If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Buzzfeed)   Staples cuts part time employee hours in order to exploit an Affordable Care Act loophole. That was sleazy   (buzzfeed.com) divider line 264
    More: Asinine, Affordable Care Act, store manager, Dollar General  
•       •       •

11411 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Jan 2014 at 11:45 PM (37 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



264 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-01-10 12:24:16 AM
As a Staples employee that quit a month ago, I can confirm this. I worked full time hours for six years as a resident tech, offically a part time postition, but once the corporate mandate came down I was cut down to sixteen hours per week. I jumped ship and found a new job. Turns out my store is closing, but the part time hour limit is company wide. Screw Staples, I earned every award they have to give then got told to piss off.
 
2014-01-10 12:25:56 AM
One less place for me to shop.  Oh well, fark them.
 
2014-01-10 12:28:18 AM
If there's one thing worse than paper cuts, it's staple cuts.

/pass the lemon juice
 
2014-01-10 12:28:35 AM

Frederick: cirby: Caffeinatedjedi:
Really, just give your damn employees benefits. So what if your 10,000 % profit percentage is suddenly reduced to 9,999 %?

You mean "So what if your 2.2% profit margin is suddenly reduced to a loss?" You have some interesting ideas about how much actual companies make, especially during a long recession.

Who has a 2.2% profit margin?


Most grocery store chains when they're having a good year for starters
 
2014-01-10 12:29:45 AM
4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2014-01-10 12:31:04 AM
No duh. We've been told this was going to happen for 3 damn years, now.
 
2014-01-10 12:33:04 AM

limboslam: No duh. We've been told this was going to happen for 3 damn years, now.


That gave you three years to attend medical school so you can heal yourself.
 
2014-01-10 12:33:52 AM

The Larch: spunkymunky: Color me unsurprised. Back when I still had a full time job (I left it in June), we were told to start cutting part time and relief staff hours to 28 hours a week, maximum, in order to keep our numbers down for when the healthcare law stuff started. And this was at a not for profit 'Christian' place that provided care for adults with intellectual disabilities.
It's one of several reasons I'm no longer working there. But, from ehat I heard from HR, a lot of businesses would be doing it to save money.

Good.  Employer provided health insurance was always a very, very bad idea.  I'm glad Obamacare is forcing people to realize that.


So if it's such a bad idea, why didn't Obama abolish it in favor of his more affordable plan?
 
2014-01-10 12:36:19 AM

Smeggy Smurf: Most grocery store chains when they're having a good year for starters


And yet Pubix which is known for how well it treats its employees is over 6%.
 
2014-01-10 12:37:23 AM

farkstorm: Most of the people affected already have insurance. You can stay on mommy's & daddy's insurance until you are 26 years old, long enough to finish college and get a full time job. If you can't get full-time employment at 26 years old, you should have paid better attention in high school. Now suffer the consequences of your own failures.


Do you enjoy repeating right wing lies or just lying in general?
 
2014-01-10 12:38:49 AM
I still think socialized medicine as a baseline, with employers having the option to offer more and better coverage as part of a compensation package, would be better than this. Employer-provided insurance only became a thing when employers realized that $6-an-hour plus benefits cost a lot less than just $8-an-hour, because a great deal of what goes into benefits is deductible and it costs less to provide benefits ostensibly worth $2-an-hour a year to a large group of many employees than it does to just give them the money. Health care costs far less in socialized-medicine countries simply because an entity which handles everyone's healthcare A. unifies the paperwork, so the cost of cross-coding between 100 different systems is gone, B. has far greater leverage in cost negotiations, and C. gets the benefits of research into human trials and out to patients far faster than a for-profit, corporate model.

I also think large corporations and 'job creators' have forgotten the Matthew Principle of Economics. If you pay low-wage earners more, they tend to spend it...at your business and those like it, boosting not only the economy, but your own earnings. The rich will get richer no matter what, so why not lay things out so that the rich get richer from actual earnings rather than having to spend the same money or more on Senators and such just to keep cutting taxes on things like food stamps, TANF and Head Start, when by just moving the money around more between the working class and their own bottom line, they can lower their taxes by removing the NEED for so many social programs?

It's like the insurance, PACs, political parties above the extreme-local level and corporate  mega-trust industries are parasitically leeching money from the poor and rich alike, and the inability for rich and poor to ever talk to one another and point out how much we're losing to these second-spaceship types keeps our economy from realizing its' full potential.

