View Poll Results: How many hours should the base of "Full Time" employment be?

Voters
55. You may not vote on this poll
  • 30 Hours

    6 10.91%
  • 35 Hours

    6 10.91%
  • 40 Hours

    34 61.82%
  • Other

    9 16.36%
Page 2 of 12 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 112

Thread: Thirty Hours = "Full Time"?

  1. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: Thirty Hours = "Full Time"?

    Quote Originally Posted by aberrant85 View Post
    If it was set at 40 you'd have a ton of employers putting their employees at 39 hours. If it was 35 they'd give them 34 hours. If it was 20 they would give them 19 hours.

    The cheap f*****s will always be cheap no matter where you draw the line.
    Yes, people will try to get out of being forced to do something by the government. Shocking..

  2. #12
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The Republic of Texas.
    Last Seen
    11-15-17 @ 11:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,647

    Re: Thirty Hours = "Full Time"?

    Quote Originally Posted by aberrant85 View Post
    If it was set at 40 you'd have a ton of employers putting their employees at 39 hours. If it was 35 they'd give them 34 hours. If it was 20 they would give them 19 hours.

    The cheap f*****s will always be cheap no matter where you draw the line.
    Is it really always someone being a "cheap ****"? Small business employs more Americans than Corporations. Not all "Corporations" actually employ people directly, many are Franchised. Most fast food places and several other businesses are franchised. This means that payroll does not come from a company like McDonald's, but from the local franchisee.

    I have already seen several small businesses close their doors because they know they cannot afford Obama care, they simply do not make enough to pay for it. When the business owners are themselves middle class and struggling with their own heathcare and other expenses, they simply will not be able to afford the added costs. Some will cut hours to keep employees below the 30 hr limit, it is the only way they might be able to survive.

    This extra cost mandated by such will also drive up prices. While some businesses will survive this, many who cannot maintain enough sales at the increased costs to customers will also be forced out of business.
    Only a fool measures equality by results and not opportunities.

  3. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Seen
    08-19-16 @ 02:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    5,243

    Re: Thirty Hours = "Full Time"?

    There are no unintended consequences. Setting it at 30 reduces the average worker's hour without making it a simple thing to have two jobs. Two 20s with a secondary commute in the middle could be doable for some, two 30s not so much. The idea is to give people almost enough and then subsidize the gap, in effect locking in a much larger dependent class while claiming to have "created" 1/3 more jobs.

  4. #14
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,998

    Re: Thirty Hours = "Full Time"?

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    For someone as detail minded and exacting as you often are, I'm suprised that you don't realize that the 30hour/week standard applies only for PPACA. For all (or at least most) other things (ex overtime compensation), the 40hour/week standard is used.
    I do understand that. It's why, in my post, I specifically stated this was the definition per the ACA.

    The issue however is that this is the only place in federal law that I've discovered an actual definition for "full time". FLSA laws speak of working 40 hours before overtime, but give no official definition for that.

    The fact that the only part of federal law DEFINING full time employment is in the ACA, and it defines it at 30 hours, does not sit right with me. At the least, it now creates conflicting standards in the law in terms of how the government treats the amount if hours employees work in relation to things that society generally relates to "full time status". It provides a leverage point for unions and others to highlight and utilize in attempting to force one standard over the other in the future.

    As you pointed out, other parts I'd our federal laws dealing with issues commonly related to "full time" currently go odd 40 hours. As such, I find it inconsistent and troubling that this one law...the only one officially determining something as full time employment...does not

  5. #15
    Engineer

    RabidAlpaca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    American in Europe
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    14,587

    Re: Thirty Hours = "Full Time"?

    Quote Originally Posted by aberrant85 View Post
    If it was set at 40 you'd have a ton of employers putting their employees at 39 hours. If it was 35 they'd give them 34 hours. If it was 20 they would give them 19 hours.

    The cheap f*****s will always be cheap no matter where you draw the line.
    Have you ever considered that most employers are not mega billionaires resembling the monopoly man but rather normal people trying to keep their business afloat?

