Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
TDU and public opinion of unionism.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Bagels" data-source="post: 1188348" data-attributes="member: 43436"><p>It's hard to phantom that the move by Forever 21 was related to ObamaCare, given that these positions already included health care. More likely Forever 21 (which denies the ACA link), which is also eliminating paid time off for PT employees, was seeking to cut costs. Given that companies have been moving to PT workforces over the past 30 years while slashing pay & benefits, it's hard to establish a definite link between benefit/employment status cuts & downgauges. If ObamaCare explains Forever 21's actions in 2013, what explains Kohl's and Target's (et. al. - the listing seems infinite really) similar actions in the mid-2000s? The big difference is that companies can use ACA as an excuse. </p><p></p><p>Take UPS for example. Unquestionably, the contract negotiated with IBT will further handicap their ability to compete on cost and could be damning in the next five years. The company's been on a cost cutting campaign since 2008, and really, there's not much left to cut. Enter ACA, which provides the company a convenience excuse to dilute managerial benefits (at a significant savings) while rallying a base that generally identifies as conservative. But did ACA make these cuts really necessary? Or is it just an excuse? Nobody here has a definite answer.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Bagels, post: 1188348, member: 43436"] It's hard to phantom that the move by Forever 21 was related to ObamaCare, given that these positions already included health care. More likely Forever 21 (which denies the ACA link), which is also eliminating paid time off for PT employees, was seeking to cut costs. Given that companies have been moving to PT workforces over the past 30 years while slashing pay & benefits, it's hard to establish a definite link between benefit/employment status cuts & downgauges. If ObamaCare explains Forever 21's actions in 2013, what explains Kohl's and Target's (et. al. - the listing seems infinite really) similar actions in the mid-2000s? The big difference is that companies can use ACA as an excuse. Take UPS for example. Unquestionably, the contract negotiated with IBT will further handicap their ability to compete on cost and could be damning in the next five years. The company's been on a cost cutting campaign since 2008, and really, there's not much left to cut. Enter ACA, which provides the company a convenience excuse to dilute managerial benefits (at a significant savings) while rallying a base that generally identifies as conservative. But did ACA make these cuts really necessary? Or is it just an excuse? Nobody here has a definite answer. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
TDU and public opinion of unionism.
Top