Large Companies Consider Dropping Health Coverage

[palehorse]

Nothing in Obamacare induces companies to drop coverage for their employees. If a company is already offering a typical HC plan, all they have to do to comply with Obamacare is to continue offering it. There's no reason their costs would go up under Obamacare (more than costs would otherwise go up without Obamacare).

In other words, blaming Obamacare for company decisions to drop coverage is plain dishonest If a company wishes to save money right now by not offering its employees coverage, it can do so without any penalty at all. Under Obamacare, it will cost a company MORE to not offer coverage.

Not in terms of money, it won't.

The point of this entire thread is that certain large companies (AT&T, John Deere, etc) have done the math and they concluded that paying the Government-imposed fines for not offering coverage to employees will actually be cheaper than paying for said coverage. As a result, some people believe that those companies may decide to drop coverage to save the money, therefore throwing tens of thousands of employees into the private insurance market with little/no increase in salaries to cover said insurance.

Still others, including myself, believe that this may ultimately lead to a louder cry for government-subsidized coverage (aka "The Public Option") when many realize that they cannot afford private insurance without their employer contributing half or more.

Once that last step occurs, any companies who still maintain coverage for their employees may decide to also drop the coverage in favor of paying the smaller fines. When that happens, it may ultimately lead to our entire population utilizing a disgustingly inefficient and expensive (think: increased taxes) system that is entirely run for and by the Federal Government.

Another possibility is that all of the above was the Left's intention all along which is why they tried so hard to "just pass anything, even if it stinks!"

Try to keep up...

 

[her209]

The point of this entire thread is that certain large companies (AT&T, John Deere, etc) have done the math and they concluded that paying the Government-imposed fines for not offering coverage to employees will actually be cheaper than paying for said coverage. As a result, some people believe that those companies may decide to drop coverage to save the money, therefore throwing tens of thousands of employees into the private insurance market with little/no increase in salaries to cover said insurance.

Under the "old" rules, couldn't the same large companies decide to drop coverage to save money, therefore throwing tens of thousands of employees into the private insurance market with little/no increase in salaries to cover said insurance?

 

[Fern]

The Law of Unintend Consequences, remember this.

I think it perfectly normal for these corporations to analyize the law and have a "what if" type discussion. It would be stupid not to do so.

But it remains to be seen if they will drop coverage.

IMO, to claim that Obamacare in no way encourages dropped coverage etc is wrong. The repeal of the tax deduction for meds etc should encourage corporations to at least curtail their plan benefits and send those people over to medicare part B (IIRC).

Will the state HI pools in some way negate the benefits of the employer-group plan thus giving employers incentive to drop their coverage and simply provide employees with a set stipend to seek their own coverage from the pools?

Will the newly imposed HI guidelines mandating minimum coverage cause an increase in HI? What will the many smaller corporations do in response to this? Will they drop the employer group plan and give additional money to employees to go shop around on their own?

Sometimes subtle psychology comes into play. Prior to this HC bill employers seemimgly had no choice but offer (some) coverage. This bill creates a clear choice not existing before - pay the (low) penalty or provide HI coverage. Will some take the (apparently) newly provide choice? I mean, the government now says they can.

I wouldn't rush to any conclusions. It's going to take a while before all the ramifications are understood and absorbed by companies. But because they are now offered an "out" and employees can seek options elsewhere, and the underlying problem of exploding health care costs have not been adressed it's not out of the realm of possiblility to think some companies may opt out. We'll just have to wait and see how it unfolds.

Fern

 

[Lanyap]

Maybe top execs will keep bennies but lots of others are replaceable if they did leave. Once one company does it others will rush to do the same.

When I first read your post I thought of drugs (bennies - I grew up in the 60's and 70's). Then I thought of the old Bell telco "green pills". They had 400mg of aspirin, 200mg of caffeine and 1mg of valium. In the old days your supervisor would give them to you if you were feeling sick or having your period. They will probably start it up again if big companies drop healthcare. "Here you go, employee. Here is your healthcare. Now keep working."

 

[daishi5]

Nothing in Obamacare induces companies to drop coverage for their employees. If a company is already offering a typical HC plan, all they have to do to comply with Obamacare is to continue offering it. There's no reason their costs would go up under Obamacare (more than costs would otherwise go up without Obamacare).

In other words, blaming Obamacare for company decisions to drop coverage is plain dishonest If a company wishes to save money right now by not offering its employees coverage, it can do so without any penalty at all. Under Obamacare, it will cost a company MORE to not offer coverage.

Did you miss the increased coverage requirements of the law, or were you being dishonest and ignoring them?

