PDA

View Full Version : 49ers and 29ers



Taxcutter
02-25-2013, 12:38 PM
Not the football team.

Are federal regulations foreclosing the possibility of full-time employment for those at the bottom?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324616604578304072420873666.html?m od=WSJ_hp_mostpop_read

quote:
“The law requires firms with 50 or more "full-time equivalent workers" to offer health plans to employees who work more than 30 hours a week.”

“Thousands of employers will face a $40,000 penalty if they dare expand and hire a 50th worker.”

“…the average fast-food restaurant has profits of only about $50,000 to $100,000 and a margin of about 3.5%.”

“Because other federal employment regulations also kick in when a firm crosses the 50 worker threshold, employers are starting to cap payrolls at 49 full-time workers. These firms have come to be known as "49ers."”

“Businesses that hire young and lower-skilled workers are also starting to put a ceiling on the work week of below 30 hours. These firms are the new "29ers."

“Look for fewer 30-35 hour-a-week jobs.”

“…the damage won't be limited to franchisees or restaurants. A 2012 survey of employers by the Mercer consulting firm found that 67% of retail and wholesale firms that don't offer insurance coverage today "are more inclined to change their workforce strategy so that fewer employees meet that [30 hour a week] threshold."”

“Democrats who thought they were doing workers a favor by mandating health coverage can't seem to understand that it doesn't help workers to give them health care if they can't get a full-time job…”

“a local McDonalds has hired employees to operate the cash register or flip burgers for 20 hours a week and then the workers head to the nearby Burger King (http://online.wsj.com/public/quotes/main.html?type=djn&symbol=BKW) BKW -0.67% (http://online.wsj.com/public/quotes/main.html?type=djn&symbol=BKW?mod=inlineTicker) or Wendy's to log another 20 hours. Other employees take the opposite shifts.”

Taxcutter says:
Standing just offstage is Baxter - a $22,000 robot that does not require Werner von Braun to program it. If robots that can making castings into running engines or process skinned beeves into packaged roasts and hamburger are avaialbe , how tough will it be to automate the work of fast food burger flippers and retail? The face of these businesses may change. Fast food joints will look less like restaurants and become big vending machines. That gets around the problem of workers who cannot make change.

Just as government imposed huge costs on the work of more skilled workers with regulations, now that hammer drops on the bottom feeders.

nic34
02-25-2013, 12:58 PM
Most mom and pop stores don't employ over 50 in fast food but offer decent packages anyway. They stay in business longer and have a loyal customer base.

The large companies that use lots of part-time workers are unlikely to pay health benefits anyway. Many of these part-timers are students trying to work thru college, single mothers/fathers, and the government is probably already subsidizing their health care through Medicaid.

Sounds like you're ok with the government taking up the slack multi-billion dollar corporations are skipping out on.

Mainecoons
02-25-2013, 02:01 PM
Most mom and pop stores don't employ over 50 in fast food but offer decent packages anyway. They stay in business longer and have a loyal customer base.

Your proof for this? Or just more of your made up stuff?

nic34
02-25-2013, 02:05 PM
http://www.goodjobsfirst.org/corporate-subsidy-watch/hidden-taxpayer-costs

welcome back old dude!

Mainecoons
02-25-2013, 04:09 PM
Yeah, and that reference provides no support at all to your statement that I quoted. Want to try again, genius?

All it confirms is that some of the employees from some big companies are using government medical payments. It says absolutely nothing that confirms this:


Most mom and pop stores don't employ over 50 in fast food but offer decent packages anyway. They stay in business longer and have a loyal customer base.

When are you going to learn that you aren't snowjobbing a bunch of ignorant leftists like yourself here?

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/10/17/who-pays-better-big-companies-or-small-companies/


Complaints over higher tax brackets aside, one rule holds true when it comes to your paycheck: Bigger is better.

Now, thanks to a recent report out of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (yes,that BLS (http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/10/08/fridays-jobs-report-conspiracy-or-confusion/)), we now know exactly where to look to score the bigger paycheck: at a big company.

Last month, BLS published its latest quarterly report on trends and takeaways in the U.S. labor market, and buried on page 17 is a table that could help you strike paycheck gold in your next job hunt.

Crunching the numbers on "employer costs" at firms with payrolls of anywhere from one to 49, 50 to 99, 100 to 499, and 500 and up, BLS data conclusively show that you get more money for your man-hours when you work at a big company than at a smaller one.


BLS data reveals a vast advantage in the bennies offered by large companies as compared to their smaller, more cash-strapped rivals.

Your average worker at a small firm with under 50 employees gets about $5.82 per hour of her total compensation in the form of non-wage benefits -- things like health insurance, flex pay, pensions, and 401(k) matches. This works out to roughly one-quarter of total compensation.

But the bigger the employer, the greater the proportion of side benefits making up total compensation. It's 28% at companies with 50 to 99 workers ($7.54 per hour), and 30% at companies with 100 to 499 workers ($8.88).

Better an old dude than a young dummy who is terminally gullible.

:rofl:

nic34
02-25-2013, 04:35 PM
http://www.businessinsider.com/the-25-best-small-companies-to-work-for-right-now-2012-10?op=1

Mainecoons
02-25-2013, 06:33 PM
Wow, 25 small companies. Out of how many million?

Keep digging yourself in deeper and deeper. :rofl:

Never mind, I'll look it up for you.

http://www.sba.gov/content/small-business-trends

23 million according to SBA.

:rofl: :rofl:

Deadwood
02-25-2013, 06:49 PM
It stands to reason that larger companies have larger salaries and benefits, as larger companies have more to work with.

As a small businessman for 20 + years I know the value of keeping good staff. But you simply cannot compete especially on benefits. Small businesses get creamed on premiums simply because the pool is so small.

Then again, having worked for small business, international corporations and myself, I know you pay with your soul at the big joints.....

lynn
02-26-2013, 08:00 AM
Wow, 25 small companies. Out of how many million?

Keep digging yourself in deeper and deeper. :rofl:

Never mind, I'll look it up for you.

http://www.sba.gov/content/small-business-trends

23 million according to SBA.

:rofl: :rofl:

That article is not correct and if you noticed at the bottom of the article they cited references to the U.S. of Labor Statistics. The 23 million quoted consists mainly of firms that do not have any employees. The number of businesses in the private sector for less then 50 employees is around 4-5 million and the number of businesses that have more then 50 employees is between 1-2 million.

Taxcutter
02-26-2013, 09:46 AM
ObamaCare only exacerbates the disparity.

Mainecoons
02-26-2013, 12:11 PM
That article is not correct and if you noticed at the bottom of the article they cited references to the U.S. of Labor Statistics. The 23 million quoted consists mainly of firms that do not have any employees. The number of businesses in the private sector for less then 50 employees is around 4-5 million and the number of businesses that have more then 50 employees is between 1-2 million.

OK, so Nic is using a story about 25 businesses out of 5 million to substantiate the claim that small businesses have better benefits.

You want to do the math on that one?

LOL

:rofl: