How do you see the implementation of Obamacare affecting recruiting in 2013"

Will employers hire fewer people through recruiters, more, or about the same as they did this year?

Tags: Consulting, JPKreiss, Marketing, Media, Social, brand, building, consulting, firms, firmsJPKreiss, More…for, headhunters, marketing, pr, recruiters, recruiting, search, strategies, web

Views: 1230

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

From time to time I have looked for a "short and sweet" summary of my obligation under Obamacare as a "small" employer.  I can not find any info suggesting any "mandate" other than companies employing 50 or more.  I feel quite certain this is not the case - but can't seem to dig up the real story. 

 

Does anyone know?

I agree with Amy and Bill--didn't think of that one, Bill.  Figured employees will eventually be "on their own" for healthcare benefits.  If falling to temp agencies--they incur the burden.

I see no way Obamacare improves healthcare.  Cost goes up, care goes down, more being cared for, and fewer doctors.

 

As for Louise's comment on cause of bankruptcy she could be right with the Harvard study.  But so does Northwestern.  They studied Himmelstein's 4 decades of research which showed medical cause of bankruptcy to be 17%

First, they fail to provide a causal relationship to support the claim that medical spending contributes to “half of all bankruptcies” (54.5 percent). Our analysis of their data finds a causal link in only 17 percent of personal bankruptcies. Nor do their data support their contention that “solidly middle-class Americans” are threatened. Four decades of studies that have explicitly addressed the bankruptcy–medical spending connection lend credibility to our conclusion. These studies, which we discuss below, support a much smaller figure than half, as does a more recent national consumer survey sponsored in part by the Harvard School of Public Health.3 As for the “solidly middle-class” citizens who face “impoverishment,” Himmelstein and colleagues report an average household income of $25,000 for their respondents—a level more accurately characterized as “marginally middle class.”

Second, the authors’ methodology does not provide a definitive answer to the policy question they implicitly pose: how national health insurance would affect the rate of personal bankruptcy. At best, they show that medical bills are a cause of 17 percent of bankruptcies but are not necessarily the most important cause. They fail to perform the multivariate statistical analysis necessary to determine the magnitude of the causal relationship or to rule out other factors such as loss of job, education expenses, or housing costs. Indeed, an economic study cited by Himmelstein and colleagues concludes (in a portion they did not mention) that there is little support for the theory that households file for bankruptcy when “adverse events”—including health problems—reduce their ability to repay debts.4

Lastly, their suggestion that national health insurance would greatly reduce the number of bankruptcies linked to medical spending is misleading. They acknowledge that the impact would depend on the “comprehensiveness” of the plan. Our analysis shows that “comprehensiveness” in this context would require defining “medical” expenses in a way that is much broader than is now typical of either private or government-funded plans.

 

  • David Dranove (d-dranove@northwestern.edu) is the Walter McNerney Distinguished Professor of Health Industry Management and director of the Center for Health Industry Market Economics at Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management in Evanston, Illinois. Michael L. Millenson is the Mervin Shalowitz, M.D., Visiting Scholar in the Health Industry Management Program at the Kellogg School of Management and an independent consultant.

  • The authors are grateful to America’s Health Insurance Plans for supporting this research.

Jerry, I believe the mandate to cover employees applies to companies over 50. 

However, if you employ people providing healthcare benefits you likely will see your premium costs rise.
I might be wrong--but how I understand it

Jerry Albright said:

From time to time I have looked for a "short and sweet" summary of my obligation under Obamacare as a "small" employer.  I can not find any info suggesting any "mandate" other than companies employing 50 or more.  I feel quite certain this is not the case - but can't seem to dig up the real story. 

 

Does anyone know?

Amy you are absolutely right! I've yet to find a single positive thing about Obamacare. And, Bill we are in the process of shopping for new policies to offer to our temp workers as we speak. We're already taking our lumps now...I can only imagine the pinch we'll feel afterward.

