How Obamacare is making it harder to find a full-time job
The drag Obamacare has had on the economy has been hard to quantify in the two-plus years since it became law, because so many of its economy- and job-altering provisions had yet to be written. But that’s changing, and the law’s negative impact on the economy is becoming clearer. The Washington Post’s Robert Samuelson explains one of the ways: the law’s exemption for part-time employees and its definition of what counts as “part time”:
In September, 34 million workers, about a quarter of total workers, were part-time, reports the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). But the BLS defines part-time as less than 35 hours a week; Obamacare’s 30 hours a week was presumably adopted to expand insurance coverage. There are now 10 million workers averaging between 30 and 34 hours a week. To the BLS, they are part-time; under Obamacare, they’re full-time.
Employers have a huge incentive to hold workers under the 30-hour weekly threshold. The requirement to provide insurance above that acts as a steep employment tax. Companies will try to minimize the tax. The most vulnerable workers are the poorest and least skilled who can be most easily replaced and for whom insurance costs loom largest. Indeed, the adjustment has already started.
As first reported in the Orlando Sentinel, Darden Restaurants — owners of about 2,000 outlets including the Red Lobster and Olive Garden chains — is studying ways to shift more employees under the 30-hour ceiling. About three-quarters of its 185,000 workers are already under, says spokesman Rich Jeffers. The question is “can we go higher and still deliver a great [eating] experience.” The financial stakes are sizable. Suppose Darden moves 1,000 servers under 30 hours and avoids paying $5,000 insurance for each. The annual savings: $5 million.
Samuelson notes there are downsides for companies to have employees working fewer hours: The jobs may become less attractive, turnover may increase and, with it, training costs may rise. But the evidence clearly shows that even many employed Americans are still looking for more work because all they can find is part-time work.
In any case, his broader point, to which I subscribe, is that the economy isn’t strong enough — hasn’t been for a few years now — to withstand this kind of unnecessarily, artificially created uncertainty. Businesses always operate with uncertain market conditions, but they don’t need government adding to this uncertainty by passing laws that muddle the labor market — and thereby undermine the entire point of passing the law in the first place.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
164 comments Add your comment
Drudge
October 22nd, 2012
12:25 pm
So back to the actual topic – Cheesy the one trick pony – this has absolutely changed how we hire. We used to hire initially as temps – 90 days then convert to permanent. Temp to perm. We don’t do that anymore. We have temps that have been here for 2 years and the reason is pretty straight forward: Obamacare – we don’t know what an employee is going to cost us in 2014. We pay temps a higher hourly, but they get no benefits, no 401k, no PTO, sick leave or holidays paid. The main area of importance: we can let them go at any time for any reason with very little penalty.
Queue the liberal hissy – but this is a fact, an actual real life example here in Midtown from someone who hires a dozen people/year.
Common Sense
October 22nd, 2012
12:25 pm
This has been the objective all along. Force enough off the plans they now have and the demand for a single payer system appears all on it’s own.
JDW
October 22nd, 2012
12:27 pm
@Tiberius…”No, they are not. Only in the so-called “minds” of people who use DNC talking points and slate.com as their sources of information”
PHULEEEEEEEESE…check out this extensive library of Mittens HIMSELF saying one thing, then the other and then yet another…
http://www.google.com/search?q=romney+flip+flops&sourceid=ie7&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-Address&ie=&oe=#q=romney+flip+flops&hl=en&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-Address&prmd=imvnsu&source=lnms&tbm=vid&sa=X&ei=8nKFUOv0E5Ke8gSt_YDoBw&ved=0CAwQ_AUoAw&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&fp=9bcecee61b0ddd91&bpcl=35466521&biw=1280&bih=843
I demand to see Cheesy Grits Birth Certificate- Long Form Please
October 22nd, 2012
12:27 pm
Not true, Cheesy. CONGRESS is primarily responsible for spending. And our debt has increased 52% during Democrat-controlled Congresses and 48% GOP-controlled Congresses.
So they are BOTH to blame.
Republicans controlled the white house the majority of that time and had to sign those budgets did they not ?
