Unions: Obamacare Will Shatter Backbone of Middle Class

The Affordable Care Act now has a formidable opponent in U.S. labor unions. The unions were a key ally in the law’s passage: They spent a large sum of money on the congressional campaigns of Democrats in 2006 and 2008, and union leaders lobbied in favor of health care reform in 2009 and 2010. But with growing worries that the legislation will disrupt the health benefits of its members, America’s largest unions are asking Congress to step in.

Representatives of three of the nation’s largest unions sent a letter to Democratic Sens. Harry Reid of Nevada and Nancy Pelosi of California on Thursday.

“When you and the President sought our support for the Affordable Care Act, you pledged that if we liked the health plans we have now, we could keep them. Sadly, that promise is under threat,” letter said. “Right now, unless you and the Obama Administration enact an equitable fix, the ACA will shatter not only our hard-earned health benefits, but destroy the foundation of the 40 hour workweek that is the backbone of the American middle class.”

The letter was written by James P. Hoffa, general president of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters; Joseph Hansen, international president of the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union; and Donald Taylor, the president of Unite-Here, a union representing hotel, airport, food service, gaming, and textile workers.


Their letter noted that their respective unions have long been supporters of the idea that all Americans should have access to quality, affordable health care. “We have also been strong supporters of you,” the three union presidents wrote. “In campaign after campaign we have put boots on the ground, gone door-to-door to get out the vote, run phone banks and raised money to secure this vision.”

But the problem is that “this vision has come back to haunt us.”

The union leadership is seeking “reasonable regulatory interpretations” to the Affordable Care Act that would help prevent the destruction of nonprofit health plans. However, according to the letter, earlier requests for government action have been “disregarded and met with a stone wall by the White House and the pertinent agencies.” In their opinion, this disregard compares unfavorably with how the administration responded to requests made by other so-called stakeholders, citing the government’s decision to make a “huge accommodation” for the employer community by extending the deadline for the employer mandate and penalties.

“Time is running out: Congress wrote this law; we voted for you. We have a problem; you need to fix it,” wrote the union leaders. “The unintended consequences of the ACA are severe. Perverse incentives are already creating nightmare scenarios.”

The letter lists three complaints. First, that the law creates an incentive for employers to keep workers’ hours below 30 hours per week. Second, that millions of Americans, including a great majority of union members, are covered by nonprofit health insurance plans. But with the implementation of Obamacare, union workers will be “treated differently and not be eligible for subsidies afforded other citizens.” Finally, the letter argued that while union, nonprofit plans will not receive the same subsidies, they will be taxed to pay for those subsidies.

Hoffa, Hansen, and Taylor believe that there are “common-sense” fixes that can be made to the legislation that will allow union members to keep their current plans and benefits as Congress and President Barack Obama promised. Unless the changes are made, they said that pledge is hollow.

“We continue to stand behind real health care reform, but the law as it stands will hurt millions of Americans including the members of our respective unions,” the letter concluded.

 Breotan wrote:
So, apparently the right-wing guys weren't just doing a Chicken Little impersonation? Too bad these same labor unions were so damned politically partisan that they didn't "stand up for the little guy" when it mattered.

http://wallstcheatsheet.com/stocks/unions-obamacare-will-shatter-backbone-of-middle-class.html/?ref=YF

Unions: Obamacare Will Shatter Backbone of Middle Class

The Affordable Care Act now has a formidable opponent in U.S. labor unions. The unions were a key ally in the law’s passage: They spent a large sum of money on the congressional campaigns of Democrats in 2006 and 2008, and union leaders lobbied in favor of health care reform in 2009 and 2010. But with growing worries that the legislation will disrupt the health benefits of its members, America’s largest unions are asking Congress to step in.

Representatives of three of the nation’s largest unions sent a letter to Democratic Sens. Harry Reid of Nevada and Nancy Pelosi of California on Thursday.

“When you and the President sought our support for the Affordable Care Act, you pledged that if we liked the health plans we have now, we could keep them. Sadly, that promise is under threat,” letter said. “Right now, unless you and the Obama Administration enact an equitable fix, the ACA will shatter not only our hard-earned health benefits, but destroy the foundation of the 40 hour workweek that is the backbone of the American middle class.”

The letter was written by James P. Hoffa, general president of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters; Joseph Hansen, international president of the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union; and Donald Taylor, the president of Unite-Here, a union representing hotel, airport, food service, gaming, and textile workers.


Their letter noted that their respective unions have long been supporters of the idea that all Americans should have access to quality, affordable health care. “We have also been strong supporters of you,” the three union presidents wrote. “In campaign after campaign we have put boots on the ground, gone door-to-door to get out the vote, run phone banks and raised money to secure this vision.”

But the problem is that “this vision has come back to haunt us.”

The union leadership is seeking “reasonable regulatory interpretations” to the Affordable Care Act that would help prevent the destruction of nonprofit health plans. However, according to the letter, earlier requests for government action have been “disregarded and met with a stone wall by the White House and the pertinent agencies.” In their opinion, this disregard compares unfavorably with how the administration responded to requests made by other so-called stakeholders, citing the government’s decision to make a “huge accommodation” for the employer community by extending the deadline for the employer mandate and penalties.

“Time is running out: Congress wrote this law; we voted for you. We have a problem; you need to fix it,” wrote the union leaders. “The unintended consequences of the ACA are severe. Perverse incentives are already creating nightmare scenarios.”

