An Omaha-based chain of fast food restauants has decided to cut the hours of all non-management employees workers’ hours to part time in order to avoid the costs of Obamacare.


Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar to the right. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

The part-timing of America: An Omaha-based chain of fast food restauants has decided to cut the hours of all non-management employees workers’ hours to part time in order to avoid the costs of Obamacare.

Share

21 comments

  • mike shupp

    Splendid!

    Now, does this tell us something basic about liberalism? Or conservatism?

  • JGL

    I just forwarded this article to a friend who voted for Obama because he “liked” him, he is about to make a decision

    about what to do with his 100 employees and their healthcare.

    I pointed out that Obamacare is designed to incentivise private company’s dumping their employees

    into a government based healthcare system. A $2000.00 “penalty” that treasonous Justice Roberts

    has happily redefined as a tax for us, or $4000.00 to $5000.00 for private insurance.

    He says ” a healthy employee is a happy employee”, which I agree with, we will see how happy he will be making

    them.

    Reality is about to visit those who voted for someone based on emotion and not about understanding a polititcians

    underlying philosophy.

    I await his response, it should be interesting.

  • wodun

    Restaurants will be keeping their staff under 50 and owners will not be opening new restaurants under the same ownership structure as the original.

    This means there will be less franchises formed and less franchise growth. It will be a large hurdle for a family owned restaurant to grow past one store.

    Also, some restaurants already provided a minimal health care plan for their workers and those plans are now illegal because they don’t provide the right kind of mandated benefits.

  • From my experience working in the restaurant industry, I’d say the great majority of those whose hours are cut voted Democrat. Of course, they’ve already demonstrated that they elevate feeling over thinking, and will blame the Simon Legree-like owners rather than the people who actually restricted their opportunities.

  • mike shupp

    So employees who think getting healthcare is important will leave companies that don’t offer it, presumably winding up at companies that do pay for healthcare or offer wages that allow their employees to get their own insurance. And the companies so unprofitable or so poorly run that they can’t afford to offer healthcare will be unable to expand.

    Sounds like a pretty good thing to me! These are outcomes that all sensible people desire.

  • wodun

    Employees wont leave those companies, they will just be forced to buy their own insurance or pay a fine. Why is there the expectation that minimum wage jobs should pay enough to buy health insurance, pay rent, and other expenses when insurance will cost as much as rent?

    Wouldn’t that money be better spent getting skills through education than lining the pockets of the Democrat’s donors? If you really want poor people to be able to get a better job, you wouldn’t take so much money from them.

    And why shouldn’t small companies be encouraged to expand? One day they might be able to afford group insurance but virtually none can do that from the get go. It doesn’t have to be a restaurant, it could be a facebook or microsoft that would be unable to expand. Starting even the smallest of businesses takes significant capital and they face enormous expenses when they hire their first employee. Social Security, Medicare, unemployment insurance, disability insurance are all significant burdens and there may be more depending on what state, county, or city they encorporate in.

    Maybe some businesses will now have to choose between keeping their 401k plan or paying health insurance.

    I can appreciate your desire for people to have health insurance but I think Obamacare was the wrong way to address the problem. It will have negative effects for businesses and not just the ones you consider undesirable. Entrepreneurs already run a gauntlet where the government places hurdles before every pit of business risk. Turning it into a horror like Ninja Warrior is not needed especially if the contestant makes it to the top of Mt Suribatchi, they get beat on for their success.

  • JGL

    You “pressume” alot, your assumption is incorrect, all company’s that operate in this model will

    be stuck with it and will not be able to offer insurance or pay the “penalty” , their margins are

    very tight now, all of the employees will have to have three part time jobs in oder to make a

    decent level of wages.

    The company’s will have to limit all time to part time in order to remain in business.

    The danger now exists that the government will now change the rules / law and require all levels

    of employees to be covered and then the businesses will be stuck with a business model that will

    necessarily require much higher prices to cover this new enforced government model.

    And now who will be paying for everything?

    The evil rich right?