As such, I propose we draft absolutely everybody in the medical-billing and coding industries  plus most of the doctors, dentists and nurses into a National Health Service (keeping them all at exactly the same salaries, of course, pending productivity tests and patient surveys, but abolishing the need for fancy status symbols, advertising or marketing, allof which pad costs and do nothing,) abolish all employer-provided insurance which is not provided above and beyond the basic system, declare socialized medicine a fait accompli, raise the minimum wage to reflect both the increased tax burden of the new NHS and the lost value of employer-provided benefits (likely to about $10-an-hour minimum in most states,) have any politician who profits directly or indirectly as a result of legislative action exiled or hanged for abuse of the public trust and if the damn anarcho-libertarians attempt a government shutdown, have them tried and summarily shot for treason. Or better yet, guillotined. The guillotine is more cost-effective, as the executed person's blood and organs can then be used by people waiting on transplant lists.

And then, when this reign of terror ends and the people responsible for instituting the NHS of the US are also guillotined, at least we will know we saved many lives while it lasted and left a better system in place than the one we found.

...Yeah, taking the English Lit class that reads 'The Scarlet Pimpernel' at the same time I took Politics of Public Budgeting and Ethics of Public Administration was a really questionable choice in my college days...
 
2014-01-10 12:39:39 AM

nyseattitude: farkstorm: Most of the people affected already have insurance. You can stay on mommy's & daddy's insurance until you are 26 years old, long enough to finish college and get a full time job. If you can't get full-time employment at 26 years old, you should have paid better attention in high school. Now suffer the consequences of your own failures.

Do you enjoy repeating right wing lies or just lying in general?


How, in any way shape or form, is this not correct? You are why this country fails. Stupid libs, making crap up.
 
2014-01-10 12:39:58 AM
I'm starting to think we're long overdue for a few labor riots.
 
2014-01-10 12:40:21 AM

just_intonation: So if it's such a bad idea, why didn't Obama abolish it in favor of his more affordable plan?


Yes, why don't we live in a perfect universe where every single thing matches the platonic ideal without compromise?

Boy, I'm glad you're asking the hard philosophical questions about life, the universe, and everything.

Maybe in two years, when you turn 9, you'll start to understand.
 
2014-01-10 12:41:41 AM

farkstorm: Most of the people affected already have insurance. You can stay on mommy's & daddy's insurance until you are 26 years old, long enough to finish college and get a full time job. If you can't get full-time employment at 26 years old, you should have paid better attention in high school. Now suffer the consequences of your own failures.


Remember when fast food and other part-time wage-slave jobs were considered the jobs for high-school drop-outs, while a high school diploma could get you a full-time job, and a college degree generally got you on the road to a decent career? Because it wasn't that long ago.
 
2014-01-10 12:43:02 AM
But it's affordable, so why are you complaining?  Everybody can afford their own now and medical debt is a thing of the past!

Oh glorious day!
 
2014-01-10 12:43:37 AM
Just pass single payer and thee shenanigans shall end.
 
2014-01-10 12:44:36 AM
LOL i sometimes forget people don't realize sociopaths run 95% of businesses. BRANDS ARE NOT FRIENDS. They want to hurt you to the edge of death.
 
2014-01-10 12:48:09 AM

Thunderpipes: nyseattitude: farkstorm: Most of the people affected already have insurance. You can stay on mommy's & daddy's insurance until you are 26 years old, long enough to finish college and get a full time job. If you can't get full-time employment at 26 years old, you should have paid better attention in high school. Now suffer the consequences of your own failures.

Do you enjoy repeating right wing lies or just lying in general?

How, in any way shape or form, is this not correct? You are why this country fails. Stupid libs, making crap up.


For one thing, Republicans have gutted the public school system, and high school leaves many students unprepared for college. For another, college is expensive, and many families cannot afford it, even with scholarships.

And again, a high school diploma USED to get you a half-decent full-time job, not a dead-end fast food job that doesn't even pay enough for a roof over your head without government aid; those were largely reserved for dropouts.
 
2014-01-10 12:49:19 AM
They will learn the same lesson that Papa Johns and Applebees did.
 
2014-01-10 12:49:32 AM

just_intonation: The Larch: spunkymunky: Color me unsurprised. Back when I still had a full time job (I left it in June), we were told to start cutting part time and relief staff hours to 28 hours a week, maximum, in order to keep our numbers down for when the healthcare law stuff started. And this was at a not for profit 'Christian' place that provided care for adults with intellectual disabilities.
It's one of several reasons I'm no longer working there. But, from ehat I heard from HR, a lot of businesses would be doing it to save money.