I work exclusively in healthcare placement. I would say roughly 50% of the small doc offices I talk with plan on closing shop because it just will not be cost effective to continue practicing. So we'll have more insured people but less docs to treat them. WHAT A GREAT IDEA! Geez.

Mick, completely agree. 

Most of my friends are doctors or close around my age of 60...OB/GYN, Radiology, Opthamology, Dentistry, and Optometry.  They'll be quitting/retiring cause they can afford to.  A few have had wages decrease over the past several years.  They've had enough.

 

The healthcare for all idealism turns into a nightmare applied realism.

 

Docs can't hardly afford to practice on their own. Financial floor is raised with costs and ceiling lowered with compensation.

Mick Essex said:

Amy you are absolutely right! I've yet to find a single positive thing about Obamacare. And, Bill we are in the process of shopping for new policies to offer to our temp workers as we speak. We're already taking our lumps now...I can only imagine the pinch we'll feel afterward.

I work exclusively in healthcare placement. I would say roughly 50% of the small doc offices I talk with plan on closing shop because it just will not be cost effective to continue practicing. So we'll have more insured people but less docs to treat them. WHAT A GREAT IDEA! Geez.

After reading these comments how can any logical person have voted for Barack Hussein Obama? Rush Limbaugh said it best, “Obama has the idiot vote locked up.” Don’t want to get political but facts are facts.

I agree with you, and the question which began the thread about Obamacare is obvious.

It can't possibly lead to more hiring and increased permanent recruiting business for us, IMO.

I shared this thread with my EXTREMELY liberal brother in law and he asked me if I had "any compassion for people without healthcare".

 

I told him 15 years of recruiting killed any compassion I once had lol. Just kidding... but honestly I prefer to give my money directly to charities of my choice including charities that provide low cost or free healthcare services. But I lack compassion. Whatever. We haven't begun to see the negative effects on business and recruiting - though clearly we all know they're coming!

You do know we're paying for the uninsured now?

Amy Ala said:

I shared this thread with my EXTREMELY liberal brother in law and he asked me if I had "any compassion for people without healthcare".

 

I told him 15 years of recruiting killed any compassion I once had lol. Just kidding... but honestly I prefer to give my money directly to charities of my choice including charities that provide low cost or free healthcare services. But I lack compassion. Whatever. We haven't begun to see the negative effects on business and recruiting - though clearly we all know they're coming!

How many of the uninsured we're paying for are here illegally?

How many are we paying education for here illegally?

How many are we paying incarceration for here illegally?

How many are we paying welfare and other government social entitlement programs for here illegally?

 

I guess, Bill, what I'm saying is I'll be willing to listen to alternative solutions when we clear the deck of people we shouldn't be subsidizing.  My guess is we have 20-30 million here illegally.

Yikes, that's a whole 'nother subject.  I don't want to get political on this forum.  I prefer to remain goofy.  

bill josephson said:

How many of the uninsured we're paying for are here illegally?

How many are we paying education for here illegally?

How many are we paying incarceration for here illegally?

How many are we paying welfare and other government social entitlement programs for here illegally?

 

I guess, Bill, what I'm saying is I'll be willing to listen to alternative solutions when we clear the deck of people we shouldn't be subsidizing.  My guess is we have 20-30 million here illegally.

Really!  Hey everyone........the sky is NOT falling, or will it fall!  And studies are just that.  Studies.  They can no better predict the future than your ouija board!  Personally, after the kinks get worked out, there isn't going to be a lot of impact on companies larger than 50 employees.  If you already provide benefits to your employees, you'll continue to do that.  Cost are rising about 10% a year anyway.  It's a COST of doing business and attracting and retaining employees.  No employees......no business.  Obamacare will ensure that those who "can't" get or "afford" insurance can now do so.  We'll see if that happening skyrockets the markets.  It's not anymore than it already is.  Really!

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Sponsored Video

Marketing Partners

Upcoming Webinar

RecruitingBlogs on Twitter

Recruiting Videos

  • Add Videos
  • View All

© 2014   Created by RecruitingBlogs.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

scroll to the top