Both Caterpillar (CAT, Fortune 500) and Verizon believe the requirement to allow dependents to remain on their parents' policies until age 26 will prove costly. Caterpillar puts the added expense at $20 million a year.

So, the law requires expanded coverage, expanded coverage costs money. Therefore, the law increases costs.

 

[werepossum]

If big business decides to bail big time from their previous health care plans, simply because the penalties cost less, they may suddenly discover the penalties suddenly get largely raised by an angry and united Congress and President. As a gaping loophole suddenly slams shut.

Such a simple amendment to the existing health care law could be implemented very quickly, and quicker than you can say beancounter, those corporations would rethink their decisions. In fact, the mere threat may be enough. Especially if it received GOP and democratic bi-partisan backing. And since many Americans with the best private health care plans tend to be GOP votes, the GOP would be hard pressed not to go along with closing that loophole.

How on Earth can you call this a loophole? It is explicitly spelled out in the legislation what a company must pay if it does not provide health insurance. You seem to think that government should dictate to companies which ones should provide health insurance.

One thing about employers dropping their provided coverage, whose coverage by the way is in pre-tax dollars. The most employers will ever do is to give to the employees their policy cost LESS the fine. That fine money will then go to government, where if past performance is any guide 1/2 to 3/4 will be spent internally collecting and administrating it. Also, the individual policies will likely be more expensive. These things will increase what our health care costs overall.

I think overall this is fairly unlikely to happen on a wide basis. Americans have learned to feel entitled to health care paid by someone else. If one large company drops insurance, its better, more marketable employees will probably migrate to a competitor where practical. Companies know this and are therefore probably not going to drop health insurance unless it's a matter of long term survival.

 

[dmcowen674]

Large Companies Consider Dropping Health Coverage

So much for "if you like your insurance you can keep it". http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/05/news/companies/dropping_benefits.fortune/index.htm?cnn=yes&hpt=C2

Good, then all the smug bastards can eat cake and see what the rest of us feel.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Good, then all the smug bastards can eat cake and see what the rest of us feel.

The fact that you posted that you haven't had a "permanent" job (which I assume you means non-contractor) in over 10 years tells the story. You're a contractor, what do you expect??? Many of those jobs pay a higher hourly rate PRECISELY because they don't offer benefits! Why don't you stop the lies and tell the truth? As a matter-of-fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the truth of the matter is that you took the contract positions precisely because they paid more and then have the audacity to come here and play the victim.

Here's an idea -- instead of being a whiny little troll, how about concentrating on getting a job with actual benefits? Don't give us crap about how you can't find one -- that is complete BS. You seriously expect us to believe that in the last 10 years, you couldn't land a single position with a company? As I posted in another thread, in the past 10 years, I have been on 4 interviews and got job offers for each. If you went on any significant number of interviews and didn't land any of the positions, let me clue you in -- you are either terrible at interviewing or you are interviewing for positions way above you. But of course, in the world of Dave McOwned, it is always someone else's fault -- it couldn't possibly be that you lack qualifications or your own fault, now could it?

But hey, on the bright side, this will also end up costing you more too. See how that works?

 

[dmcowen674]

This message is hidden because blanghorst is on your ignore list.

Must be one of the smug ones replying right away

 

[Acanthus]

Did you miss the increased coverage requirements of the law, or were you being dishonest and ignoring them? So, the law requires expanded coverage, expanded coverage costs money. Therefore, the law increases costs.

Verizon made $2,420,000,000 in the last quarter.

Caterpillar made $1,240,000,000 last quarter.

We are really worrying about $20m/yr?

 

[IndyColtsFan]

This message is hidden because blanghorst is on your ignore list.

Must be one of the smug ones replying right away

Translation: Dave can't debate a single point because he is a clueless hack.

 

[blackangst1]

Verizon made $2,420,000,000 in the last quarter.

Caterpillar made $1,240,000,000 last quarter.

We are really worrying about $20m/yr?

Maybe you arent, but shareholders are.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Gee more faux outrage for shit that won't happen

Sure large companies want to save a buck but their not fucking stupid. Anyone with half a brain knows the second a company does this effectively dealing a huge paycut to employees, that said employees will bail in massive numbers.

Get back to me when a large company actually tries this. Ain't gonna happen

And where will these employees go? Bingo! Nowhere, because jobs don't grow on trees.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Good, then all the smug bastards can eat cake and see what the rest of us feel.

Yep, then the Reps will win supermajorities in both Houses and the White House for the next several decades. Think of it, all the policies you "love" come to fruition and the SCOTUS filled with Republican loyalists for the next two generations.

