The passage of the “ObamaCare” Health Care plan in 2009 presented the country with many questions. How will it work? Who would be paying for it? Apart from the political firestorm created by one half of the political spectrum in this country (and one news network), companies were also faced with questions about how the new law would affect them. If the government is now providing health insurance for people, are private companies allowed to drop health care from their benefits package? Will there be some kind of tax incentive for a company to offer health care, and even so, why would they take that hit to their bottom line if their employees had a system already provided to them.
The Wall Street Journal article I’ve linked to here deals with the fact that many states, led by governors on both sides of the aisle, have joined in a lawsuit against the law, arguing for the principle of state’s rights. Governors of many of these states recently wrote a letter to the President claiming that the current language of the bill puts too many restrictions on states and forces them to pay too much of a share in health care costs without a source of revenue to cover those rising costs. This political issue will have a profound effect on how company’s structure their benefits, which will shape the way that HR departments are run in the future.
Thomas, if Human Resource departments are to retain internal top talent, as well as attract experienced talent from the baby boom generation then the methods in which they decide on health care benefits for their employees need to be enticing enough. Otherwise the talent from this group may eventual end up with a competitor. Another point to consider is the fact that employees no longer feel a sense of loyalty due to the effects of the last 10 years or so of re-engineering jobs offshore. In my mind it will become a creative distribution of various types of benefit packages, with some form of affordable employee contribution.
ReplyDelete