In fact for the majority of time Reagan was in office his budget had more spending in it than the ones coming for a Democratic Congress.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
October 22nd, 2012
12:27 pm
“Psst…we spend more…single payer would REDUCE our expenditures”
Psssst . . . single payer only shifts who pays the bills – it doesn’t change the bills at all, JDW.
JDW
October 22nd, 2012
12:28 pm
@Drudge…”The main area of importance: we can let them go at any time for any reason with very little penalty.”
Which you could do anyway…lie to yourself if you like but don’t expect anyone with any sense to believe you.
I demand to see Cheesy Grits Birth Certificate- Long Form Please
October 22nd, 2012
12:30 pm
Cheesy the one trick pony – this has absolutely changed how we hire. We used to hire initially as temps – 90 days then convert to permanent. Temp to perm. We don’t do that anymore. We have temps that have been here for 2 years and the reason is pretty straight forward:
We still do that all the time. Temp to perm.
Nothing has changed.
Maybe if your business isn’t doing very well you should stop blaming the government and look in the mirror.
I think a lot of Business in this country that are totally mismanaged can conveniently use Obama care to blame anyone but themselves.
JDW
October 22nd, 2012
12:30 pm
@Tiberius…”single payer only shifts who pays the bills – it doesn’t change the bills at all”
So thats why every country with single payer spends about $3500 less per person than we do…because it doesn’t change the bills.
JEEESH…every heard of purchasing power.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
October 22nd, 2012
12:31 pm
JDW, I don’t do sound bites.
Unlike you, I’ve spoken extensively to people in political situations, and there will ALWAYS be people ready, willing and eager to take down everything you say in order to parse it and cherry-pick statements in order to put together a “gotcha” event.
It is shallow politics at best, which is why you’re so enamored of it.
BlahBlahBlah
October 22nd, 2012
12:32 pm
Cheesy, despite those 91% top marginal rates, taxes collected as a percentage of GDP rarely, if ever, sniffed 20%, and didn’t differ much from collections during the Reagan years.
So what’s your point?
Drudge
October 22nd, 2012
12:32 pm
Liberal desperation – my favorite. Florida is pretty much decided. So is NC. Romney up by 5 in both VA and CO. OH is 1 point for Obama…and that is based on 2008 turnout. Do you really think this year dems will turn out like 08? College kids? Minorities? Sure you do.
Hey – anyone remember when Bookman called the election for Obama a few weeks ago?
I demand to see Cheesy Grits Birth Certificate- Long Form Please
October 22nd, 2012
12:32 pm
Psssst . . . single payer only shifts who pays the bills – it doesn’t change the bills at all, JDW.
Yes it does.
If the hospital knows they will get paid they are less likely to charge 40 dollars for an aspirin.
Ive had alot of people in the healthcare field tell me that very thing.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
October 22nd, 2012
12:32 pm
“So thats why every country with single payer spends about $3500 less per person than we do”
No, it’s because the governments involved ration the care they allow, JDW.
catlady
October 22nd, 2012
12:33 pm
It isn’t Obamacare making it hard. It is pure, unadulterated GREED. THAT is what is killing this country!
I demand to see Cheesy Grits Birth Certificate- Long Form Please
October 22nd, 2012
12:34 pm
Liberal desperation – my favorite. Florida is pretty much decided. So is NC. Romney up by 5 in both VA and CO. OH is 1 point for Obama…and that is based on 2008 turnout. Do you really think this year dems will turn out like 08? College kids? Minorities? Sure you do.
Better check those numbers again.
I love how all the polls matter but the one he doesn’t like. That one is based on blah blah blah.
Hilarious.
I demand to see Cheesy Grits Birth Certificate- Long Form Please
October 22nd, 2012
12:34 pm
No, it’s because the governments involved ration the care they allow, JDW
Total BS.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
October 22nd, 2012
12:36 pm
“In fact for the majority of time Reagan was in office his budget had more spending in it than the ones coming for a Democratic Congress.”
Cheesy, I will not repeat my already oft-repeated Reagan spending explanation, but needless to say, you don’t know Reagan, nor what you’re talking about regarding spending.
