How Low Can Part-Timers’ Hours Go?

Right now, the average number of hours an employee in a retail establishment works each week is 31.4. And a whole lot of Americans work in retail—just slightly over 15 million, according to the latest employment report, out Friday, from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). Not all of them work hours that hover just over 30, of course, but the UC Berkeley Labor Center has calculated that 10.6 percent of workers in retail establishments that employ 100 or more individuals put in between 30 and 36 hours each week. As retail establishments that employ between 50 and 100 workers may well employ a higher percentage of part-timers than their larger counterparts, that figure of 10.6 percent is likely to rise when those additional employees are factored in.

via How Low Can Part-Timers’ Hours Go?.

Part-time Nation: Was the April jobs report really the Obamacare jobs report? | AEIdeas

Let’s see, more part timers and fewer hours worked. Economist Douglas Holtz-Eakin says what we’re all thinking: “This is not good news as it reflects the reliance on part-time work. … the decline in hours and rise of part-time work is troubling in light of anecdotal reports of the impact of the Affordable Care Act.”

Anecdotal reports like this one from the Los Angeles Times: “Consider the city of Long Beach. It is limiting most of its 1,600 part-time employees to fewer than 27 hours a week, on average. City officials say that without cutting payroll hours, new health benefits would cost up to $2 million more next year, and that extra expense would trigger layoffs and cutbacks in city services.”

via Part-time Nation: Was the April jobs report really the Obamacare jobs report? | AEIdeas.

The Arkansas Project — The Legislature’s Plan to Lock Arkansans Into Poverty

The thinkers at Advance Arkansas Institute have released a new paper entitled, “How Medicaid Expansion (and the “Private Option”) Will Lock Its Clients Into Poverty.” The paper examines, among other things, how the healthcare plan being pushed through the legislature will trap the poor:

via The Arkansas Project — The Legislature’s Plan to Lock Arkansans Into Poverty.

Limiting the ACA’s Threats to Small Group Health Insurance Markets by Amy Monahan, Daniel Schwarcz :: SSRN

We identify three threats to small group health insurance markets that may result from the 2014 implementation of certain provisions in the Affordable Care Act (ACA). First, small employers with predominantly low‐income employees may tend to opt out of small group markets because their employees will be better off with subsidized individual coverage. Second, small employers with employees of heterogeneous income levels will have strong incentives to offer coverage that is either “unaffordable” or fails to provide “minimum value” in order to preserve the availability of government subsidies for their low‐income employees. Finally, small employers that continue to offer group plans will face increased incentives to self‐insure those plans, further contracting small group markets and subjecting them to adverse selection. Collectively, these forces may destabilize small group markets and increase the ACA’s fiscal cost. We therefore conclude by offering various reforms aimed at offsetting these risks and preserving the viability of small group markets.

via Limiting the ACA’s Threats to Small Group Health Insurance Markets by Amy Monahan, Daniel Schwarcz :: SSRN.

Lifting the Fog: Navigating the Penalties in the Affordable Care Act by Edward Morse :: SSRN

This article provides an analysis and critique of tax penalties affecting employers and individuals in the Affordable Care Act. After an overview of the Act and its intended role in addressing problems in the health insurance system, the article turns to examine the employer and individual mandates, along with the requirement of minimum essential coverage. It argues that behavioral effects of these provisions are unlikely to achieve the desired policy outcomes. Moreover, the failure to accommodate conscience exemptions for employers and citizens with objections to contraceptive coverage likewise erects a barrier to achieving the desired policy goal of expanded coverage. Finally, the article briefly touches on the problems associated with state exchanges and their implications for employers and citizens seeking health insurance coverage. An appendix shows hypothetical computations affecting an employer decision to shift employees to exchanges rather than to continue employer-provided coverage.

via Lifting the Fog: Navigating the Penalties in the Affordable Care Act by Edward Morse :: SSRN.

Do I look fat in this insurance plan? – Health – AEI

The most extensive study of employer wellness programs several years ago concluded that for every dollar spent on a workplace wellness program, medical costs fell by $3.27 and absenteeism costs fell by another $2.73. However, not all programs are alike or executed well.

Incentives work better if they are more immediate (preferably cash) and large enough to be noticed. Workers respond more to potential losses (higher premiums) than to gains (discounts from higher initial premiums). Simply providing more information and options to improve one’s health doesn’t work very well. Linking employees to interactive, personal engagement with a health coach makes a big difference, too.

via Do I look fat in this insurance plan? – Health – AEI.

Health Law Provision for Small Business Is Delayed – NYTimes.com

Unable to meet tight deadlines in the new health care law, the Obama administration is delaying parts of a program intended to provide affordable health insurance to small businesses and their employees — a major selling point for the health care legislation.

via Health Law Provision for Small Business Is Delayed – NYTimes.com.

How Obamacare Impacts the Self-Employed and Small Business | NFIB Webinar

Wednesday, March 27 at 12 PM ET

Presented by: Kevin Kuhlman, Manager of Legislative Affairs.

Content Level: Intermediate

This webinar is FREE to members and non-members

Countdown has begun for the majority of new taxes, mandates and administrative requirements that begin January 2014 under Obamacare. Small businesses are facing lots of questions on exactly how this law will directly and indirectly impact their business.

This webinar provides instructions on how to prepare for the law and what it means for those with fewer than 50 employees. It also presents an update on the most recent proposed and finalized regulations available and some outstanding questions that remain unanswered. Finally, the webinar presents an inventory and guide to resources NFIB has organized for members.

What the law means to a small business

What the law means to individual and small group market health insurance

What questions to ask insurer, broker, or tax professional

What the law means for small business employees

Suggested communication for employees

via How Obamacare Impacts the Self-Employed and Small Business | NFIB Webinar.

Health Insurance and the Supply of Entrepreneurs: New Evidence from the Affordable Care Act’s Dependent Coverage Mandate by James Bailey :: SSRN

The difficulty and expense of purchasing health insurance as an individual or small business is claimed to be one major barrier to entrepreneurship in the United States. This paper takes advantage of the natural experiment provided by the Affordable Care Act’s dependent coverage mandate, which allowed many 19-25 year-olds to acquire health insurance independently of their employment, to estimate the number of potential entrepreneurs discouraged by the current system of employer-based health insurance. A difference-in-difference strategy finds that the dependent coverage mandate led to a 6-9% increase in self-employment among the treated group. The effect is found to be larger for women and for unincorporated businesses. An instrumental variables strategy finds that those actually receiving health insurance coverage as dependents were drastically more likely to start businesses.

via Health Insurance and the Supply of Entrepreneurs: New Evidence from the Affordable Care Act’s Dependent Coverage Mandate by James Bailey :: SSRN.

The Wage–Health Insurance Trade‐Off and Worker Selection: Evidence from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey 1997 to 2006 by Stéphanie Lluis, Jean Abraham :: SSRN

Key provisions within healthcare reform will likely further increase the cost of employer‐sponsored insurance. Theory suggests that workers pay for their health insurance through a wage offset. We investigate this issue using data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. GMM estimates aimed at correcting for endogenous worker mobility reveal evidence of a trade‐off for workers who are offered health insurance as the only fringe benefit. On the other hand, employees in establishments with a more comprehensive set of benefits enjoy higher wages relative to employees in establishments that offer no benefits. Health also affects the wage–health insurance trade‐off.

via The Wage–Health Insurance Trade‐Off and Worker Selection: Evidence from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey 1997 to 2006 by Stéphanie Lluis, Jean Abraham :: SSRN.