4 ms·
Change the rules and people will behave accordingly. The most obvious effect I foresee is that employers who can't afford insurance will try to avoid growing to
by mike_organon 17y ago
Change the rules and people will behave accordingly. The most obvious effect I foresee is that employers who can't afford insurance will try to avoid growing to have 50 employees. This isn't because the employer is evil, it's because that one extra employee will cost salary + $40k in penalties, and probably get him labelled as an exploiter of the working class. That should do wonders for the economy.
- dkokelley 17y ago"Change the rules and people will behave accordingly" Very true. Do you know of any provisions (loopholes) for determining which organization actually employs the workers? Where do employees end and contractors begin? Couldn't organizations exist that simply contact out <50 employees to companies? Lets say I run a manufacturing business that requires 70 people to operate at target capacity. Couldn't I employ 35 workers, and then contract out the other 35 employees to a separate company (also owned by me, or maybe contracted through a staffing firm), so that each organization stays under the 50 employee limit?
- akeefer 17y agoIt'll be interesting to see whether the negative impact of employers trying to stay below 50 FTE employees is offset by the positive impact of people feeling more free to start or join small businesses that don't yet offer health coverage because they don't have to worry about pre-existing conditions when obtaining individual coverage. It's not an obvious calculation either way.