Amira Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 I was chatting with my nephew's pregnant wife the other day and she told me that her forty-hour-a-week job is officially designated as two part-time jobs so she doesn't get health care. Is that legal? Seems pretty sketchy to me. It's a non-profit. She isn't allowed to work a minute over forty hours and she does the same work for both jobs. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TechWife Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 That doesn't sound legit to me at all because the requirement is based upon how many hours an employee works, not how their job is classified by the employer. If she worked 30 or more hours per week the previous year she can get coverage on her employer's health plan (if I understand correctly). However, if they don't have one, she can purchase through the marketplace. If the employer has over 50 full time employees (30 or more hours per week) and doesn't provide an insurance plan, the company has to pay a penalty. https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/n-12-58.pdf She can get help with her questions from the healthcare.gov. Customer service section. https://www.healthcare.gov/ 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TechWife Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 (edited) dp Edited June 29, 2016 by TechWife Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Petrichor Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 I was chatting with my nephew's pregnant wife the other day and she told me that her forty-hour-a-week job is officially designated as two part-time jobs so she doesn't get health care. Is that legal? Seems pretty sketchy to me. It's a non-profit. She isn't allowed to work a minute over forty hours and she does the same work for both jobs. I don't know. But that is not cool of them :( 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoobie Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 Super sketchy. It violates all kinds of federal (possibly state) law. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-06-24/when-employers-want-to-avoid-paying-for-health-insurance 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bettyandbob Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 (edited) I've worked 3 part time jobs in the last year, totalling more than 40 hours. These were different employers. They were strict about how much I could work, mainly to keep themselves from paying insurance. Job 1: allows an average of 17 hours a week or 900 a year. A person who reaches 900 hours cannot work the rest of the year, whether that occurs in September or the beginning of December. Job 2: allows 29.5 hours a week. Supervisorsau not schedule or bring someone in on emergency once the person hits this limit. Job 3: didn't have an official policy. This was a very small company. I just never worked more than 20 per week. If your niece has two jobs with the same employer she should be getting benefits. Now she could be working 20 hours directly for her employer and 20 hours as a contractor. I've seen this done. It's clear it's a way to avoid benefits. It's wrong. I'm not an expert. I believe there are legal tests to determine whether a job constitutes work by an independent contractor. It sounds like niece should get some help investigating. Edited June 29, 2016 by Diana P. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanny Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 If I assume, what her employer is doing is illegal, or to phrase it another way, they are not complying with the ACA law. Possibly other laws in addition to the one regarding the ACA. If she makes waves, they may get rid of her, or make it uncomfortable for her to continue working there, so that she will resign and then they will not need to pay unemployment benefits. She is pregnant, which adds to the issues. She should look for a position with another employer, who will hopefully comply with regulations. Sounds like a bad place to work, based on what you described... Creative avoidance of the ACA law and possibly other laws. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TechWife Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 Amira - I wanted to clarify something - Is she at the same employer for both "part time" jobs? If so, then the employer is doing it wrong, if not, then she is correct, she doesn't get insurance coverage through the employer. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pippen Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 I was chatting with my nephew's pregnant wife the other day and she told me that her forty-hour-a-week job is officially designated as two part-time jobs so she doesn't get health care. Is that legal? Seems pretty sketchy to me. It's a non-profit. She isn't allowed to work a minute over forty hours and she does the same work for both jobs. Are all 40 hours per week for year around jobs? I believe there are some exceptions for seasonal workers. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TechWife Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 If I assume, what her employer is doing is illegal, or to phrase it another way, they are not complying with the ACA law. Possibly other laws in addition to the one regarding the ACA. If she makes waves, they may get rid of her, or make it uncomfortable for her to continue working there, so that she will resign and then they will not need to pay unemployment benefits. She is pregnant, which adds to the issues. She should look for a position with another employer, who will hopefully comply with regulations. Sounds like a bad place to work, based on what you described... Creative avoidance of the ACA law and possibly other laws. Here's another idea: She can stand up for herself and fight. If she loses her job, she can get a lawyer and fight. The only way to make sure this doesn't keep happening to her and any other employees is to fight. It's not easy, but it's a good thing to do - fight. The employer is not making ethical decisions, but the only way to change that is to fight. Don't shy away from what is hard. Instead, find one or two supportive people who will be your personal cheerleaders, dig in and fight. I'm glad that others who came before me in this life decided to fight - labor laws that protect safety and life are in place, there is a minimum wage (paltry though it may be) and worker's compensation for on the job injury is mandated, along with many other workplace regulations. These things came into being because people decided to fight. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amira Posted June 29, 2016 Author Share Posted June 29, 2016 She's been working there for less than a year, but it's not a seasonal job. It is the same employer, same office, same work. From what she said, there is no difference between the two jobs except that they're classified as two part-time jobs. They made that clear when she was hired. I doubt she will want to make an issue of this, but I definitely want to at least pass some information on to her. If she does choose to do something, I will support her in it and enlist my dh who is a licensed attorney in the state she's working in even though we don't live there. She's partly concerned because it's a non-profit so they don't have a lot of money, and I understand her concern, but non-profits do have legitimate admin costs and those include treating their paid employees fairly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephanieZ Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 (edited) Nope, not legal. If it's the same employer, it's certainly illegal. (Check pay checks/stubs . . . If they are from the same account, for sure, this is so illegal.) If it's two employers (say two different charities that coordinate), it *might* be legal in some really sketchy way. Personally, I'd advise 1) sitting down with the boss after googling up some stuff on how this is not legal and *secretly recording this entire meeting unless that is illegal in your locality and then 2) if boss doesn't fix it then (he may have had no idea it was not legal), then file a complaint with various regulatory bodies, beginning with the state Labor Board. Edited June 29, 2016 by StephanieZ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephanieZ Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 Non profits do have insurance. Hopefully this one has "employment practices" coverage and your friend files complaints and is compensated generously. Totally illegal. Totally. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TechWife Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 Definitely illegal! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amira Posted June 29, 2016 Author Share Posted June 29, 2016 I'm going to find out if she's getting paid by two different organizations. I know that there is another overarching organization over the one she's with so it's possible her paychecks aren't coming from the same source. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Georgiana Daniels Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 What a sucky employer! It makes me mad that so many hard-working people are in this position at all, trying to cobble together jobs to get full-time pay. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucyStoner Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 (edited) Does their liability insurance carrier know about this? Because trust me that insurance carrier wants to know. And if they don't carry such insurance the board and the state want to know. It's not just about the ACA and healthcare. It's contrary to many laws and messes her up on many levels. It's also unethical and as a donor, I would be irate if I found this was going on at any organization I gave so much as a dollar to. It's not uncommon for nonprofits to try to get away with illegal employment practices by winning the employees sympathy for their cause and the budget constraints nonprofits often have. But like I tell my kids and niece and nephew. Being commonplace doesn't mean being right. ETA- poor employment practices lead to employee dissatisfaction and tend to contribute to lower job performance and higher employee turnover. So it's crappy stewardship by the non-profit of th resources entrusted to them and it doesn't well serve the mission of the organization. It's just bad for everyone and a great example of penny wise, pound foolish. Edited June 29, 2016 by LucyStoner 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.