Good.  Employer provided health insurance was always a very, very bad idea.  I'm glad Obamacare is forcing people to realize that.

So if it's such a bad idea, why didn't Obama abolish it in favor of his more affordable plan?


He can't. People want single payer but didn't get it either. This is something people have been fighting for for over 40 years. Just passing the legislation that we have is a historical land mark for the common person. Think of it as "getting your foot in the door".
 
2014-01-10 12:50:03 AM
Business acts rationally to economic/political climate to save money and we're blaming them because why?
 
2014-01-10 12:51:01 AM
I'm a pretty liberal guy, but when did people start looking to jobs at places like Staples as a source of health care?  You went to school or busted your but so you could get a decent job that provided insurance.  Everyone understood that if you wanted health care from Staples or Radio Shack or the neighborhood supermarket then you worked your way up from the register and got into the back office.

I would love health care in every pot but I'm sure every business everywhere though full-time was 40 hours a week.  All of a sudden your being told that it's now 30 hours a week?  If you never intended your 32 hour a week employee to be considered full-time what do you do?

If I'm a part-timer sure, I'm thrilled I qualify but I don't know that business should be expected to just take one for the team.  Hell, they would have children working crazy hours in a dilapidated shed chained to some machine if they could get away with it so how scum bag of a move is this really?

If your a conservative this is great isn't it?  I mean, they are creating jobs right?

Joking, not trolling.
 
2014-01-10 12:51:18 AM

just_intonation: So if it's such a bad idea, why didn't Obama abolish it in favor of his more affordable plan?


Here's a guy who doesn't understand what a Republic is.
 
2014-01-10 12:51:24 AM
i1282.photobucket.com
 
2014-01-10 12:51:32 AM
I understand that the ACA states that 30 hours requires benefits, Staples created a policy that mirrors the law, drawing a line for their part-timers. They wouldn't have done this but for the ACA and a lot of their part-time workers who previously were eligible for benefits won't be any more.

Its a sucky system all around, but we shouldn't be crying that our part time jobs aren't giving us full time benefits.

I myself am a part-time employee at a restaurant and lost my insurance this year because according to the new policy I didn't work enough hours last year. And you know, I'm not mad/upset about. It's a part time job for a reason and I never expected my full time benefits to continue when I went to part time.

I agree that we need a better healthcare system in this country - employee provided is not the solution, and neither is the ACA.
 
2014-01-10 12:51:41 AM

brukmann: LOL i sometimes forget people don't realize sociopaths run 95% of businesses. BRANDS ARE NOT FRIENDS. They want to hurt milk you to the edge of death.


FTFY. They're not there just to cause you pain - they must profit from your pain. Maximum profit for minimum effort. Corporations don't care about you. Corporations, like sociopaths, are quite capable of pretending to care about you to get what they want from you as easily as possible. For example, if putting on a clown face and providing costumed characters will get you to buy unhealthy, overpriced food served to you by underpaid, overworked people that you're almost encouraged to disdain, well, Ronald's happy to take a swing at that.

We're going to see a lot of this, unfortunately, because we're not quite over our corporation worship just yet.
 
2014-01-10 12:51:58 AM
A petition against the move is circulating saying the decision is based on the Affordable Care Act.

Well duh. If you offered businesses a tax break if they made everyone wear red shower caps to work, they'd do that too. If you don't want something to happen, don't incentivize it. That seems to be a difficult concept for some people.
 
2014-01-10 12:52:58 AM

luxup: I'm a pretty liberal guy, but when did people start looking to jobs at places like Staples as a source of health care?


When companies started shipping their jobs to China or slashing benefits in the name of the bottom line.
 
2014-01-10 12:54:01 AM
How about, you pay for your own goddamn healthcare?

Why is this such a friggin issue?

Libs have no stake in the game, they don't pay, so will always vote for Messiahs, and vote for free stuff. Just not sustainable. They breed like rats, they will eventually be too many for working people to support.
 
2014-01-10 12:55:12 AM
It's working as designed.
 
2014-01-10 12:56:33 AM

el_pilgrim: I understand that the ACA states that 30 hours requires benefits, Staples created a policy that mirrors the law, drawing a line for their part-timers. They wouldn't have done this but for the ACA and a lot of their part-time workers who previously were eligible for benefits won't be any more.

Its a sucky system all around, but we shouldn't be crying that our part time jobs aren't giving us full time benefits.

I myself am a part-time employee at a restaurant and lost my insurance this year because according to the new policy I didn't work enough hours last year. And you know, I'm not mad/upset about. It's a part time job for a reason and I never expected my full time benefits to continue when I went to part time.

