Papa Johns reduces worker hours in response to Obamacare.

[Rodimus Prime]

Originally Posted by CorvusCamenarum

Looks like Applebee's also gets the joke:

HuffnPuff

oh god for bid the massively over paid CEO take a minor pay cut. God for bid they stop taking such a huge chunk of companies profits.

What pisses me off is over this depression is companies would do huge lay offs and then the CEO would get massive bonuses. If cost need to be cut it should start from the top down. If you need to cut pay roll by 10% then CEO pay cut better be 10% at min.

[bruinsrme]

Originally Posted by Prof.

I've only had their ****** pizza once or twice, but now I will never order from there again! Unless he changes his policy towards Obamacare.

they accept EBT cards, now. they have a whole new customer base spending someone else's money.
Come visit me and we'll watch the people going in and out and follow the delivery drivers to their customers.

[Surely]

Originally Posted by bruinsrme

ok i am at $11,000, minus eye and dental.

If the company drops coverage, pays the $2k fine where is the $9k difference coming from?
My pocket and/or someone elses.

If it costs that per head that money is coming out of tax payers income/house hold and economy one way or the other.

the only way to cover such costs is it impose new/higher taxes such as a VAT.

The thing you don't understand/aren't aware of, is that one of the main reasons for the big discrepancy (the ~$9,000) is because someone has to pay for all the people who don't have insurance and don't pay their hospital bills. It shouldn't cost as much as it does for healthcare. The reason it does is because the hospitals/doctors/etc. jack up their prices to account for the people who don't/can't pay. The cost is passed on to you/your company.

I've seen hospitals bill $40+ for a couple of Tylenols.

[Macky-Mac]

For a couple of decades the cost of healthcare insurance has been going up faster than the rate of inflation and for all of that time companies have been reducing or dropping coverage for their employees. Pointing the finger at Obamacare as the "reason" for increased costs is just the latest excuse added to the narrative.

While obamacare might have extended coverage to many of those who don't have insurance, it doesn't really do much to contain the increasing costs of medical care in the USA.

Papa Johns is just being a bit dishonest with their excuses for what they're up to

Originally Posted by Surely

The thing you don't understand/aren't aware of, is that one of the main reasons for the big discrepancy (the ~$9,000) is because someone has to pay for all the people who don't have insurance and don't pay their hospital bills. It shouldn't cost as much as it does for healthcare. The reason it does is because the hospitals/doctors/etc. jack up their prices to account for the people who don't/can't pay. The cost is passed on to you/your company.

I've seen hospitals bill $40+ for a couple of Tylenols.

quite true; people who think they aren't ALREADY paying for healthcare for those without adequate insurance simply aren't aware of how healthcare in the USA actually functions

[bruinsrme]

Originally Posted by Surely

The thing you don't understand/aren't aware of, is that one of the main reasons for the big discrepancy (the ~$9,000) is because someone has to pay for all the people who don't have insurance and don't pay their hospital bills. It shouldn't cost as much as it does for healthcare. The reason it does is because the hospitals/doctors/etc. jack up their prices to account for the people who don't/can't pay. The cost is passed on to you/your company.

I've seen hospitals bill $40+ for a couple of Tylenols.

Snunk said $2,700 per head which sounds reasonable.
However $2700 X 4 heads is $10,800. so I am back where I started with the exception of instead of my company paying for it we the tax payer is.

----------

Originally Posted by Macky-Mac

For a couple of decades the cost of healthcare insurance has been going up faster than the rate of inflation and for all of that time companies have been reducing or dropping coverage for their employees. Pointing the finger at Obamacare as the "reason" for increased costs is just the latest excuse added to the narrative.

While obamacare might have extended coverage to many of those who don't have insurance, it doesn't really do much to contain the increasing costs of medical care in the USA.

Papa Johns is just being a bit dishonest with their excuses for what they're up to



quite true; people who think they aren't ALREADY paying for healthcare for those without adequate insurance simply aren't aware of how healthcare in the USA actually functions

Untrue, but instead of someone paying for my family , the company I work for, me and others will have to pick up (absorb) that cost too.

[Surely]

Originally Posted by bruinsrme

Snunk said $2,700 per head which sounds reasonable.
However $2700 X 4 heads is $10,800. so I am back where I started with the exception of instead of my company paying for it we the tax payer is.

----------



Untrue, but instead of someone paying for my family , the company I work for, me and others will have to pick up (absorb) that cost too.

If your company didn't pay for it, your salary would be higher. They take things like the cost of insurance into account when determining your compensation.

With more money in the pot from everyone paying taxes, you wouldn't be taxed a high as $2,700 per person for this. The hospitals etc. wouldn't have to keep raising their prices to account for all of the unpaid bills they have to write off.

