Obamacare worries- trying to be responsible

musicbaby

I'm trying to make a responsible decision on when to have our 2nd child.  We currently have a 2 year old and are eager to have our second but the whole unknown about Obamacare has been concerning.  Ideally we would like to get pregnant in November/December and have the baby in the late summer/early fall.  I'm not sure when obamacare takes effect but I know it's sometime soon/possibly start of the new year which would be during the pregnancy.    I currently have health insurance through my employer, but I wouldn't consider my benefits through work to be stable.  They've tried to switch insurances on us twice in 1 year in order to save money.     So I just don't know what to do. If I should do the responsible thing and wait till the whole insurance/obamacare thing settles and I have a better understanding of what to expect insurance wise, which would mean waiting another year.  Or if we should just go for it and risk a lot of insurance stress during the pregnancy.   Help?

Mysterious_wife

I can't take anyone serious who says "Obamacare."

Mysterious_wife

And apparently you have no clue who the healthcare act will work or what changes have recently passed.

musicbaby

I don't mean to be disrespectful with the use of the word i'm just clueless and am looking for answers.  Please be friendly 

Kristinmo

You clearly don't understand anything about "Obamacare" or how your insurance through your employer works.

Please ask someone in your HR department for help.  The Affordable Care Act will not effect your employer's plan.

Mysterious_wife

musicbaby said:

I don't mean to be disrespectful with the use of the word i'm just clueless and am looking for answers.  Please be friendly 

That was me being friendly.

ks3pink

I get what you are saying but have no advice. I know my moms company's insurance is dropping some of the high risk employees itself this fall before its stuck with them. It's all the insurance provider, not the company.

Ducktale

GhostMonkey said:

ks3pink said:

I get what you are saying but have no advice. I know my moms company's insurance is dropping some of the high risk employees itself this fall before its stuck with them. It's all the insurance provider, not the company.

Wrong. That is completely on the company and they are assholes for doing that. The employer chooses the plan they wish to offer. They are pathetic pieces of shit for what they are doing (and they can't outright drop them- they are going to significantly alter the plan where it really doesn't benefit high risk employees. You cannot be denied group coverage). You mom works for bad people and what they are doing is going to completely undermine what the ACA is attempting to accomplish. Your mom's coworkers should take that bullshit to the media.

I don't know why it shocks me that people are such pieces of shit, but it does.

I used to work for an insurance company, and it is the company's choice what to cover. We offered lots of packages for companies to take as well as "a la carte" options. The company chooses what they want to cover. Of course, the more comprehensive/better options cost the company more. And the costs, of course, increase, so companies choose to reduce their coverage. But it is the company's choice. Also agree that what the company is doing is terrible, and also agree, it is illegal to drop people from a group plan like you described. Someone has their facts wrong. To the OP, Your company may chose to drop coverage, it's always a possibility. If the benefits are "not stable" then yes, of course they could choose to drop. If it were me and I worked for a company I which I could not rely on having health insurance, then I would not have a baby until I had alternative coverage or a different job. But having good health insurance was on my list of requirements before I would consider TTC.

ks3pink

Ducktale said:

GhostMonkey said:

ks3pink said:

I get what you are saying but have no advice. I know my moms company's insurance is dropping some of the high risk employees itself this fall before its stuck with them. It's all the insurance provider, not the company.

Wrong. That is completely on the company and they are assholes for doing that. The employer chooses the plan they wish to offer. They are pathetic pieces of shit for what they are doing (and they can't outright drop them- they are going to significantly alter the plan where it really doesn't benefit high risk employees. You cannot be denied group coverage). You mom works for bad people and what they are doing is going to completely undermine what the ACA is attempting to accomplish. Your mom's coworkers should take that bullshit to the media.

I don't know why it shocks me that people are such pieces of shit, but it does.

I used to work for an insurance company, and it is the company's choice what to cover. We offered lots of packages for companies to take as well as "a la carte" options. The company chooses what they want to cover. Of course, the more comprehensive/better options cost the company more. And the costs, of course, increase, so companies choose to reduce their coverage. But it is the company's choice.

Also agree that what the company is doing is terrible, and also agree, it is illegal to drop people from a group plan like you described. Someone has their facts wrong.

To the OP, Your company may chose to drop coverage, it's always a possibility. If the benefits are "not stable" then yes, of course they could choose to drop. If it were me and I worked for a company
I which I could not rely on having health insurance, then I would not have a baby until I had alternative coverage or a different job. But having good health insurance was on my list of requirements before I would consider TTC.


Their employees have individual policies that the company gives them money to pay because no insurance company would cover the group because of ages and sickness. My grandad owns the company and just had open heart surgery himself. Don't call names when you have no idea what you are talking about. This new health care act is going to be much worse on the people it is supposed to help and anyone who forgot see that isn't looking through very clear lenses.