I agree that we need a better healthcare system in this country - employee provided is not the solution, and neither is the ACA.


Don't blame the ACA - it's not like your employer is prevented from providing you with insurance at any hours.
 
2014-01-10 12:57:05 AM

Thunderpipes: nyseattitude: farkstorm: Most of the people affected already have insurance. You can stay on mommy's & daddy's insurance until you are 26 years old, long enough to finish college and get a full time job. If you can't get full-time employment at 26 years old, you should have paid better attention in high school. Now suffer the consequences of your own failures.

Do you enjoy repeating right wing lies or just lying in general?

How, in any way shape or form, is this not correct? You are why this country fails. Stupid libs, making crap up.


I was covered under my mothers insurance until I was like 21 or 24 the latest.  She worked for the State.  I'm in my 40s now and I grew up in NYC.  When did that change?  Now, if your parents didn't have a good job then it was the emergency room at the city hospital for you.

I am far from a right winger.
 
2014-01-10 01:00:29 AM

cameroncrazy1984: just_intonation: So if it's such a bad idea, why didn't Obama abolish it in favor of his more affordable plan?

Here's a guy who doesn't understand what a Republic is.


Please -- enlighten me.

nyseattitude: He can't. People want single payer but didn't get it either. This is something people have been fighting for for over 40 years. Just passing the legislation that we have is a historical land mark for the common person. Think of it as "getting your foot in the door".


I get that.  My point, though, is that neither Obama *nor* the government is doing what the *people* want.  The people are the ones getting shafted because of it, and the people don't seem to have the balls to do what needs to be done.  You know, this being a Republic and all, and we can elect people that would actually (gasp!) *represent* us.  Perish the thought!
 
2014-01-10 01:02:12 AM
Really? I urge every offended Farker to step up and pay the affected employees the difference in wages they would have gotten had not the US Congress through three decades and now Obama diligently corrupted the position of Employee into the single biggest liability an Employer can have.

None of you complainers have skin in the game. You try and make payroll sometime lugging around the gigantic absurdity of imposed obligations that attain to the title of Employee.

/Obama never has made a payroll. Has no idea what or how
 
2014-01-10 01:02:27 AM

Old enough to know better: I'm starting to think we're long overdue for a few labor riots.


With Ames pitchforks, Georgia Pacific posterboards, and Rubbermaid Sharpies, right?  I guess Coleman can chip in with the torches.
 
2014-01-10 01:02:35 AM

Gyrfalcon: "Loophole"? Hasn't that always been there?


People claimed it would happen from inception, and said it would be a problem.  These people were called racists.
 
2014-01-10 01:04:30 AM

djh0101010: Pretty sure any asshole-ish move by any employer or insurance company for the next $YEARS will be blamed on Obamacare.  It's a wonderful excuse for anyone to use, true or not.


THANKS OBAMACARE
 
2014-01-10 01:04:34 AM

Caffienatedjedi: Something something Obamacare something job creators etc.

Really, just give your damn employees benefits. So what if your 10,000 % profit percentage is suddenly reduced to 9,999 %? Why the fark are people not demanding the heads of the businessmen who make these changes, instead of demanding the heads of the people who are trying to help them(but are then used as an excuse for the businessmen to be worse people)?


If you think businesses with fewer than 500 employees are making 10,000% profit, then your opinion about anything is not worth listening to.  These businesses are being crushed by this tax, AND they have people "demanding their heads."
 
2014-01-10 01:04:40 AM

The Larch: Zombalupagus: Solution: Require insurance for all employees. Suddenly places will want to have people work full time again.

Better solution:  make employer provided health insurance illegal.

I keep reading about how employers want to choose what kind of health insurance their employees are allowed to purchase.   Apparently, some employers are even going to the Supreme Court based on some sort of insane legal theory that their employees are the legal property of their employer and that employers should get to make health care decisions for their employers.

Since it's employer provided health insurance is obviously such a problem, we should get rid of it.


Citation needed
 
2014-01-10 01:05:40 AM

limboslam: No duh. We've been told this was going to happen for 3 damn years, now.


Those were all racists saying that.  Derp and such.
 
2014-01-10 01:05:46 AM

CtrlAltDestroy: emarica: Why is heath care tied to employment in the USA?

Because we have a for-profit healthcare system. So good health isn't seen as a right (which seems to fly in the face of the preamble to our constitution). It's set up to be a money making opportunity. In order to gain the privilege of the opportunity to purchase a chance at maintaining your health you must play a role in making corporations richer by being an employee.