    Its insanely ****ing ignorant for you to claim that every company in America can afford to give healthcare to its workers.
    Quote Originally Posted by LowDown View Post
    I've got to say that it is shadenfreudalicious to see the rich and famous fucquewads on the coast suffering from the fires.

  6. #16
    Sage davidtaylorjr's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    10-18-13 @ 08:57 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    6,775

    Re: Thirty Hours = "Full Time"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    So talking with my dad tonight I actually heard something for the first time. Not sure how I missed it in previous readings of things (to be honest, Obamacare hasn't been one of those things I've been able to generate enough interest to look extremely heavily into, so that may be why) but he told me how one of the things his business is facing is the fact that...at least under the definitions of the ACA....30 hours of work is considered a Full Time Employee.

    What?

    Seriously, for as long as I've lived on this earth...even as a younger child...I understood that standard "Full time" was generally a "40 hour" work week minimum. That's definitely been my understanding for my entire working age. How in the world is it that we're randomly deciding that 30 hours is "full time" employment?

    Do you agree with equating a 30 hour work week to "Full Time" employment?
    Man if 30 hours a week was full time I would have a lot more money than I do today due to all of the overtime I have put in over the years.
    Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.

    Ronald Reagan

  7. #17
    Wee Nyeff
    GottaGo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    In the now
    Last Seen
    05-23-17 @ 02:58 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,311

    Re: Thirty Hours = "Full Time"?

    Arbitrary line drawn at 30 hours can very easily open the door for changing the rules regarding employers having to pay overtime at that line.

    The cynical me also says keep an eye out for mandatory 'benefits' such as vacation also mandated at that line.

    40 hour jobs are going to become less and less available, making more jobs with less hours, as many have said before me.
    Building block or stumbling block.... choose.

  8. #18
    Bring us a shrubbery!
    tessaesque's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Plano, Texas
    Last Seen
    11-09-17 @ 06:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    15,910

    Re: Thirty Hours = "Full Time"?

    In my experience, part-time has always ended at 32+. I remember as a part time worker I would often find my last scheduled shift cut short so I did not go over 32 hours, because it was at that point that they considered you "full time"...and you were then entitled to all of the benefits (earned vacation time and PTO, specifically...health insurance secondary to that).

    It's kind of a double-edged sword, I suppose.. If you cut hours you have to hire more employees to provide adequate coverage, and there are costs involved in that: some cities will charge you more for yearly operational permit renewals based upon your number of employees, workers comp rates can go up, training costs, supply/uniform costs, payroll costs, etc. At the same time, if you increase hours and decrease the number of employees you then have additional costs for healthcare and potential overtime. I have NO idea how those two costs equate to one another though...from the current climate it would seem that the latter is more expensive, but I'm not qualified to say for sure.

    I think applying an hour cap specifically to ACA is a little...convoluted, FWIW.
    "Hmmm...Can't decide if I want to watch "Four Houses" or give myself an Icy Hot pee hole enema..." - Blake Shelton


  9. #19
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Goldsboro,PA
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 04:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,596
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Thirty Hours = "Full Time"?

    OTHER, of course.
    Forty hours is arbitrary and antique...We are in a computerized mechanized age....news to those who cannot keep up.....
    Right off the bat, I cannot design a definite number of hours for a worker.
    This definitely varies from task to chore and even with the individual.
    I'd throw 40 hours and OT out the window, along with all other rigid tenets.
    In the window would be far greater input and responsibility and profit sharing.
    Happiness would have to be numero uno, for all.
    Just look at the faces of workers entering and leaving...much less the consumers...things can be much better...
    And, we need a better "spel-chek".
    Last edited by earthworm; 09-21-13 at 11:28 AM.

  10. #20
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Goldsboro,PA
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 04:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,596
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Thirty Hours = "Full Time"?

    Handle health care in a similar manner to today's social security.....make it a 50-50 deal.
    Fifty years ago, many companies offered health care as a benefit (Blue Cross and Shield) Was this ever expensive, IMO.
    But my company offered Travelers Insurance instead....I'd imagine the costs or either would be much the same as todays ACA ......
    So why all this fuss ???

Page 2 of 12 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •