Why Changing the Definition of Full-Time Work Under the ACA Will Put More Workers at Risk and Increase Federal Spending

eAlert c47f35e1-ad9a-4e72-9ef3-ffa3a4784070

<p>Starting next year, large employers must offer health insurance coverage to full-time employees or pay a penalty if their employees become eligible for the law’s insurance subsidies. Under the Affordable Care Act, large employers are defined as those with at least 50 full-time employees, and current regulations specify that full-time workers are those working 30 or more hours per week.</p><p>But some groups have urged the Obama administration to raise this minimum above 30 hours per week, arguing that employers will otherwise reduce workers’ hours to avoid the mandate penalty.</p>
<p>In a <a href="/blog/2014/why-changing-definition-full-time-work-under-aca-will-put-more-workers-risk-and-increase">new blog post,</a> Sherry Glied, Ph.D., the dean of the Robert F. Wagner Graduate School of Public Service at New York University (NYU), and Claudia Solis-Roman, a junior research scientist, share findings from a new Commonwealth Fund–supported study showing that increasing the threshold would not only subject a much larger proportion of workers to having their hours cut, but would also increase the federal costs of health reform. </p>
<p>Read the complete post on <a href="/blog/2014/why-changing-definition-full-time-work-under-aca-will-put-more-workers-risk-and-increase">commonwealthfund.org</a>.</p>