Drudge
October 22nd, 2012
12:36 pm
Maybe if your business isn’t doing very well you should stop blaming the government and look in the mirror.
I think a lot of Business in this country that are totally mismanaged can conveniently use Obama care to blame anyone but themselves.
That’s hysterical – blame every business in the country instead of 1 singular poisonous policy. If you knew who I worked for, you would have a better understanding of my position. We run a very profitable, rapidly expanding international fortune 1000. There are more companies running our philosophy than yours – which is why unemployment hasn’t even kept up with population…
Matz
October 22nd, 2012
12:37 pm
“I think a lot of Business in this country that are totally mismanaged can conveniently use Obama care to blame anyone but themselves.”
Indeed. I also love the way they spout on about “uncertainty,” (per their GOP talking point.) “OHHH! We can’t hire anybody because we’re SO uncertain! We don’t know for sure what the future (with this black muslim marxist in the white house) will bring, so we’re too SCARED to hire another employee! We want to the government to ensure us that the risks we take as innovative businessmen, boldly forging ahead into the future, will not be risky at all. Ever. Because we believe in personal responsibility.”
Spoken like the brave pioneers of industry that made this country great! …. NOT.
TBone
October 22nd, 2012
12:37 pm
The sooner you figure out that the elite ruling class don’t give a crap about the peons the better off you are. How is the gonna affect take home pay? Figure it out. Vote for the MORMON.
Drudge
October 22nd, 2012
12:39 pm
Cheesy – most of your points are either hearsay, some guy you know or comparing Ike’s congress to London’s olympic committee to chocolate cake. This is why even whining liberals can’t stand whining liberals.
I demand to see Cheesy Grits Birth Certificate- Long Form Please
October 22nd, 2012
12:39 pm
It isn’t Obamacare making it hard. It is pure, unadulterated GREED. THAT is what is killing this country!
You have to love Republicans.
Tell them that 50 cents is going to provide a poor black kid a free lunch and they will tell you will tell you by all means that must be stopped. Entitlements and all.
But talk about raising taxes on the wealthy. Wow. That just cant be allowed to happen.
Those historically low tax rates for the rich must be protected at all costs. Maybe even lowered more.
Really have their priorities in order dont they.
Whats strange is most of them claim to be Religious.
If they actually opened the bible I think they would find Jesus teaching the exact opposite viewpoint.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
October 22nd, 2012
12:40 pm
” No, it’s because the governments involved ration the care they allow, JDW
Total BS.”
Yeah, Cheesy, that’s why it takes months to get an MRI in Britain or Canada, where it takes days (or even hours) here. That’s why it takes a year or more to get a joint replacement there rather than weeks here.
But you keep believing the stuff being fed to you.
JDW
October 22nd, 2012
12:40 pm
@Tiberius…” I don’t do sound bites.”
BAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
That’s all you do…BTW unlike you, I do lots of talking to lots of people in business and politics…WAY above the pay grade of lets say our local politicians that spend their spare time working at the mall.
I demand to see Cheesy Grits Birth Certificate- Long Form Please
October 22nd, 2012
12:40 pm
Cheesy – most of your points are either hearsay, some guy you know or comparing Ike’s congress to London’s olympic committee to chocolate cake. This is why even whining liberals can’t stand whining liberals.
Georgia schools at work.
The lower the education level. The redder the state.
iggy
October 22nd, 2012
12:41 pm
Its gonna be a big election night surprise the Party of Moral Bankruptcy ie the Democratic party.
JDW
October 22nd, 2012
12:42 pm
@Tibeius…”it’s because the governments involved ration the care they allow”
And insurance companies don’t
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
October 22nd, 2012
12:44 pm
Finn makes an almost daily assault on red states, with his stats about the “redder the state” the less educated the voters in that state. Studies do show that, however studies also show that Rep voters are much more educated than Dem voters, so great minds will have to ponder how you square those two facts. Here are some studies that show that the Dem voting base is less educated, no surprise there.
