I use temps in some of my locations, and check out the notice I got from the agency.
The Patient Protection Affordable Care Act (ACA) legislation will result in additional costs for most, if not all, US employers. Moreover, as the employer responsible for ACA compliance with respect to our talent, our clients can be assured that Randstad will comply with the ACA’s employer mandate and be responsible for any claims or liabilities that may arise from such obligation. As a result of careful and detailed cost modeling, effective January 1, 2015, you will see a $0.29 per talent billable hour ACA fee on your invoices to cover the expenses associated with offering and providing ACA compliant coverage.
They aren’t. They probably already provide it to some people. This is the cost they figured for anybody working 32 hours or more for them that isn’t already covered by their plan or a spouse’s.
Part of the irs rules state that staffing agencies need to show a cost difference between temps who have coverage and temps who don’t. Honestly they could of just clarified that the staffing agency is the common law employer.
they only should be charging you the additional for those temps who take their coverage.
they only should be charging you the additional for those temps who take their coverage.
Why? So he could then specify that he did not want them to provide any temps who have elected coverage and, thus, come with the additional charge? That would be discriminating on the basis of ACA election, which is illegal per the ACA.
Can I get an answer from the conservative republican scum bags as to what their solution is to help Americans who could not afford to see a doctor before that ACA was implemented? So far, the only thing I have heard from the anus of the republican party is this; “If you are sick and you can’t afford to see a doctor, just fuck off and die already because we are not going to do a god damn thing to help you.”
How can these cold blooded republican pieces of shit sleep at night? I will also add that every last scum bag republican get free health care from the governemnt thats paid for by us the tax payer! These hypocritical republican bastards enjoy free government health care, but apparently they don’t think that government health care is OK for the rest of us. Republicans are as worthless as the dog poop in front of my house.
I know your more well versed in this then me but it states:
"an offer of coverage is treated as made on behalf of a client employer only if the fee the client employer would pay to the staffing firm for an employee enrolled in health coverage under the plan is higher than the fee the client employer would pay to the staffing firm for the same employee if the employee did not enroll in health coverage under the plan".
Can I get an answer from the conservative republican scum bags as to what their solution is to help Americans who could not afford to see a doctor before that ACA was implemented?
They still cannot. If you did not have your head so firmly planted up your ass, you could see that.
You cannot, cannot, cannot provide universal or affordable health care by mandating universal health insurance. Even an idiot should be able to understand that. Or not …
Maybe I misunderstood what you were suggesting. But, I thought you were saying Forge should only be charged the $0.29 (or whatever it was) per hour for those temps who have elected coverage. If that were the case, Forge could demand the agency only send temps who did not elect coverage (thus, did not carry the $0.29). That would be discriminatory on the basis of election and is prohibited by the ACA. Likewise, the agency cannot charge a premium only for those who elect coverage b/c again, that is discriminatory. So, if the agency is going to assess a surcharge, they must assess it on every temp.
That is actually what I was thinking, but I haven’t looked at it in a while, I let my company’s lawyers figure this stuff out. I just make sure our people who work the 30hrs get offered coverage.
Either way, I think we can both agree how messed up the employer mandate is. Its a generalized law being implemented into a very complex business world.
All due respect, JSA (and I have plenty of it for you), but that’s not what Mr. Winkle was asking, and I think you know that.
I’m not in the US, and I can see that ACA is a train wreck. Fine, all good, no-one’s arguing that.
What he asked is what is a better solution to ensure everyone can afford healthcare? So that poor people don’t have to get asked for their credit card details to get picked up by an ambulance? So that people aren’t deciding ‘No, I won’t go to the hospital - I can’t afford it’.
How do fiscal conservatives solve that? Or do they not, and just say ‘Doctors are for people with money. Let the rest of them eat cake.’
All due respect, JSA (and I have plenty of it for you), but that’s not what Mr. Winkle was asking, and I think you know that.
I’m not in the US, and I can see that ACA is a train wreck. Fine, all good, no-one’s arguing that.
What he asked is what is a better solution to ensure everyone can afford healthcare? So that poor people don’t have to get asked for their credit card details to get picked up by an ambulance? So that people aren’t deciding ‘No, I won’t go to the hospital - I can’t afford it’.
How do fiscal conservatives solve that? Or do they not, and just say ‘Doctors are for people with money. Let the rest of them eat cake.’
Easy. Go back to the way we used to pay for health care. Back in the day, you saw the doc for routine treatment, you paid at the end of the visit. Just like most people do at the dentist. Just like most people do at the eye doctor. Just like our parents used to do for doctor visits. The primary reason for the increase in health care costs is – health insurance companies. Further empowering them is purely asinine and morally corrupt.
All due respect, JSA (and I have plenty of it for you), but that’s not what Mr. Winkle was asking, and I think you know that.
