Jul
11
2013

Wegmans abandons part-time workers to #obamacare exchanges.

This is, by the way, happening now. Not next year.  Not October. Now.

Et tu, Wegmans?

The Rochester-based grocer that has been continually lauded for providing health insurance to its part-time workers will no longer offer that benefit.

I expect that this will probably be reversed pretty quickly, assuming that it hasn’t been already.  But, still, you’re going to love THIS spin:

However, part-time employees may actually benefit from Wegmans’ decision, according to Brian Murphy, a partner at Lawley Benefits Group, an insurance brokerage firm in Buffalo.

“If you have an employee that qualifies for subsidized coverage, they might be better off going with that than a limited part-time benefit,” Murphy said.

That’s because subsidized coverage can have a lower out-of-pocket cost for the insured employee while also providing better benefits than an employer-paid plan.

So, basically: Wegmans is actually doing their part-time workers a favor if they eliminate their existing benefits, because then they’re allowed – well, required – to go onto the exchanges and see if they can find a program that could duplicate their old one!  And they can use somebody’s tax money to help out with that!  Of course, the exchanges aren’t scheduled to be up until October 1st, but once that happens everything should be fine.  As long as the exchanges work properly, on the first try…

[pause]

…Oh, dear.

Moe Lane (crossposted)

PS: For the record: the Republican party knew that the working class was going to get hammered by Obamacare. That’s one major reason why we were and are so adamantly against the dang thing.

Via

 

5 Comments

  • Cameron says:

    OK, help me out with the score card: Is Wegman’s “Racist” or do they “Hate Poor People” for doing this?

    • Jeffstag says:

      You’re obviously not up on your Democrat-speek. ‘Racist’ and ‘Hate Poor People’ mean the same since ‘Poor’ and ‘Black’ mean the same. Poor white people do not exist in general discussions of ‘the poor’. Poor white people are referred to by the general term ‘racists’ or ‘hicks’ (with implied racism). Conversly, rich black people do not exist unless they were once poor and have ‘overcome all odds’. Black people no poor backstory are referred to as ‘unauthentic’ or, if they are Repulicans, by the title of a Harriet Beecher Stowe novel.

      • Cameron says:

        I’m going to need another 1TB external drive to keep track of all of these things.

    • Wombat-socho says:

      I’ll bet money Wegman’s doesn’t get hammered by the press since all the Cool People shop there, unlike those smelly proles who go to Walmart.

  • […] Moe Lane points out that this boomerangs against workers who are always told they will benefit by voting for Democrats. But even if you stipulate (as I do not) that Democrats care more about “working families,” this does not necessarily translate to Democrat policies that actually benefit the people about whom Democrats care. Have none of these people ever read Mises, Hayek, Friedman, Sowell? […]

RSS feed for comments on this post.


Site by Neil Stevens | Theme by TheBuckmaker.com