Twinkie0612

Mysterious_wife said:

I can't take anyone serious who says "Obamacare."

Ha. Today I made a comment about the health care industry being screwed up (referring to the outrageous price of medical care versus the insurance negotiated rates) and he asked me if I thought "Obamacare" was going to make things better. I had to correct him, letting him know it was called the affordable care act and while I don't think it will fix every problem, it is a step in the right direction.

DebateThis

fredalina said:

fredalina said:

hischelseababy said:

Some of this depends on whether the employees are FT or PT. There is still no obligation to cover PT employees.

My teenage brother works at a fast food place. There is a huge issue going on because the main managers are planning on hiring more employees and cutting everybody's hours so that only managers will work full time and therefore be the only ones getting insurance.

This isn't new. A lot of places have done this for a long time. Not that it's right, but that has nothing to do with the changes in healthcare.

It is new, because FT used to be defined as 40 hours a week, but now it's defined as 30. It isn't "new" but it is much stricter.

Not so much. Every employer I have ever had has used 30.

The law used 40 before. It's been a while since I was hourly but the two employers I remember who offered insurance to full timers used 40 and one used 50 because it was a seasonal job and apparently the old law had a clause for seasonal workers being defined as "full time" over 50 hours. Maybe some used 30 but the minimum by law was 40, now 30.

Federal Labor Standards Act still doesn't define full vs part time: https://www.dol.gov/elaws/faq/esa/flsa/014.htm and the IRS defines it differently and so does the ACA. This, IMO, isn't necessarily an ACA issue so much as it is a need for streamlining federal definitions since several different regulatory and compliance agencies all have different interpretations.

SmileyJay

I guess I don't understand. It seems like you haven't done much homework on the Affordable Care Act ("ObamaCare"). 

Basically you are employed full time and receive health benefits. New laws, which won't affect your employer for several years, would make it illegal for them not to offer you insurance if you are full time. But they do offer you insurance, so that doesn't matter. If you quit working then you could (and eventually would be forced to, or pay a fee otherwise) pay a premium for a healthcare plan.

Your issue has nothing to do with the ACA, but that your Employer offers shoddy benefits and changes them frequently. My suggestion would be to either find a new employer with better benefits, not have a baby if you can't afford it with your current benefits, or have a baby if you can afford it and trust your current healthcare. 

I'm not sure what sort of answer you are looking for. I hope this helps. 

SmileyJay

Currently your employer does not have a legal obligation to give you health coverage. I don't know why they would drop your healthcare after they are required to give it to you. Some companies anticipate making hour cuts so that they can escape paying for premiums. There is no way for anyone on here to know what your company will do. Go talk to your HR department.

BeckyOff

Twinkie0612 said:

Mysterious_wife said:

I can't take anyone serious who says "Obamacare."

Ha. Today I made a comment about the health care industry being screwed up (referring to the outrageous price of medical care versus the insurance negotiated rates) and he asked me if I thought "Obamacare" was going to make things better. I had to correct him, letting him know it was called the affordable care act and while I don't think it will fix every problem, it is a step in the right direction.

Uh...  Doesn't Obama himself refer to it as "Obamacare?"

Off to youtube...

Here's one.  First 3 seconds of the video.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnZGRHC11K0

Here's a newer one.  He refers to it as both ACA and Obamacare 17 seconds in.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HsW0l139JD0

BeckyOff

kojala

Actually, it is new. My dad is an agricultural commissioner and works for the county. They used to hire full-time seasonal employees who would work 40 hours each week for 9 months out of the year. Due to Obamacare, they are cutting these employee's hours to less than 30 hours per week because they cannot afford to offer them healthcare. Really sucks for those employees, but they really don't have any other choice. I also know a family who owns several Burger Kings and they, too, are in the same boat.

sueann911

kbrockman06 said:

Actually, it is new. My dad is an agricultural commissioner and works for the county. They used to hire full-time seasonal employees who would work 40 hours each week for 9 months out of the year. Due to Obamacare, they are cutting these employee's hours to less than 30 hours per week because they cannot afford to offer them healthcare. Really sucks for those employees, but they really don't have any other choice. I also know a family who owns several Burger Kings and they, too, are in the same boat.

How dare the county who gets its money from taxpayers have to pay for health care for the very people that pay their tax dollars? Along the same line, we should never ask a person who owns several locations of a national fast food chain to pony up and pay for health care for employees who will barely make over minimum wage.

Now where is that sarcasm font when you need it?

Your dad and the county aren't cutting the hours because of the ACA. They're cutting the hours because they didn't properly budget for the changes that require them to pick up seasonals and offer them health care. Don't blame the ACA. Blame the county commissioners who won't dig in the county budget to pay for the increase or are too afraid of not being re-elected to vote in a tax increase to cover the difference.