» SPECIAL REPORT
ANALYZE THE WORKFORCE NEW FEDERAL EMPLOYER REQUIREMENTS TO OFFER HEALTHCARE COVERAGE HAVE RAMIFICATIONS FOR BUSINESSES, SCHOOLS ALIKE
WRITTEN BY SYLVIA ARROYO B
usinesses across the country, no matter the industry, have Jan. 1, 2014, on their minds. Tat’s when larger employers, including school districts, may face penalties if they don’t offer affordable health benefits to part-time employees
who work 30 or more hours under Obamacare. Te mandate is one of a number of provisions, some of which
have already kicked in since President Obama signed into law the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPAC) and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, the latter which made some adjustments to the former, in March 2010. Te new mandate applies to business with 50 or more employees. According to a study conducted in February by the UC Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education, millions of part-time workers may see their hours reduced as a result of the mandate. Te study concluded that some 2.3 million workers, about 1.8 percent of the workforce, would be at greatest risk. Tese people presently don’t have insurance through their employer, work between 30 and 36 hours per week and earn incomes 400 percent below the federal poverty line for businesses with 100 or more employees. Te purpose of the study was to determine an exact number of what has until now been an anecdotally based trend of employers threatening to cut hours as a result of the law. From retail to education, already employers are looking at reduc-
ing part-time hours or are awaiting analysis reports on their health- care questions from their insurance brokers. At school districts, some department heads, including those in transportation, are being told to make 29 hours the maximum part-timers can work in order to meet budgetary confinements. Tere’s much debate about how large businesses will react to the
requirement, but in the meantime, managers such as transportation directors can use this time to look at the big picture before adhering to any type of reduction or change to policies and procedures. “Now is the time to begin analyzing your workforce,” advised
Mark Hinson, chief human resources officer at Adams 12 Five Star Schools in Tornton, Colo. “How do I staff and do so within my existing budget? Tat’s the talk they need to have with their budget and finance office. Tey’ve got to take the lead and identify those pockets of employees who need that part-time threshold.” Hinson also said transportation directors must ask themselves to what extent they are willing to take on some of the additional costs
32 School Transportation News June 2013
of insuring more drivers, for example. “It’s a cost benefit analysis versus a robust part-time staff to meet
your staffing needs,” he added. Te balance is whether or not managers are willing to keep cer-
tain part-timers at 30 or more hours knowing that they may have an additional cost for healthcare. Hinson said these employees could be part-timers who are well trained and certified, and highly skilled. In trying to save money, a business may cut their part-timers’
hours, but then it may have to supplement the lost manpower with new part-timers who work less than 30 hours, but these new hires come with associated costs for training at the very least. It’s a complicated decision, with benefits and drawbacks, and
transportation directors such as Launi Schmutz-Harden at Wash- ington County (Utah) School District are already analyzing their part-time staff, particularly bus drivers used for long-trip athletic events. Te new law requires a measurement period during which the hours of employees must be tracked to determine who meets the eligibility requirements. “It’s a long process, but what’s good about it is it gives you time
to go back and see what you did during that time,” she said. “So, for example, for variable-hour employees that we can’t determine what they’re going to do or not, we have that measurement period to make a conclusion.” Schmutz-Harden added that transportation directors should find out what the measurement period is at their facility. She also noted that this non-funded mandate comes at a chal- lenging time for school districts. Hinson agreed, but he pointed out that though the objective of the law is to insure more people in this country, many different real costs must be weighed. “What’s tough for districts is we’re coming out of an economic
environment that really tested us and included a lot of cutbacks, which have caused negative impacts including to transportation,” he said. “But before we panic and look for a solution, let’s make sure we determine what the problem is. We first need to identify if we have a problem, and then start doing some estimates of those costs versus hiring and training.”
Editor’s note: For details on the UC Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education study, including a breakdown of part-timers who might be affected by the Jan. 1, 2014, mandate, visit
www.stnonline.com/go/2k.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60