The nation’s largest movie chain is turning its employees into part-time workers to avoid the cost 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.

Finding out what’s in it: The nation’s largest movie chain is turning its employees into part-time workers to avoid the cost of Obamacare.

Share

14 comments

  • Scott

    The notion that these cuts are “unintended consequences” of Obama Care is laughable. This is precisely what was intended. That is, drive the herd away from private insurance and into the arms of the all caring government. Disgraceful. (IMHO, of course)

  • JGL

    The government, if Obamacare is allowed to continue, functionally owns the people now. The exact opposite of the intent of the founders. Obamacare is a liberal / One World Government agenda model fulfillment, IMO.

    Think of this country 5, 10, 20 years from now under this model. Anyone who controls who, how and when a person gets their medical care functionally owns them. The people of America were delivered to this by both parties, IMO.

  • Thomas

    Thanks Robert. Now I know what movie theater to never go to again.

  • Thomas

    … a company that is so cynical that it will use its own badly paid employees as PAWNS in a political battle does not deserve one cent of my money.

  • JGL

    The government creates incentive and disincentive through taxation (remember Obamacare is now a tax, not a penalty as it was promoted and defended as. A total fraud perpetrated on the people of America by both parties).

    Business must live by certain rules of capitalism, they must make a profit in order to survive and they must act and react strategically to governmental policy decisions.

    Soon, if you live your life by the rules you have laid out here of not patronizing businesses who strategically react to the governments actions you may find that you may have very few businesses to choose from. The problem is not with the businesses it is with the socialist agenda being executed in our country.

  • JGL

    PS: Business does not exist to provide medical care for its employees. A business can choose to offer medical care as an incentive to a good worker over and above their pay, if they so choose.

    Oh wait a minute, thats the way that it used to be, now the government through law mandates that a business provide health care for all its employees or they will have to pay a tax (read penalty) if they do not. Forget about incentive and disincentive.

    See a problem with this picture?

    Maybe you don’t.

  • Scott

    Thomas,

    You say, “a company that is so cynical that it will use its own badly paid employees as PAWNS in a political battle does not deserve one cent of my money.” It’s unfortunate that everything is politics to you. You’ve obviously never run a business. And no, a non-profit is not a business. It’s a charity.

  • wodun

    “Regal, which had revenue of $2.8 billion in 2011″

    But what are its costs? And what does it say that a company with $2.8b in revenue can not afford Obamacare?

    This is the good part, ” “To comply with the Affordable Care Act, Regal had to increase our health care budget to cover those newly deemed eligible based on the law’s definition of a full-time employee.””

    It looks like the cost of insuring their other employees also went up.

  • wodun

    Sure, blame the company not the politicians that passed the law…

    Sad to see my predictions coming true.

  • Thomas

    ‘Business must live by certain rules of capitalism, they must make a profit in order to survive’

    Government intrusion into private business:

    Outlawing slavery
    Banning child labor
    Worker safety- its illegal for a business to slowly kill its employees, in the name of profits
    40 hour work week- in the ‘good-ole days, before government ‘intrusion’, business was free to insist its workers work 12 hour shifts, 6-7 Days a week.

    I have no problem with business making a profit, but a huge percentage of the cost of showing movies is the obscene amounts of money paid to movie stars, advertising, etc. Then there are the too highly compensated CEO’s of most corporations today, and layers and layers of middle management. Let all of THEM make less, first.

  • The ‘people’ can refuse and resist. There’s 300 million of us, and only a relative handful of supporting politicians. Well, maybe not 300 million on board with such outlandish concepts as ‘freedom’ and ‘liberty’, but enough to make a difference. Make a commitment.

  • Garry

    I don’t like obscene amounts of money going to movie stars, CEOs, etc., but how can we justify limiting what companies pay people? The movie stars get a lot of money (from the studio, not the theater companies) because they bring in revenue to the studio. There’s very little we can do to try to change that; perhaps one aspect of Obamacare is an attempt to limit payments to “overcompensated” CEOs, etc., but it never works out that way.

    Any burden placed on a company is ultimately passed on to the consumer. Any attempt by government to limit behavior of individuals and companies that ignores human nature is bound to fail. If you want to boycott, go ahead, but unless you’ve got a lot of people on your side, you’re not going to do much other than maybe feel better about yourself

    Instead of trying to punish the predictable (and lawful) behavior of the rich, which almost always backfires, we should try to find ways to leverage their predictable behavior to make things better for society as a whole.

  • JGL

    The summarizing comment on this subject is this:

    The people who passed the bill exempted themselves from the bill.

    The elite have spoken, for the masses own good of course.

  • Thomas

    Garry- I don’t really disagree with much of your post, but I will add this thought. Imagine you lived in the 1800’s. You could make the same statements about appealing to the better nature of business regarding slavery, child labor, 80 hour work weeks, etc- but one fact of human nature is many people will do anything they can to benefit themselves without regard for other people. The ONLY recourse then, is to punish them for their bad behavior, and to make it illegal to continue their bad behavior.

    So sure, try the carrot first. But if that fails, you need the stick. Thats human nature for you.

    You can also say, and I’m sure it was said, that eliminating slavery or child labor would simply mean higher costs to the consumer, and its true, those costs WERE passed on. But I would argue that to look at everything in terms of consumer pricing is to use a very poorly thought out measuring stick.

Leave a Reply

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