I am addressing a comment I put it in bold for clarification so folks will know what I am referring to. If I don’t generally I am just providing adjunct comment, that the post trigger in my thinking as I read it.

If we could get the Admin here to turn on the “thank you button” I would not even have to had quoted…(in there defense the thank you button may NOT be avaiable in this version of vBulletin)