3 ms·

Tell it your elected official, because the law currently obliges your employer to subsidize your insurance if they have greater than <X> employees. This is not

Tell it your elected official, because the law currently obliges your employer to subsidize your insurance if they have greater than <X> employees. This is not evil corporations pushing their insurance choice upon you, it's government pushing employee insurance mandates on corporations. If that bothers you(enough to compel you to take political action), then vote or write your elected official. If your elected official ignores you, then consider that you are not the majority, or your elected official simply does not care, and is motivated by something other than their constituents well being.

ryandrake 9y ago
If companies were, all of a sudden, no longer required to subsidize health insurance, who wants to bet that they will immediately pass all the savings on to each employee in the form of a raise? I guarantee you shareholders pocket the difference.
- SamReidHughes 9y ago
  Why don't companies just give everybody a pay cut and pocket that difference, too?
  - danans 9y ago
    Because doing it that way would be a public relations disaster, and likely destabilize the company. The way they do it is by layoffs and planned attrition to return to growth. I'm sure everyone has seen a stock price jump when large scale layoffs are announced.
  - acdha 9y ago
    They do: this thread is about one of the most common ways – and there are plenty of stories of people being ordered to train their replacement contractors to do the same job at lower rates – but other popular strategies include cutting benefits, reducing annual raises relative to the cost of inflation, or not hiring adequate numbers of people and pressuring the staff to try to do the extra work anyway (i.e. unpaid overtime). The main counterbalance is market pressure, which is why high-demand programmers don’t see this as often as other fields where people have less leverage, and, in bluer states, the risk that doing so will trigger government action.

ryandrake 9y ago

If companies were, all of a sudden, no longer required to subsidize health insurance, who wants to bet that they will immediately pass all the savings on to each employee in the form of a raise? I guarantee you shareholders pocket the difference.

SamReidHughes 9y ago
Why don't companies just give everybody a pay cut and pocket that difference, too?
- danans 9y ago
  Because doing it that way would be a public relations disaster, and likely destabilize the company. The way they do it is by layoffs and planned attrition to return to growth. I'm sure everyone has seen a stock price jump when large scale layoffs are announced.
- acdha 9y ago
  They do: this thread is about one of the most common ways – and there are plenty of stories of people being ordered to train their replacement contractors to do the same job at lower rates – but other popular strategies include cutting benefits, reducing annual raises relative to the cost of inflation, or not hiring adequate numbers of people and pressuring the staff to try to do the extra work anyway (i.e. unpaid overtime). The main counterbalance is market pressure, which is why high-demand programmers don’t see this as often as other fields where people have less leverage, and, in bluer states, the risk that doing so will trigger government action.