Rep = Republican
Dem = Democrat
Ind = Independent/Unaffiliated
Grade school education:
23.4% Rep, 54.6% Dem, 22.5% Ind
Some High School:
22.8% Rep, 51.3% Dem, 26.0% Ind
High School Grad:
29.4% Rep, 40.5% Dem, 30.2% Ind
Some College and/or Tech:
36.0% Rep, 35.0% Dem, 29.3% Ind
College Grad:
42.0% Rep, 30.7% Dem, 27.7% Ind
(Source: The World Almanac of U.S. Politics, 1991-93 edition, p.25)
iggy
October 22nd, 2012
12:51 pm
“In the 11 swing states, Mitt Romney earns 49% of the vote to Obama’s 46%. Two percent (2%) like another candidate in the race, and four percent (4%) are undecided.”
“Romney now leads 50% to 37% among unaffiliated voters in the combined swing states.”
Colorado: Romney 50%, Obama 46%
Iowa: Obama 48%, Romney 48%
Romney has FL.
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
October 22nd, 2012
12:53 pm
Matz
Don’t get too lathered up about all this uncertainty in the business world. It ends on 6 Nov. They will then know, four more years of an abysmal economy and unhealthful government regulations, or a better economy and a government more friendly to business. I think you will see them move off their inertia after 6 Nov. They will either start hiring and growing or start pulling back and reevaluating what they need to do to try to ride out the next four years. Many business will try to fashion ways to stay under the limit of employees, that forces them to provide health care.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
October 22nd, 2012
12:55 pm
JDW, I wasn’t always a local politician, nor did I always work in my spare time.
“Talking” with people, and “speaking” to people are two different things.
Which is why the minutiae of collecting sound bites is a juvenile waste of time for people to use as their “knowledge base” of candidates.
But the shallower the process, the more I’m sure you’ll embrace it.
td
October 22nd, 2012
12:56 pm
“It isn’t Obamacare making it hard. It is pure, unadulterated GREED. THAT is what is killing this country!”
How many more of our citizens do the producers going to have to take care of? Why can not these non producers become producers?
Matz
October 22nd, 2012
12:56 pm
Rafe Hollister,
Thank you for your concern. How thoughtful! But I am not the one who’s crying scared.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
October 22nd, 2012
1:01 pm
“It isn’t Obamacare making it hard. It is pure, unadulterated GREED. THAT is what is killing this country!”
catlady, I suggest you watch John Stossel some time.
Greed is the only thing making this country work at all.
Just Saying..
October 22nd, 2012
1:02 pm
“Stop pretending you were expecting something else.”
In poker, I think this is the end-of-the-night game called Guts…
Just Saying..
October 22nd, 2012
1:03 pm
“Greed is the only thing making this country work at all.”
And hoping that “Greed is Good” has not been copyrighted…
ragnar danneskjold
October 22nd, 2012
1:07 pm
ObamaCare and Dodd-Frank are the leading causes of the continuing regulatory recession engulfing the country. Repeal would be a first step toward a better economy.
kay
October 22nd, 2012
1:07 pm
Hey Kyle, Canada has universal heath care and the federal tax rate there is under 25%….. not nearly that 40 or 50 that you just shouted out into a full theatre.
Just Saying..
October 22nd, 2012
1:09 pm
“…Dodd-Frank are the leading causes of the continuing regulatory recession engulfing the country. Repeal would be a first step toward a better economy.”
Because we saw how swell it worked last time…
Georgia
October 22nd, 2012
1:10 pm
The only problem with ObamaCare is that it could possibly foster even more incompetence among some doctors.
JDW
October 22nd, 2012
1:14 pm
@Tiberius…”Which is why the minutiae of collecting sound bites is a juvenile waste of time for people to use as their “knowledge base” of candidates.”
If this were 1950 I would agree with you, however it is not. Those “sound bytes” today define the marketing message of a candidate. They are the candidates primary messaging methodology. Now you might not like it, and I don’t but those bytes are how a candidate in today’s world communicate with the voter. They spend inordinate amount of time wordsmithing and streamlining those messages. Those sound bytes are how the candidate wishes the voter to perceive them.