Because that's how the republicans like it. Money reigns supreme and helping people without gaining money from it is wrong. At least as far as they're concerned.

As a social experiment I want the south to secede. That'll give the north to the liberals and the south to the conservatives. Each will have almost complete control over their newfound nations. Then I want to watch what happens over the next 50 years. It would be fascinating.


Look at where people are moving.  The north is shiat and people are leaving in droves.  Look at the last two censuses and the U.S. Congressional apportionment.  People are moving south and west.  Indiana would probably want to join your new South along with Kentucky to make it contiguous.
 
2014-01-10 01:07:47 AM
and?
 
2014-01-10 01:07:50 AM

Thunderpipes: nyseattitude: farkstorm: Most of the people affected already have insurance. You can stay on mommy's & daddy's insurance until you are 26 years old, long enough to finish college and get a full time job. If you can't get full-time employment at 26 years old, you should have paid better attention in high school. Now suffer the consequences of your own failures.

Do you enjoy repeating right wing lies or just lying in general?

How, in any way shape or form, is this not correct? You are why this country fails. Stupid libs, making crap up.


I've seen many of your posts and have seen you identified as racist, bigoted, partisan hack, a liar, delusional, crazy and "possibly dangerous". I don't converse with people like you.
 
2014-01-10 01:08:40 AM

luxup: Thunderpipes: nyseattitude: farkstorm: Most of the people affected already have insurance. You can stay on mommy's & daddy's insurance until you are 26 years old, long enough to finish college and get a full time job. If you can't get full-time employment at 26 years old, you should have paid better attention in high school. Now suffer the consequences of your own failures.

Do you enjoy repeating right wing lies or just lying in general?

How, in any way shape or form, is this not correct? You are why this country fails. Stupid libs, making crap up.

I was covered under my mothers insurance until I was like 21 or 24 the latest.  She worked for the State.  I'm in my 40s now and I grew up in NYC.  When did that change?  Now, if your parents didn't have a good job then it was the emergency room at the city hospital for you.

I am far from a right winger.


Obamacare changed it. All libs can stay on mom and dad's government provided plan until 26. Do you read?
 
2014-01-10 01:10:34 AM

Thunderpipes: How about, you pay for your own goddamn healthcare?

Why is this such a friggin issue?

Libs have no stake in the game, they don't pay, so will always vote for Messiahs, and vote for free stuff. Just not sustainable. They breed like rats, they will eventually be too many for working people to support.


-5/10, way too obvious
 
2014-01-10 01:12:03 AM

Clemkadidlefark: Really? I urge every offended Farker to step up and pay the affected employees the difference in wages they would have gotten had not the US Congress through three decades and now Obama diligently corrupted the position of Employee into the single biggest liability an Employer can have.

None of you complainers have skin in the game. You try and make payroll sometime lugging around the gigantic absurdity of imposed obligations that attain to the title of Employee.

/Obama never has made a payroll. Has no idea what or how


fark those employees! A business can, and should run itself! A corporate is a PERSON! Let the free market take over! Get rid of every employee and let the customer come in to grab what they want off pallets in a back, the customer can pay on the way out where they'll just drop the money in a bucket and take what change is needed! FREE MARKET! FREE MARKET!!
 
2014-01-10 01:12:17 AM
The talking heads are yelling about how 91 million Americans are not working (they didn't say how many are retired or children). It got me to thinking, unemployment is down and these same heads are saying because benefits are running out. So what's the underemployment rate and why isn't that attached to the unemployment rate like the symbiote it is?
 
2014-01-10 01:12:51 AM
Nope, can't imagine why Staples would attempt to torpedo the PPACA

s1.reutersmedia.net
 
2014-01-10 01:14:13 AM

just_intonation: cameroncrazy1984: just_intonation: So if it's such a bad idea, why didn't Obama abolish it in favor of his more affordable plan?

Here's a guy who doesn't understand what a Republic is.

Please -- enlighten me.

nyseattitude: He can't. People want single payer but didn't get it either. This is something people have been fighting for for over 40 years. Just passing the legislation that we have is a historical land mark for the common person. Think of it as "getting your foot in the door".

I get that.  My point, though, is that neither Obama *nor* the government is doing what the *people* want.  The people are the ones getting shafted because of it, and the people don't seem to have the balls to do what needs to be done.  You know, this being a Republic and all, and we can elect people that would actually (gasp!) *represent* us.  Perish the thought!


I agree, but it is a foundation to build on and that is something we haven't had in the past.
 
Displayed 50 of 264 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report