    No, all of the public that will be paying for their meals with money that has been inflated

    and can buy much less with their dollars, or they just stay home.

    When government monkeys with markets (socialism / fascism) the end result will not be

    desirable.

  • I’m certain Thomas Jefferson would be shocked to see the federal government requiring government directed health care (the states would probably be better at this, but then again maybe not). I believe someone (Reagan?) said the best government social program is a job. It’s too bad Obama is working the wrong side of the problems. Policies that encourage jobs that pay medical benefits in the country are what’s needed. But some say this is part of his plan for class warfare.

  • mike shupp

    “Employees wont leave those companies, they will just be forced to buy their own insurance or pay a fine.” As I recall, there’s a fine on the companies, not the employees. Memory says it’s about 5000 bucks a head, roughly what group insurance already runs for single middle aged employees at small companies. I. e, take two little companies in the same business with the same number of employers, and the idea is the non-insuring company will get hit with fines comparable in cost to the health bills of the firm which does offer insurance. Wr shouldn’t be penalizing companies which do provide health insurance by sticking only them with such costs.

    “Why is there the expectation that minimum wage jobs should pay enough to buy health insurance….” I’ve no frigging clue. Why is there the slightest expectation that minimum wage workers should feel entitled to (a) clean air. (b) drinkable water, (c) working sewage systems, (d) malaria prevention and other public health efforts, (e) rabid animal and pest control. (f) reliable telephone service, (g) etc, etc, etc?
    Even worse, why do we provide these things to *children* with no incomes at all? Why why why?

    “Wouldn’t that money be better spent getting skills through education than lining the pockets of the Democrat’s donors?” Does this have some real meaning? As I read it, you’re suggesting that employers should be required to pay for additional schooling for their employers, because health care is totally corrupt, and all those insurance premiums are sucked up by people being rewarded for contributing to (Democratic) politicians. Obamacare provides for multiple insurance firms — they’ll be free to bribe Republicans and Libertarians and even Green Party politicians, not just Democrats! And in a free market, they certainly will! Feel better now?

    “If you really want poor people to be able to get a better job, you wouldn’t take so much money from them.” Actually my thought is that poor people ought to get better jobs by going to work at places with better pay. I’m tempted to add “just like the white folks do” but that would be snide, and unfair. I’m sure you’re just as comfortable with the idea of poverty-level white employment and I’d be happy to say so in court on your behalf.

    “And why shouldn’t small companies be encouraged to expand?” The original statement was that unprofitable or poorly run businesses would not be able to expand. Last I looked, Olive Garden and Red Garden and Wendy’s weren’t exactly tiny little hole-in-the-wall outfits. Are there roach coaches in your neck of the woods using those names? Then you ought to tell the cops, or better yet the corporate lawyers those restaurant chains employee. Trademark protection is important!

    Also, I ought to point out, a company with 50 or more full-time employees has a wage bill of at least a million bucks per year, and probably higher if everyone’s not on minimum wage. And companies with such wage costs presumably have real estate expenses and local taxes to deal with and fire insurance premiums and costs for materials and operating expenses and …. When you get up to 50 employees, your small business isn’t that small anymore. (Oh sure, there are “companies” these days in the IT business which own no real estate and no equipment and the employees are :”independent contractors” who work out of their own homes and all the coordination and management stuff is handled over the internet or via cell phones. Potentially very profitable companies — but those employees aren’t getting paid at minimum wage levels.) Anyhow, it’s not clear at what size a company has to be before Obamacare suddenly drives it into bankruptcy, and I suspect most of us could find accountants who can suggest all sorts of semi-legal shenanigans. Obviously, some folks already have…

    By the way, I really admire the idea that small businesses should be forced to subsidize educational costs for their employees. That’s one way to fight back against rising college costs. You’re probably right in thinking it’d change America in all sorts of good ways.

    Am I missing anything here?

  • Pzatchok

    Am I the only one questioning Mikes point/s?

    Are you glad that many companies are going to go out of business Mike? Or are you happy that some rich guy(the owners) will then have to look for a job like you?

