Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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 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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-30-2010, 01:11 PM
 
5,915 posts, read 4,813,813 times
Reputation: 1398

Advertisements

The fast-food giant reportedly told federal regulators it would be “economically prohibitive”
for its insurance carriers to continue to cover hourly workers unless it gets a waiver on the 80%
requirement. It added that having “to drop our current mini-med offering would represent a huge
disruption to our 29,500 participants."

Unless regulators waive a requirement of the health-care overhaul, McDonald’s
has warned federal regulators it could drop its health insurance plan for almost 30,000 hourly workers,
The Wall Street Journal
reported.

This new health insurance law sucks big time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-30-2010, 01:16 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,297 posts, read 120,796,716 times
Reputation: 35920
Uh, not so fast.

McDonald's Threatens To Cut Skimpy Health Plans : Shots - Health News Blog : NPR

Update: Steve Russell, Senior Vice President and Chief People Officer at McDonald's USA released a statement last night that says, in part:

Media reports stating that we plan to drop health care coverage for our employees are completely false...McDonald's is committed to providing competitive pay and benefits, and the strongest employment opportunities possible.


It should be noted that McDonald's lifetime caps start at $2000, the price of one ER visit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2010, 01:17 PM
 
Location: Spokane via Sydney,Australia
6,612 posts, read 12,842,677 times
Reputation: 3132
It isn't called MINI med for no reason
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2010, 01:24 PM
 
3,562 posts, read 5,228,739 times
Reputation: 1861
You do realize that McDonalds has a history of hiring part time to avoid benefits, right?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2010, 01:30 PM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,882 posts, read 33,274,487 times
Reputation: 4269
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pandamonium View Post
You do realize that McDonalds has a history of hiring part time to avoid benefits, right?
Oh yeah, McDonalds is the bad guy here. What will you say when other large and small employers declare the fine for not maintaining their plans as enough less than maintaining their present plans? Will that be the bad guys being the employers or maybe the Congress that failed to read the Andy Stern bill to see what was in it? I say the latter, for sure.

When health care premiums rise a low of 12% in the next year I don' think many employers are going to be able to keep up. Oh well, when those whose employers manage to keep paying for them start paying income taxes on the money spent by the employers maybe the government can keep us afloat.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2010, 01:30 PM
 
Location: Fuquay-Varina
4,003 posts, read 10,843,375 times
Reputation: 3303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pandamonium View Post
You do realize that McDonalds has a history of hiring part time to avoid benefits, right?
McDonalds is a fast food restaurant that employs part time school aged people, as does every other fast food restaurant. It is not typically a career path. If you are in a career path you would be in management/training which I am certain is full time with benefits. Their business model is not to avoid insurance for most of its employees, it is basic entry level part time work flipping burgers and running cash registers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2010, 01:31 PM
 
Location: Staten Island, NY
6,476 posts, read 7,324,646 times
Reputation: 7026
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pandamonium View Post
You do realize that McDonalds has a history of hiring part time to avoid benefits, right?
And I see nothing wrong with that what so ever.
The whole idea behind government enforced mandated coverage is to explode costs so employers that offer health insurance as a benefit will be tempted (if not forced) to drop coverage. That's what'll make everyone flock to government run (aka socialized, single-payer) health care. It's creeping socialism by stealth. Nothing more and nothing else.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2010, 01:32 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,297 posts, read 120,796,716 times
Reputation: 35920
Quote:
Originally Posted by sacredgrooves View Post
McDonalds is a fast food restaurant that employs part time school aged people, as does every other fast food restaurant. It is not typically a career path. If you are in a career path you would be in management/training which I am certain is full time with benefits. Their business model is not to avoid insurance for most of its employees, it is basic entry level part time work flipping burgers and running cash registers.
With the economy like it is now, it may be the only job available to someone. Should they not get insurance because it's not a "career path"?

If you're certain of the "full time with benefits" for managers, post a link.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2010, 01:33 PM
 
8,762 posts, read 11,576,037 times
Reputation: 3398
Where is Calvinist? His/her/its solution was for everyone to get insurance working at a place for 9 an hour.

I worked at fast food for 4 years. Never did they offer it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2010, 01:33 PM
 
14,247 posts, read 17,927,270 times
Reputation: 13807
Quote:
Originally Posted by roysoldboy View Post
Oh yeah, McDonalds is the bad guy here. What will you say when other large and small employers declare the fine for not maintaining their plans as enough less than maintaining their present plans? Will that be the bad guys being the employers or maybe the Congress that failed to read the Andy Stern bill to see what was in it? I say the latter, for sure.

When health care premiums rise a low of 12% in the next year I don' think many employers are going to be able to keep up. Oh well, when those whose employers manage to keep paying for them start paying income taxes on the money spent by the employers maybe the government can keep us afloat.
This has been going on for 50 years. The average annual; rise in health care costs over that period even after adjusting for inflation is 4% to 8%. There was always going to come a point when employers said enough. It was just a question of when.

Given that 56% of Americans get their health insurance via employers, the political consequences are enormous.
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 $104,000 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. The time now is 12:42 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top