[quagmire]

Originally Posted by bruinsrme

Untrue, but instead of someone paying for my family , the company I work for, me and others will have to pick up (absorb) that cost too.

Who do you think pays for the uninsured trips to the ER? The taxpayer......

[Macky-Mac]

Originally Posted by bruinsrme

....

Untrue, but instead of someone paying for my family , the company I work for, me and others will have to pick up (absorb) that cost too.

sorry, but it is true.......the whole of the healthcare industry, including the insurance company your employer buys insurance from, bundles unpaid costs incurred by those without medical insurance and passes them on to those that are paying for insurance premiums.....in your case that's both your and your employer. (They also include a charge for their overhead and profit on top of those unpaid services.)

it's probably the most expensive way to pay for the uninsured, but it helps maintains the illusion that you're not paying for them which is politically important for some

[AlaskaMoose]

Originally Posted by neiltc13

Democrat voters now finding out what it means to have universal health care?

There is a reason that here in the UK we have an additional income tax called national insurance that runs at about 12% - this is in addition to income tax, which ranges from 20% to 50%. We also have 20% VAT on almost every product bought.

Seems like there was a desire for this healthcare, but when it comes down to paying for it people have had other ideas.

Well, a majority of Americans opposed Obamacare not too long ago. I don't know if that's the case today, however. But I agree with you in that a lot of Americans, specially HS and college students, have no idea how costly Obamacare will be to every tax-paying American.

This table relates to companies paying for Obamacare for their employees:
http://www.nfib.com/Portals/0/PDF/Al...0Provision.pdf

[MadeTheSwitch]

Yeah Applebee's, yeah Papa John's, it's going to cost you millions alright. Millions in lost business as people like me go elsewhere over political moves that do not help your employees and only make yourselves look bad. Geez, just add 15 cents to the cost of a pizza, it's no big deal.

[leenak]

Honeslty, it doesn't seem too much different than they were already doing, right? I used to know someone who worked as an assistant manager at a competing chain yet they weren't allowed to work over 30 hours? 35? Not sure what it was. The reason being is then they would have to provide benefits. So it sounds like Papa Johns and others will just keep doing what they have been doing, denying their employees benefits.

[samiwas]

Originally Posted by bruinsrme

I don't mean to sound cold that is a choice.

Yes, it is a choice. I make twice to nearly three times as much freelancing as I could get in a full time job in my field. I applied for a full-time house electrician for a large theater here so that I wouldn't have to travel as much, and hoping that I could get some benefits for our newly-expanded family. For this skilled position, the pay offered came out to only about $37,000 a year base, but more if I worked the 55-60 hour weeks that were common. The max came out to something like $55k (before taxes or benefit reductions) if I worked 60 hours a week. Oh, and the benefits that I would pay a part of only covered me, not my family at all...they would be billed at full cost. That salary wouldn't even pay my bills, much less put food on the table and gas in the car, without cutting majorly sacrificing our current life.

My company pays $11,000 for my policy

Originally Posted by skunk

FYI, average annual total cost per head of the NHS is around $2,700.

Originally Posted by bruinsrme

ok i am at $11,000, minus eye and dental.

If it costs that per head that money is coming out of tax payers income/house hold and economy one way or the other.

the only way to cover such costs is it impose new/higher taxes such as a VAT.

Surely, you understand that a single-payer system would reduce costs involved greatly. When I get a bill from the hospital, a procedure might be billed at $6,000. Then the insurance company just says "No, it's going to be $3,200" Obviously, that $3,200 is still making the hospital money. Then from that $3,200, insurance only pays a portion, and I pay the rest. But those $6,000 bills are still being billed to lots of people who can't pay them. but someone IS paying them: you. In the form of higher costs and insurance premiums. Get rid of that part of medical billing, and watch costs go waaayy down. Why you can't see that you are already paying for them anyway is beyond me.

But there's one big difference: even after paying premium pricing to cover the people who don't pay, the medical and insurance businesses are still multibillion-dollar profit machines. Why insurance companies need billions in profit, I will never know. A government-run program does not need profit. So that again will reduce costs. No multimillion-dollar-salary CEOs, no shareholders, just some government workers.

Also note that while Skunk said it costs about $2,700 a head in the UK, that's it, as far as I know. They aren't paying on top of that. But here in the US, you are paying your portion or your insurance company, and then most likely also paying the deductible and co-insurance portion of the bills AFTER that $11,000. So even a family of four, if they indeed were taxed at $10,800 (not likely), would be saving thousands per year, just in your example.

Having the right job shouldn't be the only way to get affordable healthcare coverage. Not in the so-called "greatest country in the world". It does always interest me that those so against healthcare reform seem to be those receiving their coverage from an employer.