  • mike shupp

    Pzatchok — Dude, I’m deliriously happy! You know why? It’s because I live in the richest, most powerful nation that ever was, a country noted for its affluence and kindness and generosity and freedoms, a place traditionally praised as an example for all the world.

    And what country are you from? Well, never mind. Tell you what, sneak acrosss the border and find a better life for yourself. All of us here will be applauding for you.

  • The problem these days is….the large corporations pay little to no taxes. That’s why no one defends them. The smaller 50 employee companies are owned by wealthy people. It’s very unpopular to defend the newly rich who own the 50 employee companies too. Problem is, the large banks and corporations who get bailouts or pay no taxes are indefensible. The nouveau rich are easy to blame. Class warfare a la Lenin is fashionable just like those cool Che T-shirts. Blame the bourgeoisie.

    I’m stuck in the Praetorian class as a result. Able to gain employment only through military service. And a pension? Only with 20 years of perfect service in the Praetorian Guard, despite hard work in the civilian sector and an MBA.

    The problem needs to have been fought and won when Perot ran against Bush senior. Sadly, the Leninists won.

  • Pzatchok

    Are you high?

  • Pzatchok

    ““Employees wont leave those companies, they will just be forced to buy their own insurance or pay a fine.” As I recall, there’s a fine on the companies, not the employees. Memory says it’s about 5000 bucks a head, roughly what group insurance already runs for single middle aged employees at small companies. I. e, take two little companies in the same business with the same number of employers, and the idea is the non-insuring company will get hit with fines comparable in cost to the health bills of the firm which does offer insurance. Wr shouldn’t be penalizing companies which do provide health insurance by sticking only them with such costs.”

    Your wrong in your assumption that the company will be fined.

    If I refuse to buy the insurance that the company offers(no matter its cost) I will be fined. The “fine” ,which a supreme court justice now says is a tax, will be taken out of my income tax return if I have any. They have not clarified how they will get it if I do not have a return.

    That is why states have been ordered to provide an insurance ‘pool’ for individuals to buy out of. The exchanges, as they are called, are supposed to provide the group buying power that large companies have.
    The problem is there are 30 states who are refusing to make an exchange and the federal government doesn’t yet know if they want to step in and do it themselves.

    I wonder what the buying power or cost controlling leverage a company with 51 employees will have?
    My company with a little over 2000 employees has the leverage to provide me with 6000 dollar a year insurance half paid by me.

  • One more thing I left out on my last post. This will sound a bit paranoid but the globalists, the internationalists, the free trade folks, the neo-cons are part of the big problem. I believe we should have national policies to encourage job growth and prosperity here in America, based upon fair trade internationally. Let’s face it, we’re allowing China and other countries to carry out trade wars through currency manipulation, and both Democrats and Republicans allow this hollowing out of America, with huge annual trade and fiscal deficits in the hundreds of billions. What we’re left with is Americans being played against one another on this health care issue: class warfare. Nationalized centralized planning of healthcare unfortunately is only the beginning of a broader agenda.

  • Chris Kirkendall

    Mike, you said this:

    It’s because I live in the richest, most powerful nation that ever was, a country noted for its affluence and kindness and generosity and freedoms, a place traditionally praised as an example for all the world.

    But you’re forgetting one thing, as all on the Left do, and it’s absolutely critical: This country did not get to be the richest, most powerfiul country on Earth by way of the Socialist policies you endorse. Capitalism (a dirty word to most on the Left) is what produced this wealth. You seem to think that now that we’re so “rich”, we can change the way we do business, the things that MADE us rich, turn it 180* on its head, and we’ll still REMAIN rich. I have news for you: That won’t happen. Money doesn’t just exist in a vacuum – it’s created by commerce, buying & selling, the market. As our GDP has expanded, the number of businesses, jobs & the amount of money increased in turn. If you enact policies & regs that inhibit investment, expansion, or the ability of businesses to make a profit, you will not have the commerce & vibrant economy that prodiuces that wealth. You will kill the goose that laid the golden egg. Businesses & jobs will leave this country for regions that are more favorable. In fact, we’ve already seen a lot of that – and much of it is the result of well-intended policies that ultimately damage the competetiveness of American co’s.

