It Was Only A Matter Of Time Before This Began.......

View attachment 1499

http://nation.foxnews.com/obamacare...-cutting-employee-hours-avoid-obamacare-costs

 

Five Guys owner confirms that it may cost more to get ‘fries with that’ with that because of Obamacare

Thanks to President Barack Obama and his signature health care law, you may not be able to afford fries with that burger at Five Guys in the near future.

President Obama and his administration will celebrate the third anniversary of Affordable Care Act, known to most as “Obamacare,” on Tuesday, but for many business owners and consumers there will be little to celebrate.

At a Heritage Foundation event in Washington, D.C. today,Five Guys Burgers and Fries franchise Mike Ruffer said the costs incurred to comply with Obamacare was forcing him to make some very difficult decisions about how to financially manage his business.

“Likely, any added cost to the business is going to have to get passed through to the customer,” Ruffer said at the “Part Time America? – Impact of Obamacare” panel Monday afternoon.

Ruffer, who owns Five Guys francises in North Carolina and Virginia, explained that he signed a deal in 2004 to build 11 of the burger joints, not knowing the economy would come crashing down a few years later and that the government would mandate that he provide healthcare to employees working over 30 hours a week.

Ruffer said he thought he would be safe from the repercussions of Obamacare because he opened each restaurant under a separate Limited Liability Company (LLC) and no more than 20 people worked at any one burger place. Unfortunately, under the umbrella of Obamacare, if a person or family members own all the establishments, then they are considered one entity, bringing small businessman like Ruffer under the purview of the law.

The Five Guys owner said he employs 147 people, 60 of whom work more than 30 hours per week, which is considered full-time under Obamacare. Ruffer said he will either have to fire or reduce the hours of 31 employees in order to avoid paying for their insurance. The cost of paying for their healthcare would be added on top of the roughly $2.4 million he spent on last year’s payroll.

When Obamacare comes to full fruition in 2014, the law will cost him the profit equal to one of his Five Guys Burgers and Fries.

Still, Ruffer noted that he needs those employees to maximize his profits. He must expand his business to three more restaurants regardless of Obamacare due to his agreement with the corporation, which is why he sees charging the consumer more as his only real viable option.

Many franchise owners are feeling the same Obamacare induced heart burn as Raffer. Quiznos, Burger King, Subway, McDonalds and Dunkin Donuts have also voiced concerns about how the costs associated with Obamacare will affect local franchise owners’ hiring and firing decisions as well as menu pricing.

“I don’t have the profit margin to pay for it,” one franchise owner told the Wall Streed Journal last year.
This news is especially bad for young people and recent college grads who are most likely to work in these part time jobs who are still facing a 12.5 percent unemployment rate. Getting a part time to pay for school or pay back student loans will likely get a little bit harder in the coming year.

http://redalertpolitics.com/2013/03...ies-with-that-with-that-because-of-obamacare/

 

OOPS! Someone follows the Constitution.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/03/15/us-cant-make-monaghan-offer-contraceptives-judge-says/#ixzz2NcS9G7Zc​

 

Little Joe's not going to like this.....

 

View attachment 1559

"I heard [Obama] say, ‘If you like your health plan, you can keep it,’ ” John Wilhelm, chairman of Unite Here Health, representing 260,000 union workers, recently told the Wall Street Journal. “If I’m wrong, and the president does not intend to keep his word, I would have severe second thoughts about the law.” Besides Wilhelm, some of the nation’s largest union bosses have taken to publicly criticizing the Affordable Care Act.

​

IS THIS WHERE THE UNIONS WILL END UP?​

EPA / MICHAEL REYNOLDS​

Of course, keeping your health care plan, like many Obama-care promises, has turned out to be demonstrably untrue. According to the Congressional Budget Office, about 7 million Americans stand to lose insurance coverage through the law by 2022. But unlike most private-sector workers expected to lose their current health coverage, union workers were a powerful Democratic constituency granted specific exemptions from Obama-care. Labor leaders are just now realizing that those protections are fleeting, and Obama-care regulations and cost increases will fall on the politically connected and unconnected alike.

The Obama administration has thus far issued waivers from Obama-care’s onerous requirements to unions representing 543,812 workers. By contrast, the administration has issued waivers for only 69,813 nonunion workers. While these waivers are a significant benefit, they accrue to a small fraction of the nation’s 14 million union workers. Further, many of the waivers have been granted on an annual basis, and no waiver has been granted for longer than two-and-a-half years. Eventually even union health plans are going to have to comply with Obama-care regulations.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/unions-vs-obamacare_707688.html

 

Unions, the reliable Democratic supporters, split from president on ObamaCare​

Published May 25, 2013​

​

Labor unions that have solidly backed President Obama are splitting with him over ObamaCare -- with one calling for the “repeal or complete reform” of the president’s signature health-care law.​

​

Union leaders argue insurance costs for millions of workers will increase under the president’s health-care plan so they might have to drop their existing plan, despite Obama promising the opposite.​

