Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
So you work for say 20 hours a week and they give you health benefits?
Sooo unamerican
I must be living in a cave
Most places just contribute something toward it; formulas are generally based on hours as a percentage of full time. Even as a full time employee, I pay most of my premium. Pre ACA, just being able to get in a group plan used to be a bigger deal than it is now.
I did the same (me and my wife) and the state government had a formula to get rid of us "dead wood" so
we retired and took health plan and benefits with the pension
in our 50s and then worked part-time as we chose. She was a p-t librarian and I was a p-t city planner.
Didn't need the additional benefits so employers were eager to hire us part-time. I retired in 2000 then worked p-t seven years in an enjoyable job.
Quote:
Originally Posted by misterno
Never heard of a part time job paying benefits Never in my entire life of 45 years
Benefits were tied to their retirement - not their p-t time employment.
As he said, he and wife didn't need health care benefits because they already had their health benefits as part of their early retirement package.
He and wife then went back to work p-t - and employers were glad to have them b/c health care benefits didn't need to be part of their compensation.
This would be true of any Medicare-eligible person, as well. I did a few interviews after retirement. It's nice to be able to say health insurance is irrelevant.
That said, back in the day before the recession, where I worked, if one worked 21 hours a week, one received fully-subsidized health insurance. Not sure what they're doing, now.
Wake up and smell the coffee - Starbucks, for one, does offer benefits to PT workers.
I think in some cases so does Wal-Mart.
It's been documented that some managers at Starbucks deliberately make sure that workers aren't given enough hours (needs to be at least 20) to qualify for insurance. I wouldn't count on getting adequate insurance through part-time employment. And let's face it, if a youngish manager has the choice to give more hours to an energetic young peer or someone who is older and slower, no guarantee they will opt for the latter..
It's been documented that some managers at Starbucks deliberately make sure that workers aren't given enough hours (needs to be at least 20) to qualify for insurance. I wouldn't count on getting adequate insurance through part-time employment. And let's face it, if a youngish manager has the choice to give more hours to an energetic young peer or someone who is older and slower, no guarantee they will opt for the latter..
Older doesn't mean slower, I find that some of my younger coworkers move and do things a lot slower than I do, and I have been to enough Starbucks to tell you that some of their young workers don't move as fast as you would think.
We spend about 12K per year for health insurance - we are 62 and retired a few years back. BUT, since I work for myself I still find ways of making income and have not had to go for ss or my IRA yet.
Obviously each case is different, but those who have saved properly (a minority, I know) should have some serious accounts at Vanguard or Fidelity etc. by the time they are 60. That should be 30 years of saving and compounding...
BTW, none of this has anything to do with the ACA.
The costs - per person - for healthcare in the USA were already over 8500 per year in 2006. That means a "normal" family of 4 costs 34K a year. It's another discussion about where that money comes from.....
The basic reason is that we are the only advanced country on the planet with "predatory health care" - where corporations make more money when we are all sicker and more diseased. The profit motive may work well in many instances, but when billions (trillions, actually) are made from sickness there is little reason for the corporations to reign in costs.
We are the only country that allows drugs to be marketed direct to consumers also.
But, again, that's another story. Until we wake up and simply provide basic healthcare as a right most of you are going to have to work hard until later and later. The system ($$$) doesn't care about your quality of life or early retirement. It cares about how much money you spend. Hopefully this will moderate in the future.
Wake up and smell the coffee - Starbucks, for one, does offer benefits to PT workers.
I think in some cases so does Wal-Mart.
Health care is a easy perk to give workers to beat the competition and hire a better candidate and keep them retained. Benefits are often cheaper than continued, recruitment and training from turnover not to mention the retained experienced workers job performance. Now french fry turners is another story. Starbucks nees staff able to converse with their customers. McDonald's not so much. Ever chat with your typical Costco employee? Real easy to do.
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.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