    It’s no surpirse that as taxes & regulations have placed ever-increasing burdens on individuals & businesses, our standard of living has declined. Leftists seem to think profit is a bad thing. Well, when co’s can’t make a profit, they go out of business, and with it, the jobs that business provided for people. The fast food restaurants & others that are cutting employee hours to get around Obamacare regs aren’t doing that because they’re MEAN – they’re trying to keep costs under control so thay can stay in business. Would you rather have the whole co. go under & EVERYONE loses their job?

  • Pzatchok

    Its real easy to manipulate the value of your own currency if you have total control of all aspects of your economy, much like China does.

    For all that your led to believe the US does not control its economy as tightly or totally as many other nations do. And definitely not like China.

    They manipulate their currency often to the detriment of their own people. they have no hope of manipulating ours except by fear.

    In my point of view China is one of the weakest nations on the planet and getting weaker as their standard of living rises among the commoners.

  • Pzatchok

    Sorry my above reply was meant for this post instead.

  • wodun

    “As I recall, there’s a fine on the companies, not the employees.”

    Individuals are also responsible so the company gets “taxed” if the don’t or can’t pay for the mandated policies and if the individual can’t or wont pay for a policy on their own they get “taxed”.

    There were companies who were providing health care plans for their employees but those plans didn’t meet the new mandates so the companies had to stop providing them. This will happen again as new coverage mandates increase the burden on businesses. And other companies who’s plans exceed the mandates are also taxed.

    “I’ve no frigging clue. Why is there the slightest expectation that minimum wage workers should feel entitled to (a) clean air (g) etc, etc, etc?”

    I don’t really see those as being related to forcing people to buy health insurance and also mandating what health insurance they can buy.

    “Actually my thought is that poor people ought to get better jobs by going to work at places with better pay.”

    And how if all their money goes to health insurance instead of paying for school? You don’t just “get” better jobs. A guy flipping burgers doesn’t magically become head of HR, a surgeon, or anything else.

    I am not even sure how you can drag race into this but whatever. Do you really go around calling everyone racist who disagrees with you? They don’t like your sports team so they must be racist? Don’t like your favorite restaurant so they are racist? Don’t agree with you about healthcare so they are racist?

    “Also, I ought to point out, a company with 50 or more full-time employees has a wage bill of at least a million bucks per year, and probably higher if everyone’s not on minimum wage. And companies with such wage costs presumably have real estate expenses and local taxes to deal with and fire insurance premiums and costs for materials and operating expenses and …. When you get up to 50 employees, your small business isn’t that small anymore. ”

    Well, you add some more hurdles that businesses face to support my point. Even a business that has revenue of a million dollars has significant expenses that eat most of that revenue up. Revenue does not equal profit. It is difficult to get that far with just business risk to deal with much less the myriad of government regulations and now the burden of Obamacare. Maybe our economy would be doing better if people like you didn’t constantly advocate kicking businesses in the nuts and charging them for the privilege?

    “By the way, I really admire the idea that small businesses should be forced to subsidize educational costs for their employees. That’s one way to fight back against rising college costs.”

    Umm what? Allowing people to keep more of their own money to spend on education or something else if they choose is not advocating for businesses to subsidize the education of their employees. Subsidizing education through “free” money is driving the cost of education up. But here you are advocating for adding another significant per employee cost to running a business.

    “Am I missing anything here?”

    Soooooo much. My advice would be to pick a business or industry, then research what it would take for you to start it. It might give you some appreciation of what the guy running those evil roach coaches has to go through.

  • wodun

    “Would you rather have the whole co. go under & EVERYONE loses their job?”

    Yes.

  • Chris Kirkendall

    wodun, you just may be right – we have to consider the possibility that for some people, they WOULD rather see the whole business go down the tube – it was probably “evil” anyway…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *