• Home
  • News
  • Firms & Lawyers
  • Courts
  • Judges
  • Surveys/lists
  • Columns
  • Verdicts
  • Public Notices
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe

Home > Practice Columns > Health Care Reform and the Unionized Employer

Font Size: increase font decrease font

Health Care Law

Health Care Reform and the Unionized Employer

By Eric N. Athey and Kelley E. Kaufman All Articles 

The Legal Intelligencer

March 19, 2013

  •    
  •    
  •    
  •      
 
Eric N. Athey

Eric N. Athey

Kelley E. Kaufman

Kelley E. Kaufman

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, also known as health care reform, is now three years old. Employer health plans have had a host of new administrative and coverage requirements to comply with during each of the PPACA's first three years. However, the PPACA requirements that have taken effect to date seem negligible when compared to those that will take effect in 2014 and beyond. The legal landscape of health insurance will fundamentally change in three ways next year:

• Eligible individuals will be able to purchase "qualified health plans" using tax credits or subsidies through newly created "health care exchanges."

• Individuals who fail to obtain affordable coverage that is available to them will be subject to an "individual mandate" penalty equal to 1 percent of their gross income or $95, whichever is greater (this penalty will be adjusted upward in subsequent years).

• "Large employers" (those employing an average of 50 or more employees) will be subject to "shared responsibility" penalties unless they offer 95 percent of their "full-time employees" and dependent children "minimum essential coverage" that is "affordable."

In 2018, the PPACA's final requirement, the "Cadillac tax," will take effect. Under this provision, employer group health plans with annual premiums that exceed statutory benchmarks ($10,200 for self-only coverage; $27,500 for family coverage) will pay a 40 percent tax on the overage. Many generous employer health plans appear likely to incur the Cadillac tax in 2018 unless steps are taken to significantly reduce plan costs in advance.

Identifying cost-effective PPACA compliance strategies is challenging enough; however, unionized employers face the additional challenge of making sure their strategies don't run afoul of a collective bargaining agreement or their statutory duty to bargain under the National Labor Relations Act). CBAs that expire before 2014 or that contain "reopener" provisions will provide unionized employers with the opportunity to address this challenge. Employers whose CBAs do not expire until after 2014 may have a difficult time simultaneously complying with their CBA and the PPACA. This article examines the intersection of the PPACA with a unionized employer's responsibilities under its CBAs and the duty to bargain under the NLRA.

Who Is Offered What Coverage?

The PPACA requires large employers to offer full-time employees (those employed for an average of 30 or more "hours of service" per week) and their dependent children health coverage on an affordable basis. The term "hours of service" is defined in proposed regulations to include "each hour for which an employee is paid, or entitled to payment," including time spent on vacation, holidays and sick leave. This definition is broader than the "hours worked" standard by which many employers have traditionally measured full-time status, and plans will need to be updated to incorporate the PPACA's new regulatory standard.

Most unionized employers already offer health coverage to their full-time employees and many also offer dependent coverage. Importantly, however, the PPACA's "30 hours of service" threshold for full-time status is lower than the threshold many employers have used in the past. A large employer that has traditionally offered coverage only to employees who regularly work 40 hours or more per week has several options under the PPACA:

• Expand the eligible class to all employees who average 30 or more hours of service per week.

• Reduce work schedules so that no one (or less than 5 percent of the employer's full-time employees) falls between 30 and 40 hours of service.

A browser or device that allows javascript is required to view this content.

Continue reading

  • 1
  • 2

Next



Subscribe to The Legal Intelligencer

You must be signed in to comment on an article

Find similar content

Firms mentioned

    
  • McNees Wallace & Nurick

Companies, agencies mentioned

    
  • NLRA
  • PPACA
  • Health Claims
  • Post-PPACA World
  • New Type

Most viewed stories

    
  1. Third Circuit Rejects NLRB Recess Appointment
    •      
  2. Judge Orders Parties to Hire Neutral Expert to Probe Facebook
    •      
  3. Bernstein Upholds $78.4 Mil. Verdict in Phila. Med Mal Case
    •      
  4. Third Circuit Rules Against Citgo in Case Over Oil Spill
    •      
  5. Fox Rothschild Grows Revenue 7.8 Percent
    •      
lawjobs.com

TOP JOBS

MORE JOBS

POST A JOB

From the Law.com Network

The General Counsel and the Compensation Committee

Your Company's Been Hacked -- What Comes Next?

Amid Spy Scandal, Russia Boots Baker & McKenzie Lawyer

Survey: Firm Leaders Admit Downturn's Permanent Impact

Contrite Companies Can Win Forgiveness in Bribery Cases
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Plaintiffs Want to See Toyota's 'Crown Jewels'
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Cisco E-Book Delivers Ethics on the Go

Collaboration Is Key to Defending Cyberattacks

Prolific ADA Plaintiff Faces Nemesis in Harassment Suit

Ullyot Exit Closes Chapter for Facebook

Fla. Attorneys Lead Force-Placed Insurance Fight

Lawsuit Names Missing Fla. Attorney for Alleged Fraud
  •      
    • Subscription Required

$3M Judgment Voided Against 'Girls Gone Wild' Producer

Judge Says Boston Bombings Had No Effect on Terrorist Sentences
  •      
    • Subscription Required

The Affordable State-Specific Practice Solution
Available in NY, NJ, PA and CT editions - research, draft and prepare even the most complex cases with ease.

Court System, Counties Agree on 3 Court Facility Upgrades

Guardian Who Delayed Final Account Must Pay Referee Fee
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Perelman's Case Against Arlin Adams Thrown Out

McVay Wins Superior Court Nod With Western Turnout
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Law Schools Are Looking Beyond LSATs, Says Mich. Dean

Is Freezing Your Eggs the Solution?

Advising Clients on Weather and the Workplace
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Texas Sues BP, Transocean, Halliburton, Anadarko Entities
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Insurer Beats Bid By Bilked Client
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Barnes Asks For Court-Appointed Lawyer To Help Defend Brooks

Corporate Bribery Case Part Of National Trend
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Court Continues To Grant Lawyers Fraud Immunity
  •      
    • Subscription Required

  • About |
  • ALM Properties |
  • ALM Reprints |
  • Customer Support |
  • Privacy Policy |
  • Terms & Conditions |
  • ALM User License Agreement
ALM Media