I’m not in the US, and I can see that ACA is a train wreck. Fine, all good, no-one’s arguing that.
What he asked is what is a better solution to ensure everyone can afford healthcare? So that poor people don’t have to get asked for their credit card details to get picked up by an ambulance? So that people aren’t deciding ‘No, I won’t go to the hospital - I can’t afford it’.
How do fiscal conservatives solve that? Or do they not, and just say ‘Doctors are for people with money. Let the rest of them eat cake.’
Easy. Go back to the way we used to pay for health care. Back in the day, you saw the doc for routine treatment, you paid at the end of the visit. Just like most people do at the dentist. Just like most people do at the eye doctor. Just like our parents used to do for doctor visits. The primary reason for the increase in health care costs is – health insurance companies. Further empowering them is purely asinine and morally corrupt.
This, and stop mandating what insurance companies provide. If I want a company to only cover me for visits that would likely cost 10K or more, that should be my choice. If I want coverage that includes penis reduction surgery, well that is my choice.
Not a single cost principal addressed. I have stated this repeatedly, it basically added a bunch of services and a bunch of people to the pool. It did little in the way of proven market transactions to address the problem like people using emergency rooms for basic care (colds, pneumonia, dehydration) could be triaged at entrance and sent to a cheaper clinic next door or allowing professionals below doctor skill to handle casts, sutures, etc. My son was dehydrated, we took him to the hospital. For an IV and x-ray (why I don’t know), and a doctor sign off it cost 750 after insurance.
All due respect, JSA (and I have plenty of it for you), but that’s not what Mr. Winkle was asking, and I think you know that.
I’m not in the US, and I can see that ACA is a train wreck. Fine, all good, no-one’s arguing that.
What he asked is what is a better solution to ensure everyone can afford healthcare? So that poor people don’t have to get asked for their credit card details to get picked up by an ambulance? So that people aren’t deciding ‘No, I won’t go to the hospital - I can’t afford it’.
How do fiscal conservatives solve that? Or do they not, and just say ‘Doctors are for people with money. Let the rest of them eat cake.’
Easy. Go back to the way we used to pay for health care. Back in the day, you saw the doc for routine treatment, you paid at the end of the visit. Just like most people do at the dentist. Just like most people do at the eye doctor. Just like our parents used to do for doctor visits. The primary reason for the increase in health care costs is – health insurance companies. Further empowering them is purely asinine and morally corrupt.
Okay. I get that. What if you don’t have the money to pay the doctor for routine treatment? And how do you allow for emergency treatment?
I ask this as a lucky individual, paying a 2% Medicare levy on taxable income in Australia which means that when I had a bike crash last year and was ambulanced to emergency, head and shoulder X-ray (nothing serious thankfully), my out-of-pocket was $0.00.
My daughter is a high-level water polo player. We had to get a referral from our local GP, and an X-ray and MRI for a knee problem. Out of pocket? $0.00.
You always need a social safety net and always will. There was no reason to jump in bed with insurance companies and destroy the very system that worked for the vast majority of people to get there. It would have been easy to expand Medicaid while implementing the changes I suggested. Once the costs go down, you continue that social safety net at a vastly reduced cost. But, instead, what Team Donkey did was morally, ethically, and financially corrupt and did nothing to make healthcare affordable.
You always need a social safety net and always will. There was no reason to jump in bed with insurance companies and destroy the very system that worked for the vast majority of people to get there. It would have been easy to expand Medicaid while implementing the changes I suggested. Once the costs go down, you continue that social safety net at a vastly reduced cost. But, instead, what Team Donkey did was morally, ethically, and financially corrupt and did nothing to make healthcare affordable.
Yeah, I’ve been on board with this type of strategy for years. The progression from catastrophe insurance to full-blown employer-based HMO’s is what’s bent the cost curve, we need to revert to individuals paying out of pocket for routine visits and minor procedures and leave the insurance to costly operations/drugs/hospital stays. More accountability from individuals in shopping for coverage and searching for doctors, it’s the only way to curb rising costs. Provide credits to low-income families to help cover the routine stuff, and as the cost curve is bent downward they can also afford the catastrophe insurance.
And this idea, proffered by Mr. Winkle, that the Pubs haven’t offered alternatives, is complete horseshit. There have been dozens, hundreds even, he just chooses to ignore it. While I don’t agree with this plan here’s one example, from Ed Gillespie in today’s NYT…Gillespie nearly took down a popular incumbent in Virginia with this repeal-and-replace plan: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/21/opinion/ed-gillespie-an-obamacare-do-over.html?_r=0
We had our meeting last night to decide what insurance to get for the company. Same plan went up 13% this year which is actually better than the last couple years. We decided to make the employees pay a portion (only 10%) for the first time ever.
One of my partners actually said “all our employees voted for Obama so they should have to deal with the consequences.”