The letter lists three complaints. First, that the law creates an incentive for employers to keep workers’ hours below 30 hours per week. Second, that millions of Americans, including a great majority of union members, are covered by nonprofit health insurance plans. But with the implementation of Obamacare, union workers will be “treated differently and not be eligible for subsidies afforded other citizens.” Finally, the letter argued that while union, nonprofit plans will not receive the same subsidies, they will be taxed to pay for those subsidies.

Hoffa, Hansen, and Taylor believe that there are “common-sense” fixes that can be made to the legislation that will allow union members to keep their current plans and benefits as Congress and President Barack Obama promised. Unless the changes are made, they said that pledge is hollow.

“We continue to stand behind real health care reform, but the law as it stands will hurt millions of Americans including the members of our respective unions,” the letter concluded.

 Polonius wrote:
Every argument against Obamacare eventually boils down to this: "I don't want to pay for it."

And that's all they are complaining about.

 SilverMK2 wrote:
I hear in America you have to pay for healthcare.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Sooooo

If you like what you have now, why were you campaigning for the bill in the first place?

 whembly wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
Every argument against Obamacare eventually boils down to this: "I don't want to pay for it."

And that's all they are complaining about.

Disagree... it's also HOW it's been implemented.

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Sooooo

If you like what you have now, why were you campaigning for the bill in the first place?

Pretty much.

Just like whembly I'm struggling to feel any sympathy for the Unions, or anyone else, who campaigned long and hard for the ACA on the basis of ideology alone.

 whembly wrote:

 SilverMK2 wrote:
I hear in America you have to pay for healthcare.

I hear in Britain... everyone pays.

 Polonius wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
Every argument against Obamacare eventually boils down to this: "I don't want to pay for it."

And that's all they are complaining about.

Disagree... it's also HOW it's been implemented.

Nobody, outside of insurers or doctors or other participants in the health industry, care a hill of beans about how its implemented if it doesn't change their cost and/or standard of care.

I'm not saying it's a bad argument. There's plenty of evidence that this is going to somehow allow insurers to make more money, doctors make less, and everybody pay more.

 Polonius wrote:
A lot of unions, believe or not, want to expand. A lot of low wage unionized employees work without health insurance. The labor movement has always worked to improve the lot of all workers.

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
A lot of unions, believe or not, want to expand. A lot of low wage unionized employees work without health insurance. The labor movement has always worked to improve the lot of all workers.

And as is being made apparent the law that they campaigned so vigorously for is not (and it seems, never was) the solution that they were looking for. Now they are campaigning for relaxed immigration and amnesty for illegal immigrants, something else that is likely to bite them in the future.

 Polonius wrote:
Well, either the unions have terrible lawyers (not true), the law somehow changed since it was passed (not true) or the regulations the administration is promulgating are not what they unions expected (most likely true).

I'm a government union worker, but even I'll admit that Unions tend to be, at hte national level, very, very whiny.

If you're enjoying a politcal opponent "get what he asked for," then by all means enjoy. This seems to be a scrape mostly about how much the union insurers will have to pay, with the fig leaf of "OMG, employers will cut full time jobs over this."

 Polonius wrote:

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
A lot of unions, believe or not, want to expand. A lot of low wage unionized employees work without health insurance. The labor movement has always worked to improve the lot of all workers.

And as is being made apparent the law that they campaigned so vigorously for is not (and it seems, never was) the solution that they were looking for. Now they are campaigning for relaxed immigration and amnesty for illegal immigrants, something else that is likely to bite them in the future.

Well, either the unions have terrible lawyers (not true), the law somehow changed since it was passed (not true) or the regulations the administration is promulgating are not what they unions expected (most likely true).

I'm a government union worker, but even I'll admit that Unions tend to be, at hte national level, very, very whiny.

If you're enjoying a politcal opponent "get what he asked for," then by all means enjoy. This seems to be a scrape mostly about how much the union insurers will have to pay, with the fig leaf of "OMG, employers will cut full time jobs over this."

 Polonius wrote:
I think Unions support democrats, if only because Republicans want to destroy the unions. The enemy of one's enemy...

Here's a pretty good article explaining the actual problem:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/unions-vs-obamacare_707688.html

The short version is that Unions were supposed to be exempt from many of the taxes and requirements, but the administration decided to either broaden those waivers for everybody (like the cadillac plan tax) or not grant the unions the privileges they wanted.

 Polonius wrote:

The short version is that Unions were supposed to be exempt from many of the taxes and requirements, but the administration decided to either broaden those waivers for everybody (like the cadillac plan tax) or not grant the unions the privileges they wanted.

 Polonius wrote:
It's like I said up top: nobody wants to pay for it.

 whembly wrote:

Furthermore, why should UNION Cadillac plans be exempted and not private entity's Cadillac plans?

 whembly wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
It's like I said up top: nobody wants to pay for it.

And I'm telling you it's more than that.

 Jihadin wrote:
Since a lot of employer's are cutting back on 40 hour min the Unions get less dues. Like they didn't see that coming past 6-8 months?

 Polonius wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
It's like I said up top: nobody wants to pay for it.

And I'm telling you it's more than that.

sigh.

Fine.

Unions, like most vocal critics of Obamacare, do so because they don't want to pay for it.

 Jihadin wrote:
Polonius....you gave in to easy to Whembly.....Me.....I just string him along.....make him feel comfy and warm....and then chop him off at the knee's.....steal his wobble blanket along with all his cookie and milk....and just left him with a bottle of water and a few tic tacs letting him think their motrin.