[AlaskaMoose]

Originally Posted by MadeTheSwitch

Yeah Applebee's, yeah Papa John's, it's going to cost you millions alright. Millions in lost business as people like me go elsewhere over political moves that do not help your employees and only make yourselves look bad. Geez, just add 15 cents to the cost of a pizza, it's no big deal.

I see... Some of you have not idea whatsoever about economics. It's laughable, really.

Lets say that you have a pizza joint and sell pizza for a living. Can you imagine how many pizzas you have to sell in order to make a profit? Do you believe that you have an unlimited supply of free ingredients, the electricity is produced by the electrical outlet, the ovens and equipment were given to you by the Government, the water is free since it comes from the tap? Lets say that you buy a gallon of gasoline for your car: how would you like a tax increase of fifteen cents per gallon? It's the same for every business out there. The company can't survive on a loss of profit, and if it can't survive it has to let workers go first, and then go bankrupt.

[senseless]

Cutting worker hours means they will have to hire more workers to make up the time. This has got to increase accounting, insurance and training costs as well as decrease efficiency. I would rather have a few committed full timers than a bunch of transient part timers with other gigs.

[Hugh]

Originally Posted by bruinsrme

they accept EBT cards, now. they have a whole new customer base spending someone else's money.
Come visit me and we'll watch the people going in and out and follow the delivery drivers to their customers.

I thought that hot foods was not eligible. At least it was when I was on Food stamps for a short time (several years ago). :/

Hugh

[samiwas]

Originally Posted by AlaskaMoose

The company can't survive on a loss of profit, and if it can't survive it has to let workers go first, and then go bankrupt.

I think you mean to say "a company can't survive without profit", right? Profit is profit. It's the money left over after all employees wages, bills paid, and rents covered. A business can indeed survive with a cut in profit, as long as there is still profit. Is there something I'm missing? Maybe you can explain some economics to me.

[Rodimus Prime]

Originally Posted by AlaskaMoose

I see... Some of you have not idea whatsoever about economics. It's laughable, really.

Lets say that you have a pizza joint and sell pizza for a living. Can you imagine how many pizzas you have to sell in order to make a profit? Do you believe that you have an unlimited supply of free ingredients, the electricity is produced by the electrical outlet, the ovens and equipment were given to you by the Government, the water is free since it comes from the tap? Lets say that you buy a gallon of gasoline for your car: how would you like a tax increase of fifteen cents per gallon? It's the same for every business out there. The company can't survive on a loss of profit, and if it can't survive it has to let workers go first, and then go bankrupt.

It has already been shown that the profit margin they are getting after all cost are added up is 40%. Sorry that they can not afford to take on that extra 15 cents per pizza and have it eaten out of the 40% profit margin.

You wonder why the 99% hates the 1% so much. This is an example. The employees do not see a penny of that 40% profit. Instead it is in the hands of a handful of people.

Companies have been treating their employees like crap for years. Then they turn around and wonder why there is zero loyalty to them. It is because the companies show none. They need to show loyalty first.

[AlaskaMoose]

Originally Posted by samiwas

I think you mean to say "a company can't survive without profit", right? Profit is profit. It's the money left over after all employees wages, bills paid, and rents covered. A business can indeed survive with a cut in profit, as long as there is still profit. Is there something I'm missing? Maybe you can explain some economics to me.

Hmmm....I wonder if Apple would agree to cut its profit and barely survive? I wonder which company would agree to that?

How about this: from now on all government officials, starting with the ones who passed Obamacare, will work 40 hours per week at minimum wage. I am being sarcastic

[P-Worm]

Originally Posted by AlaskaMoose

Hmmm....I wonder if Apple would agree to cut its profit and barely survive? I wonder which company would agree to that?

How about this: from now on all government officials, starting with the ones who passed Obamacare, will work 40 hours per week at minimum wage. I am being sarcastic

If Apple cut its profits it wouldn't "barely survive." If you think that, you obviously haven't read their balance sheet.

P-Worm

[AlaskaMoose]

Originally Posted by Rodimus Prime

It has already been shown that the profit margin they are getting after all cost are added up is 40%. Sorry that they can not afford to take on that extra 15 cents per pizza and have it eaten out of the 40% profit margin.

You wonder why the 99% hates the 1% so much. This is an example. The employees do not see a penny of that 40% profit. Instead it is in the hands of a handful of people.

Companies have been treating their employees like crap for years. Then they turn around and wonder why there is zero loyalty to them. It is because the companies show none. They need to show loyalty first.

But you are ignoring that it takes an enormous number of pizzas x fifteen cents for the employer to pay for Obamacare. That's why the company passes the added expense to the customer, fifteen cents at a time. The profits, regardless of what these may be are used by the shareholders and their families. That's how they make a living. You also have to take into account that the customers may not buy as many pizzas as before because now they will be more expensive. They would just turn around and buy pizza from a small joint where it's cheaper. So, it's much easier for a large company to either reduce the workforce, or the number or work hours, and so forth.

