Enough is Enough (A must Read)
- Thread starter davidshaner100
- Start date
Damn facts...and from the WSJ too...and not on the opinion page!
davidshaner100
Member
Is health law really to blame for plan changes?
USA TODAY
October 3, 2013
Elise Amendola, AP
UPS dropped health insurance for employees' spouses if they had insurance from elsewhere.A handful of big-name firms and many small ones are making major changes to their health care plans this fall, and while some big companies are blaming the Affordable Care Act, insurance and economic experts call those claims an exaggeration.
Making health insurance changes, including big premium and deductible hikes when the rate of increase in health care costs has slowed, creates a "messaging issue," says University of Michigan business economics professor Thomas Buchmueller.
"That's not an easy conversation," says Buchmueller. "It's convenient to say, 'the ACA is raising our costs.'"
Big companies citing the ACA are "using this as cover," says Farzan Bharucha, a health care strategist for consulting firm Kurt Salmon. "Companies are making a business decision that by dropping or limiting coverage you won't have employees leave."
"There's nothing in the ACA that would make dropping spousal coverage be an obvious response," says Buchmueller. "That's the type of strategy firms have been doing for a while."
Most large companies made any big ACA-related changes to their health insurance plan two years ago, says Bryce Williams, managing director of global benefits company Towers Watson Exchange Solutions. He says only about one in 10 of the major companies Towers represents are making major changes to their health plans this year. Towers Watson represents about 80% of the companies on the Fortune 500, he says.
Some changes, like the elimination of mini-med plans, can benefit employees. Some workers were shocked to find how little coverage they had when they landed in emergency rooms. Private exchanges, which IBM and Walgreens have also announced they're moving employees to — can be what Williams calls a "win-win" for workers and employers. Many other experts warn that employers' contributions may not keep up with premium increases.
It's far more believable for a small company to cite the new law than for big employers to do so as it's had little effect on them financially this year, says Allen Wishner, CEO of Flexible Benefit Service Corp., which serves insurance brokers for small to mid-sized companies.
These companies have far more regulatory burdens and costs associated with the new law, he says. In July, those employing more than 50 workers were given another year to provide insurance to all full-time workers or face a $2,000-per-employee fine.
"I struggle to see what's different" for large employers, says Wishner, a director of the Employers Council on Flexible Compensation. "The delay kept the status quo for the most first part."
Smaller employers may wind up sending employees to the government exchanges because of the "expense of it and the administrative burden of offering insurance," says Ed O'Malley, president of the corporate client group for National Financial Partners, which advises companies on ACA compliance and health care, and manages private exchanges. "In industries, that are more competitive, it may be more difficult to not offer health insurance."
USA TODAY
October 3, 2013
Elise Amendola, AP
UPS dropped health insurance for employees' spouses if they had insurance from elsewhere.A handful of big-name firms and many small ones are making major changes to their health care plans this fall, and while some big companies are blaming the Affordable Care Act, insurance and economic experts call those claims an exaggeration.
Making health insurance changes, including big premium and deductible hikes when the rate of increase in health care costs has slowed, creates a "messaging issue," says University of Michigan business economics professor Thomas Buchmueller.
"That's not an easy conversation," says Buchmueller. "It's convenient to say, 'the ACA is raising our costs.'"
Big companies citing the ACA are "using this as cover," says Farzan Bharucha, a health care strategist for consulting firm Kurt Salmon. "Companies are making a business decision that by dropping or limiting coverage you won't have employees leave."
"There's nothing in the ACA that would make dropping spousal coverage be an obvious response," says Buchmueller. "That's the type of strategy firms have been doing for a while."
Most large companies made any big ACA-related changes to their health insurance plan two years ago, says Bryce Williams, managing director of global benefits company Towers Watson Exchange Solutions. He says only about one in 10 of the major companies Towers represents are making major changes to their health plans this year. Towers Watson represents about 80% of the companies on the Fortune 500, he says.
