Looming implementation of the Affordable Care Act's (ACA) so-called “play or pay” provision has large employers evaluating the alternatives it presents: “play,” by offering health insurance coverage to full-time employees; or “pay,” by absorbing the annual per employee penalty for not offering such coverage. Employers willing to “play” are looking carefully at cost management, plan coverage, and who will be covered. Employers opting to “pay” are taking a hard look at how they might reduce the penalties they may be facing because of the employer mandate. In weighing both of these options, some companies are also looking at ways to reduce the number of full-time employees to whom coverage must be provided.
Employers that reduce employee hours to reduce employer mandate penalties, however, risk violating the wrongful interference provision of ERISA. It prohibits employers from, among other things, discharging, suspending, disciplining, or discriminating against an employee for the purpose of interfering with the attainment of any right to which the employee may become entitled under an employee benefit plan.
Please see full alert below for more information.
Firefox recommends the PDF Plugin for Mac OS X for viewing PDF documents in your browser.
We can also show you Legal Updates using the Google Viewer; however, you will need to be logged into Google Docs to view them.
Please choose one of the above to proceed!
LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.
Topics: Affordable Care Act, Employer Mandates, ERISA, Health Insurance Exchanges, Healthcare, Pay or Play, Shared Responsibility Rule
Published In: Civil Rights Updates, Health Updates, Insurance Updates, Labor & Employment Updates
DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.
© Miller & Martin PLLC | Attorney Advertising