Be careful what you ask for because you just might get it.

 

[nobodyknows]

And where will these employees go? Bingo! Nowhere, because jobs don't grow on trees.

LOL, if they have any nads they will "go" on a sit down strike.

 

[nobodyknows]

Yep, then the Reps will win supermajorities in both Houses and the White House for the next several decades. Think of it, all the policies you "love" come to fruition and the SCOTUS filled with Republican loyalists for the next two generations.

Be careful what you ask for because you just might get it.

So you're saying that the Republicans have a healthcare plan that covers people without insurance besdies the "don't get sick" one? What's taking them so long to present it??

 

[Kappo]

Good, then all the smug bastards can eat cake and see what the rest of us feel.

Some of us aren't stupid and lazy with an incredible sense of entitlement.

 

[Balt]

Most have already dumped retirement healthcare...and it now looks like the other shoe is dropping as an unexpected consequence of our recent healthcare legislation. I imagine that these 'great thinkers' who created this 'historic' legislation will resolve the issue by increasing penalties further to a give corporations a more compelling cost/benefit analysis to consider. That's just how they roll.

I think you're probably right there.

 

[frostedflakes]

Think about it, though. They could have dropped coverage before the new health care bill and saved even more money, they wouldn't have had to pay fines or anything. I'm sure they were always analyzing the cost of insuring vs not insuring employees. The actual direct cost is probably one of many things that they consider, though. What also must be considered is the PR nightmare they would have on their hands if they dropped coverage for all their employees. They'd have to consider how it would effect current employees (would they be more likely to leave for another company that offered health care?) and potential new employees who might look elsewhere because they want an employer that provides coverage. etc. If they thought it was worth providing employees coverage before the health care bill, I doubt it will be different now since they actually have less incentive to drop them (now w/the government fines, there's even less financial advantage for not providing coverage).

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

So you're saying that the Republicans have a healthcare plan that covers people without insurance besdies the "don't get sick" one? What's taking them so long to present it??

Nope. I'm saying that if it happens that working people who have had insurance find it gone due to changes in regulation, then what I suggested will happen.

Of course if Obama gets illegals covered then there will be a larger Dem base, so maybe screwing up health care royally helps them.

 

[bfdd]

If big business decides to bail big time from their previous health care plans, simply because the penalties cost less, they may suddenly discover the penalties suddenly get largely raised by an angry and united Congress and President. As a gaping loophole suddenly slams shut.

Such a simple amendment to the existing health care law could be implemented very quickly, and quicker than you can say beancounter, those corporations would rethink their decisions. In fact, the mere threat may be enough. Especially if it received GOP and democratic bi-partisan backing. And since many Americans with the best private health care plans tend to be GOP votes, the GOP would be hard pressed not to go along with closing that loophole.

This bill is only a couple months old and people are already picking it apart. Maybe they should of spent more time refining it and defining it instead of rushing it out to say "YAY WE DID IT".

 

[MotF Bane]

The fact that you posted that you haven't had a "permanent" job (which I assume you means non-contractor) in over 10 years tells the story. You're a contractor, what do you expect??? Many of those jobs pay a higher hourly rate PRECISELY because they don't offer benefits! Why don't you stop the lies and tell the truth? As a matter-of-fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the truth of the matter is that you took the contract positions precisely because they paid more and then have the audacity to come here and play the victim.

Here's an idea -- instead of being a whiny little troll, how about concentrating on getting a job with actual benefits? Don't give us crap about how you can't find one -- that is complete BS. You seriously expect us to believe that in the last 10 years, you couldn't land a single position with a company? As I posted in another thread, in the past 10 years, I have been on 4 interviews and got job offers for each. If you went on any significant number of interviews and didn't land any of the positions, let me clue you in -- you are either terrible at interviewing or you are interviewing for positions way above you. But of course, in the world of Dave McOwned, it is always someone else's fault -- it couldn't possibly be that you lack qualifications or your own fault, now could it?

But hey, on the bright side, this will also end up costing you more too. See how that works?

Mental hospitals don't pay their patients.

 

[Zorba]

If this happens you'll see union membership go sky high.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

This bill is only a couple months old and people are already picking it apart. Maybe they should of spent more time refining it and defining it instead of rushing it out to say "YAY WE DID IT".

That's not how it works. Make the party look good no matter how they screw things up then "tweak" it. That doesn't make it good, it just plugs holes they didn't bother to considered in their ignorance to begin with.

 

[nick1985]

Good, then all the smug bastards can eat cake and see what the rest of us feel.

I wonder what Dave's 401k looks like.