U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-05-2012, 06:07 AM
 
Location: 500 miles from home
9,436 posts, read 4,304,685 times
Reputation: 8452
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Doug Ross @ Journal: EXCLUSIVE-RED ALERT: Kroger to Slash Hourly Workers to Avoid Obamacare Penalties

Last week we found out that, beginning in January, any employee who is not full-time at that point, will be limited to 28 hours per week and all new hires will be subject to the same policy.
Hmmm. Sounds like Wal-Mart to me. Nothing new ~ though it's nice they think they have a convenient scapegoat.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-05-2012, 06:14 AM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
73,363 posts, read 33,555,639 times
Reputation: 17427
It's not just Kroger. There's some big names in this article.
Over 30 hours and they have to offer qualifying insurance or pay a penalty. Either way the company has to pay.
So just lower hours and avoid the entire mess.

Health-Care Law Spurs a Shift to Part-Time Workers - WSJ.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2012, 07:18 AM
 
Location: Limbo
4,879 posts, read 2,366,929 times
Reputation: 4665
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
But this isnt to discuss the company you work for, this is to discuss Krogers, who used to have a bunch of full time employees, now being FORCED to reduce them because of Obama.
Just pointing out this isn't the first time this has happened. I doubt President Obama was the reason.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2012, 07:20 AM
 
Location: fredericktown,ohio
5,062 posts, read 1,731,634 times
Reputation: 1775
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoJiveMan View Post
The largest employer, wallyworld will probably cut some hours of present employees, and hire more 15-20 hour a week workers.
And here we are again back to action-reaction. Not only Walmart but a bunch of employers will hire more workers at PT of less then 30 hours. And the reaction to this will be the UE rate will drop and Obama/Romney will pat their selves on the back and claim their jobs program is working Even the Labor dept? is predicting 12 million jobs being created in the next four years. I wonder if they took into account the extra employees that Obamacare will create?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2012, 07:38 AM
 
4,029 posts, read 1,574,048 times
Reputation: 2096
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobtn View Post
Other grocers did this 30 years ago. Kroger is losing market share to Wal Mart throughout the south, as the majority of WMs are now superstores. 2 years before Obamacare, WM cut into Krogers here so bad, they stopped being open 24 hours.

Wal Mart beats their prices; Publix has a much better deli.
I agree with this. I live in the SE as well and Publix has a better deli and bakery IMO, but I do still primarily shop at Kroger.

What they are doing is nothing new for any major grocer in the country. They are trying to compete with Walmart. Here, Publix has a niche market as they are known as the "high quality" grocer. Kroger is actually getting better IMO. I'm a crazy coupon lady so know my way around all the local grocery stores. Walmart is actually the worse for coupons so I spend more time at Publix and Kroger, metro Atlanta's top grocers other than Walmart, more than any other stores and in that order. I get more from Kroger than Publix though as I go to Publix for BOGO sales.

But I have had a few relatives who worked at Kroger. I worked for them when I was a teenager as a bagger and I never worked more than 20 hours per week and my sister didn't work more than 25-30 hours per week either and she just stopped working there a couple weeks ago. Not getting enough hours was her primary complaint about working there as she had to have a 2nd part time job to make ends meet.

Many employers slash hours for their workers so they don't have to offer them health insurance, that is what happens when you make healthcare something that is provided by employers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2012, 07:40 AM
Status: "Give an idiot a keyboard and there's no hiding the fact." (set 6 days ago)
 
2,631 posts, read 1,040,179 times
Reputation: 944
What Mircea said is spot on. It's business and anytime business is threatened and or mandated something from government, business adjusts. Since employees are more often than not the biggest cost to a business, they most often suffer the consequences of a business adjusting to government regulation, intervention or mandate. Like physics and economics, there is the law of unintended consequences.