Some changes, like the elimination of mini-med plans, can benefit employees. Some workers were shocked to find how little coverage they had when they landed in emergency rooms. Private exchanges, which IBM and Walgreens have also announced they're moving employees to — can be what Williams calls a "win-win" for workers and employers. Many other experts warn that employers' contributions may not keep up with premium increases.
It's far more believable for a small company to cite the new law than for big employers to do so as it's had little effect on them financially this year, says Allen Wishner, CEO of Flexible Benefit Service Corp., which serves insurance brokers for small to mid-sized companies.
These companies have far more regulatory burdens and costs associated with the new law, he says. In July, those employing more than 50 workers were given another year to provide insurance to all full-time workers or face a $2,000-per-employee fine.
"I struggle to see what's different" for large employers, says Wishner, a director of the Employers Council on Flexible Compensation. "The delay kept the status quo for the most first part."
Smaller employers may wind up sending employees to the government exchanges because of the "expense of it and the administrative burden of offering insurance," says Ed O'Malley, president of the corporate client group for National Financial Partners, which advises companies on ACA compliance and health care, and manages private exchanges. "In industries, that are more competitive, it may be more difficult to not offer health insurance."
I'm seeing plenty on the Internet citing layoffs due to Obamacare. One newspaper article, which emphasized part-time work, does not settle the issue. And I have to wonder about that article as every state job bank I've looked at cited 30 hours as fulltime. FedEx uses 30 hrs as the limit on part-time. Be that as it may, you guys don't want to believe anything but good about Obamacare. Time will tell. And it will be completely on the Democrats which way it goes. Wonder why a number of Democrat Congressmen are now joining Republicans in asking the individual mandate be pushed back a year?
barnyard
KTM rider
Clearly an opportunity for people to blame something they do not like. Whether it is really to blame is not relevant, it happens to be a really convenient scapegoat that happens to fit in with business owners politics.
Isn't relevant? All these small businesses nationwide are being forced to offer healthcare whether they can afford it or not? Alot of talk on this forum about drinking Koolade. Yep, must be tasty.
MAKAVELI
Well-Known Member
I would say if you can't afford to give some sort of healthcare benefits, you shouldn't be in business.
barnyard
KTM rider
No they are not.
A business has to have at least 50 employees before they have to offer benefits. That excludes the majority of small businesses in the US.
Me thinks you have been spending waaaay too much time watching Faux and listening to angry conservative radio.
MrFedEx
Engorged Member
Bingo.
To me a business that employs, say, 70 employees isn't BIG business. And to listen to you guys you'd think all employers are scoundrels and all employees are pure as the driven snow. Alot of hospitals are now laying off employees including the one my sister works at and it's directly due to Obamacare. Tell me again why is it that Democrat Congressmen are now starting to join Republicans in calling for a year wait on the individual mandate?
MAKAVELI
Well-Known Member
Hospitals in my area are hiring and expanding and that's due to Obamacare.
MAKAVELI
Well-Known Member
Exactly why I live in CA and not Texas.
Texas absorbed millions of newcomers in the last 5 years as the economy held up pretty well during the recession. California has how many cities declaring bankruptcy or are very near it?
MrFedEx
Engorged Member
vantexan is now a ex-pat in Mexico. Texas politics is so crazy and strange that you need a book to figure it out. Suffice it to say that it is heavy on the stupid, heavy on religion, and very big on the Second Amendment. Glad I live elsewhere.
Nope, living in North Carolina with family now. My wife didn't like Mexico, but I really enjoyed where we were living. If you don't live in Texas then how do you know?
MrFedEx
Engorged Member
I've been there. It scared me, it's flat and ugly, and the people (in general) aren't real smart.
Goldilocks
Well-Known Member
Its not all flat. Dallas is a Metropolitan city, San Antonio and Austin are wonderful cities. Houston is too humid and ugly beaches. Padre Island fun place. Fort Worth my favorite. Cow town and Billy Bob's. Nothing better than a man in a suit wearing cowboy boots and a hat. You don't have LONG HORNS in California....
Typical, no answers so attack the people. Liberal Playbook 101.
MrFedEx
Engorged Member
Like I said, I have been there. Nice people, most not so bright. Personal opinion, not Liberal Playbook.