How does Apple keep labor cost as low as possible? Answer: by making products overseas where it's cheaper.

[Ugg]

Originally Posted by AlaskaMoose

But you are ignoring that it takes an enormous number of pizzas x fifteen cents for the employer to pay for Obamacare. That's why the company passes the added expense to the customer, fifteen cents at a time. The profits, regardless what these may be are used by the shareholders and their families. That's how they make a living. You also have to take into account that the customers may not buy as many pizzas as before because now they will be more expensive.

...and maybe they won't get so fat, further reducing health care costs. See, everybody wins?

[jnpy!$4g3cwk]

Every now and then, I think about the whole logic of these titans of industry:

Schnatter went on to say he's neither in support of, nor against the Affordable Care Act, even admitting that "the good news is 100 percent of the population is going to have health insurance.” But he’s not the only one in the chain restaurant industry to admit that workers hours may be reduced, since Obamacare mandates that only employees that work more than 30 hours per week are covered under their employers health insurance plan. For example, Darden restaurants, the parent company of Olive Garden and Red Lobster, has already experimented with reducing workers hours in anticipation of the legislation.

So, how are employees of Papa John's, Olive Garden, etc, supposed to get healthcare under a system where private employers are demanding low taxes, and are complaining about government intervention, and yet, refuse to offer healthcare themselves? What is it that these companies want?

[AlaskaMoose]

Originally Posted by P-Worm

If Apple cut its profits it wouldn't "barely survive." If you think that, you obviously haven't read their balance sheet.

P-Worm

If Apple cost its profits, then its market value takes a downturn. And if the downturn continues, Apple goes broke.

----------

Originally Posted by jnpy!$4g3cwk

Every now and then, I think about the whole logic of these titans of industry:



So, how are employees of Papa John's, Olive Garden, etc, supposed to get healthcare under a system where private employers are demanding low taxes, and are complaining about government intervention, and yet, refuse to offer healthcare themselves? What is it that these companies want?

It's not only employers asking for lower taxes, but all tax payers. Do you want to pay more taxes? But in relation to taxes, corporate taxes in the US are the second highest in the world. The problem is that our Congress creates the tax laws plus the loopholes corporations and individuals use to their advantage. The loopholes should be closed first. Corporations don't create the tax laws.

[Rodimus Prime]

Originally Posted by AlaskaMoose

But you are ignoring that it takes an enormous number of pizzas x fifteen cents for the employer to pay for Obamacare. That's why the company passes the added expense to the customer, fifteen cents at a time. The profits, regardless of what these may be are used by the shareholders and their families. That's how they make a living. You also have to take into account that the customers may not buy as many pizzas as before because now they will be more expensive. They would just turn around and buy pizza from a small joint where it's cheaper. So, it's much easier for a large company to either reduce the workforce, or the number or work hours, and so forth.

How does Apple keep labor cost as low as possible? Answer: by making products overseas where it's cheaper.

No I am not. $10 pizza has $4 of profit now it will be $3.85. So now instead of making 40% margins they will be making 38.5% margins.

Lets change this to they will be making 38.5% profit compared to 40%. Wow they are still making a killing.

So again I repeat what I said. They will still be pulling in 38.5% margins and the employees will not be seeing a penny of it.

[AlaskaMoose]

Originally Posted by Ugg

...and maybe they won't get so fat, further reducing health care costs. See, everybody wins?

I see your point

----------

Originally Posted by Rodimus Prime

No I am not. $10 pizza has $4 of profit now it will be $3.85. So now instead of making 40% margins they will be making 38.5% margins.

Lets change this to they will be making 38.5% profit compared to 40%. Wow they are still making a killing.

So again I repeat what I said. They will still be pulling in 38.5% margins and the employees will not be seeing a penny of it.

Again, tell that to all corporations and see how they agree with you. Look at it this way: how about you telling your employer that you want a fifteen cent per hour pay cut of? See...fifteen cents per hour x 40 hours per week would take a hefty sum of money from your profits by the end of the year. Asking shareholders to take a cut from their profits would amount to the same thing.

Another example: look at the public employee wages in your city and State, and then look at the amount cash yearly the State has to pay for each employee's health insurance. The employees have to pay a portion of the health insurance, and after certain amount the State (which is the employer) passes the additional cost to you the worker. Alaska has been paying around $15K per year for every employee's health insurance. Now that Obamacare is being implemented, the cost of health insurance to each employee went up 267% in July this year. The State passed the added cost to the employee.

But asking the private sector to pay the additional cost of health insurance is not that easy.