Last edited by Ludja; 11-05-2012 at 04:05 PM.. Reason: deleted quoted post
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2012, 07:49 AM
Status: "From Now On..He Will Be Called Dingle Barry" (set 8 days ago)
 
22,432 posts, read 9,579,776 times
Reputation: 8232
Quote:
Originally Posted by MobileVisitor09 View Post
This practice, has happened, is happening, and will happen in the future, with our without Obamacare. I work with the urban poor, if you don't think restaurants, fast food chains, retail stores, generally speaking, the entire service industry, doesn't cap part-time workers at x hours per week to avoid paying them appropriate benefits, you are sorely mistaken.

As others mentioned, this would be a reason not to support this type of store, regardless. It's poor business practice to 'profit' off of the backs of your hard-working employees.

Obamacare would provide federal healthcare subsidies for the many part-time employees right now who are unable to receive benefits from their employers who have practiced this type of business prior to the birth of Obamacare.

Here's an article from the WSJ, not biased to one side, that provides more detail about the program, it's pros, cons, and, why something needs to be done to fix the present dysfunctional state of our healthcare system:

David Gamage: ObamaCare's Costs to the Working Class - WSJ.com
Uhhhh....this is the essence of business. This statement is disgustingly ignorant.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2012, 07:51 AM
Status: "Give an idiot a keyboard and there's no hiding the fact." (set 6 days ago)
 
2,631 posts, read 1,040,179 times
Reputation: 944
As I said in another post. it is the law of unintended consequences. Often, when a 'decision' is made centrally, (federal government in this instance), the recipients, (businesses in this instance), adjust to the central decision, creating consequences that those "in charge" did not anticipate.

Low margin, low employee cost, business model companies, , service industry, are adpating to the ACA, by lowering their employee costs even more. The unintended consequence is to further suppress income and or benefit costs. Or, was it an unintended consequence?

Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
No, the Kroger limit is people making something now making less of something.

It's going on in other businesses as well. More p/t workers hired and those already working having their hours capped.

The rules for this full time status change for Obamacare have the IRS looking back one year from 2014 for employee status.

IMO Obamacare has failed. Instead of more full time workers qualifying for the mandated insurance which is what Obamacare wanted, we see more people working less hours and will be dependent on the government pools for subsidized insurance.

So, instead of more people insured, we're going to see more people not insured and working less hours.

I wonder if the CBO will take this into account and rework their numbers for how much this will cost.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2012, 08:07 AM
Status: "From Now On..He Will Be Called Dingle Barry" (set 8 days ago)
 
22,432 posts, read 9,579,776 times
Reputation: 8232
Quote:
Originally Posted by earthlyfather View Post
As I said in another post. it is the law of unintended consequences. Often, when a 'decision' is made centrally, (federal government in this instance), the recipients, (businesses in this instance), adjust to the central decision, creating consequences that those "in charge" did not anticipate.

Low margin, low employee cost, business model companies, , service industry, are adpating to the ACA, by lowering their employee costs even more. The unintended consequence is to further suppress income and or benefit costs. Or, was it an unintended consequence?
Exactly. One poster mentioned that Kroger had a net profit of $279M. Considering the size and scope of Kroger's business, that amount is a pittance. (I'm not surprised that anti-capitalism liberals would not understand this) The bottom line is that the grocery business is a low margin industry. There's hardly any profit in the aisles of a grocery store. They make their money on the perimeter(meat/produce/seafood/deli). The ACA did nothing good for those types of businesses, and in turn did nothing good for their employees.

Liberals and Democrats have never been known for extraordinary foresight. NEVER.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2012, 08:27 AM
Status: "Summertime Sadness" (set 10 days ago)
 
Location: Baltimore, MD / NY
486 posts, read 297,745 times
Reputation: 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
Uhhhh....this is the essence of business. This statement is disgustingly ignorant.
Yes, silly me. Everyone wants to go into business so they can be in the red. Really?

It's the essence, or myopic focus, of some businessmen and women. Not all. You can still earn a hefty profit while treating your employees properly. As I listed earlier, there are plenty of high profit grossing companies that supply their service-industry workers (even those working PT) with basic healthcare as part of their compensation package. They are able to do it, because they choose to do it and make it work. Companies such as Krogers, or Walmart, take an alternative route, and, via this type of business practice, most lose (including the tax payer), while only a few at the top win.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top