The other key data those sound bytes provide is a view of the candidate over time. If you compare them you find you can build a picture of how a candidate has either matured or not. You can understand how consistent they have been in their positions and how they have responded to a changing landscape.
In Romney you find a very clear picture of a candidate that shifts core beliefs based on his perception of the voters desires and that makes him the lessor candidate in most cases including this one.
getalife
October 22nd, 2012
1:17 pm
“The U.S. economy finally seems to be recovering in earnest, with housing on the rebound and job creation outpacing growth in the working-age population. But the news is good, not great — it will still take years to restore full employment — and it has been a very long time coming. Why has the slump been so protracted?
The answer — backed by overwhelming evidence — is that this is what normally happens after a severe financial crisis. But Mitt Romney’s economic team rejects that evidence.”
Read the truth here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/22/opinion/krugman-the-secret-of-our-non-success.html?_r=0
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
October 22nd, 2012
1:24 pm
JDW, don’t quit your day job and go into political analysis.
You’d starve.
Sound bites are no different from the slogans of 200 years ago. Same crafting of a small message to get into a voter’s head repeatedly. You’ve probably forgotten “Tippecanoe and Tyler too!”
What are being collected to allegedly “prove ” a candidate’s changing views are pieces and parts of long-winded explanations; those pieces and parts parsed to convey one message when the deeper message is entirely different.
It doesn’t build a message of their beliefs over time. It builds a phoney narrative crafted to “out” a candidate by the opposition party.
And both sides do it.
“In Romney you find a very clear picture of a candidate that shifts core beliefs based on his perception of the voters desires”
Really? And so Obama can change is stance on gay marriage and because it’s him, he’s “evolved”, but when Romney changes an earlier stance on something he’s “flip-flopping”, right?
Kyle Wingfield
October 22nd, 2012
1:25 pm
kay @ 1:07: Canada taxes and spends for health care at the provincial level.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
October 22nd, 2012
1:25 pm
Whenever I see the words “truth” and “Krugman” in the same post, I just pass it by . . .
Patty
October 22nd, 2012
1:25 pm
It’s just that kind of myopic wrong headed thinking that keeps our per capita health care costs the most expensive in the world…
US…$7690
Canada…$4363
Germany…$4218
France…”$3978
UK…$3487
Psst…we spend more…single payer would REDUCE our expenditures while freeing business to concentrate on more important problems than how to game health insurance costs.
Ask those people from Canada who were always sneaking over the Michigan border where they’d rather be treated for a life-threating disease. While living in Grand Rapids, I talked to Canadians who waited 6 months to a year for an MRI and up to two years for heart surgery or hip/knee replacements. And the NHS stories coming out of UK aren’t exactly heartwarming.
jconservative
October 22nd, 2012
1:26 pm
At this writing I would guess we would have a Republican House, a Democratic Senate and a Republican White House in Jan 2013.
That leaves the issues of sequestration, Bush/Obama Tax Cuts, debt ceiling and Obamacare all on the table for a number of potential compromises. Or maybe, no compromises at all.
Note that in January 2013 the 113th Congress will convene. And you thought Friday the 13th was bad news.
Add to this the 2014 elections where in the Senate about 20 Democratic seats and 13 Republican seats will be up for grabs.
The period from January 2013 until the August recess will not only be entertaining, it will be critical.
JDW
October 22nd, 2012
1:37 pm
@Tiberius…”Whenever I see the words “truth” and “Krugman” in the same post, I just pass it by ”
Indeed because only liars teach at Princeton, win Nobel Prizes for Economics and Loeb awards.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
October 22nd, 2012
1:37 pm
jconservative, I think the fun will start earlier if Obama is re-elected.
Emboldened by his victory, he will (once again) completely misread the electorate and mood in Washington and reject any and all attempts to modify or delay sequestration, even to the point to where he’d veto any bill sent to him during the recess that might do so.
Fortunately, I don’t think that victory is going to happen if the trend continues in Romney’s favor.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
October 22nd, 2012
1:40 pm
Bookman gets a mention in Salon.com but not Kyle? Snub!