Giving PT the option to not have benefits/pension

Michael Scott

Well-Known Member
I have seen posts in the past regarding this. Giving part timers the option of not having benefits and or pension in exchange for a higher hourly rate, say $5-$10 an hour. Has this ever actually been brought up in negotiations to anyones knowledge. It seems like this would be a good way to solve the part time wage problem and free up money to also give full timers the raises we deserve.
 

Michael Scott

Well-Known Member
Why? The cast majority of part timers could care less if they get benefits, and most will never be here long enough to get a pension. Why not give them the choice to not have access to these things they dont need in lieu of much higher hourly pay.
 

Michael Scott

Well-Known Member
I guess maybe my buliding is different than most but i would say 90% of our part timers have less than 2 years seniority and are under the age of 25.
 

rod

Retired 22 years
There’s no PTer that is ever going to trade off the insurance. Most are only there for the insurance.
The young ones are all still covered under their parents insurance until I believe they are 26 so I can see a lot of them thinking short term and trading money for insurance.
 

ManInBrown

Well-Known Member
The young ones are all still covered under their parents insurance until I believe they are 26 so I can see a lot of them thinking short term and trading money for insurance.
Honestly I don’t see a lot of young ones anymore. Not like I used to. Most are older and it’s a second job to provide insurance for their family.
 

Brownwind

Well-Known Member
I have seen posts in the past regarding this. Giving part timers the option of not having benefits and or pension in exchange for a higher hourly rate, say $5-$10 an hour. Has this ever actually been brought up in negotiations to anyones knowledge. It seems like this would be a good way to solve the part time wage problem and free up money to also give full timers the raises we deserve.
Never gonna happen due to the various insurance and pension plans. The bigger pool of workers equals a better insurance plan for all. Others will explain it better locally
 

Brownslave688

You want a toe? I can get you a toe.
I have seen posts in the past regarding this. Giving part timers the option of not having benefits and or pension in exchange for a higher hourly rate, say $5-$10 an hour. Has this ever actually been brought up in negotiations to anyones knowledge. It seems like this would be a good way to solve the part time wage problem and free up money to also give full timers the raises we deserve.
The problem with this is healthy young part timers subsidize the rest of our insurance
 

UnionStrong

Sorry, but I don’t care anymore.
I have seen posts in the past regarding this. Giving part timers the option of not having benefits and or pension in exchange for a higher hourly rate, say $5-$10 an hour. Has this ever actually been brought up in negotiations to anyones knowledge. It seems like this would be a good way to solve the part time wage problem and free up money to also give full timers the raises we deserve.
Not happening. It lowers the cost of healthcare by spreading it out among the young and healthy.
 

542thruNthru

Well-Known Member
Never going to happen. PTers out of the West pension will definitely never happen and what the west wants the west gets. You all just keep ECing everything and keep your mouths shut.
 

Brownslave688

You want a toe? I can get you a toe.
Never going to happen. PTers out of the West pension will definitely never happen and what the west wants the west gets. You all just keep ECing everything and keep your mouths shut.
ECing everything……from the state that has almost floated away this year.
 
Top