Insurers would not be allowed to set limits on coverage per sickness, year, or lifetime, nor could they set a dollar maximum for any medical service
This part makes me wonder how this will impact the charges that medical providers use.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Insurers would not be allowed to set limits on coverage per sickness, year, or lifetime, nor could they set a dollar maximum for any medical service
john_petrowski said:somarco said:Failure to comply will mean a $295 per employee assessment
The penalty is not severe enough to force compliance. I can see many employers paying the $295 and thumbing their nose at the law.
. . .
But now they have some 'splain to do to their employees. The employees would now get to confront the owner and ask why they don't have coverage since the law took effect. Now the owner comes off looking like a douchebag and loses the respect of the employees - especially if said owner has a nice fat S-class, huge house and a boat. The employees now see him as a law-breaker and someone willing to pay a fine instead of offering coverage. And there goes your workforce.
And how does that employer hire? Say that employee size is 20 and a newbie gets a job. He's all excited to see the health package but the empoyers says "Nah, I don't comply. I just pay the fine instead - it's cheaper." Well, there goes your hiring ability.
You also have your peer group. They're all complying and you're not so now you're an outcast in the small business community.
Also, would an employee now be able to sue that employer? After all, the employer is violating a law and thereby denying coverage. Sounds like a great civil case.
And how does that employer hire? Say that employee size is 20 and a newbie gets a job. He's all excited to see the health package but the empoyers says "Nah, I don't comply. I just pay the fine instead - it's cheaper." Well, there goes your hiring ability.
You also have your peer group. They're all complying and you're not so now you're an outcast in the small business community.
Also, would an employee now be able to sue that employer? After all, the employer is violating a law and thereby denying coverage. Sounds like a great civil case.
would an employee now be able to sue that employer? After all, the employer is violating a law and thereby denying coverage.
john_petrowski said:I'm all in favor of forcing people to protect themselves