​

Their primary concern is the multi-employer or so-called Taft-Hartley plans that cover unionized workers in retail, construction, transportation and other industries that frequently use seasonal and temporary employment.​

The union leaders say the roughly 20 million people covered by the plans will likely have higher premiums because the Affordable Care Act does not include tax subsidies for them.​

​

However, workers seeking coverage in the upcoming, state-based marketplaces for insurance, known as exchanges, can qualify for subsidies.​

​

Union leaders are now hearkening back to what Obama repeatedly said starting in 2009: "If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan."​

​

Joe Hansen, president of the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, wrote in a recent op-ed that that scenario “is not going to be true for millions of workers now" and the realization “makes an untruth out of what the president said.”​

​

The plans are jointly administered by unions and smaller employers that pool resources to offer continuous coverage, even during periods of unemployment.​

​

The union plans were already more costly to run than traditional single-employer health plans. And the Affordable Care Act only added to the cost by mandating essentially all plans cover dependents up to age 26, eliminate annual or lifetime coverage limits and extend coverage to people with pre-existing conditions.​

​

"We're concerned that employers will be increasingly tempted to drop coverage through our plans and let our members fend for themselves on the health exchanges," said David Treanor, director of health care initiatives at the Operating Engineers union.​

​

Other unions expressing their concerns include the hotel workers union UNITE HERE, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters and the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, according to The Hill newspaper.​

​

They are joined in such concerns by at least two congressional Democrats, House Minority Whip Rep. Steny Hoyer, Maryland, and retiring Montana Sen. Max Baucus.​

​

​

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/05/25/unions-reliable-democratic-supporters-split-from-president-on-obamacare/#ixzz2ULutU3ld​

 

Coverage may be unaffordable for low-wage workers under ObamaCare​

​

​

June 14, 2013​

It's called the Affordable Care Act, but President Obama's health care law may turn out to be unaffordable for many low-wage workers, including employees at big chain restaurants, retail stores and hotels.​

​

That might seem strange since the law requires medium-sized and large employers to offer "affordable" coverage or face fines.​

​

But what's reasonable? Because of a wrinkle in the law, companies can meet their legal obligations by offering policies that would be too expensive for many low-wage workers. For the employee, it's like a mirage -- attractive but out of reach.​

​

The company can get off the hook, say corporate consultants and policy experts, but the employee could still face a federal requirement to get health insurance.​

​

Many are expected to remain uninsured, possibly risking fines. That's due to another provision: the law says workers with an offer of "affordable" workplace coverage aren't entitled to new tax credits for private insurance, which could be a better deal for those on the lower rungs of the middle class.​

​

Some supporters of the law are disappointed. It smacks of today's Catch-22 insurance rules.​

​

"Some people may not gain the benefit of affordable employer coverage," acknowledged Ron Pollack, president of Families USA, a liberal advocacy group leading efforts to get uninsured people signed up for coverage next year.​

​

"It is an imperfection in the new law," Pollack added. "The new law is a big step in the right direction, but it is not perfect, and it will require future improvements."​

​

Andy Stern, former president of the Service Employees International Union, the 2-million-member service-sector labor union, called the provision "an avoidance opportunity" for big business. SEIU provided grass-roots support during Obama's long struggle to push the bill through Congress.​

​

The law is complicated, but essentially companies with 50 or more full-time workers are required to offer coverage that meets certain basic standards and costs no more than 9.5 percent of an employee's income. Failure to do so means fines for the employer. (Full-time work is defined as 30 or more hours a week, on average.)​

​

But do the math from the worker's side: For an employee making $21,000 a year, 9.5 percent of their income could mean premiums as high as $1,995 and the insurance would still be considered affordable.​

​

Even a premium of $1,000 -- close to the current average for employee-only coverage -- could be unaffordable for someone stretching earnings in the low $20,000's.​

​

With such a small income, "there is just not any left over for health insurance," said Shannon Demaree, head of actuarial services for the Lockton Benefit Group. "What the government is requiring employers to do isn't really something their low-paid employees want."​

​

Based in Kansas City, Mo., Lockton is an insurance broker and benefits consultant that caters to many medium-sized businesses affected by the health care law. Actuaries like Demaree specialize in cost estimates.​

​

Another thing to keep in mind: premiums wouldn't be the only expense for employees. For a basic plan, they could also face an annual deductible amounting to $3,000 or so, before insurance starts paying.​

​

"If you make $20,000, are you really going to buy that?" asked Tracy Watts, leader of the health care group at Mercer, a major benefits consulting firm.​

​

And low-wage workers making more than about $15,900 won't be eligible for the law's Medicaid expansion, shutting down another possibility for getting covered.​

​

It's not exactly the picture the administration has painted. The president portrays his health care law as economic relief for struggling workers.​

​

​

​

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/14/coverage-may-be-unaffordable-for-low-wage-workers-under-obamacare/#ixzz2WC95B89e​