|
|
This topic comprises 7 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Regal cuts employee hours to stay out of Obamacare
|
|
|
|
|
Jason Burroughs
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 654
From: Allen, TX
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 04-18-2013 11:47 AM
quote: Lyle Romer
This isn't true. Any healthcare facility or provider that accepts any federal program money (Medicare or Medicaid) must treat anybody who walks through the door regardless of their ability to pay.
The "duty to treat" that EMTALA imposes on hospitals with emergency rooms that accept Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement begins when a patient comes to the emergency department seeking help. In addition to the emergency department, EMTALA also applies to other properties owned by a hospital, such as ambulances. To comply with EMTALA, the participating hospitals must provide within its capabilities a nondiscriminatory medical screening examination (MSE) to determine if the patient has an emergency medical condition. An emergency medical condition is defined as "a condition manifesting itself by acute symptoms of sufficient severity, such as severe pain, for which the lack of immediate medical attention could reasonably be expected to result in placing the patient in serious jeopardy, serious impairment to bodily functions, or serious dysfunction of any bodily organ or part." [Smith, JM, "EMTALA Basics: What Medical Professionals Need to Know," Journal of the National Medical Association 94,6 (2002): 426-429]. In the case of pregnant women in labor, an emergency medical condition exists if there is not sufficient time to deliver the baby at another facility or if the unborn child is at critical risk and needs assistance. If an emergency medical condition exists, the hospital must provide the necessary medical treatment to stabilize the patient. Legally, a patient can be considered stabilized when "no material deterioration of the emergency medical condition is likely, within reasonable medical probability, to result from or occur during the transfer of the individual, or, …that the (pregnant) woman has delivered (including the placenta)." [42 U.S.C. § 1395dd(e)(3)]. If no emergency medical condition exists or the emergency medical condition has been stabilized, then the hospital has no further obligation under EMTALA.
Bottom line - they would be obligated to provide emergency treatment ONLY. The hypothetical cancer patient - screwed. Once an uninsured patient is stable (not cured) the provider is under no further obligation. This is why you often see patient dumping, once their Medicaid, or other insurance runs out.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Michael Marini
Film Handler
Posts: 27
From: issue maryland/ USA
Registered: Dec 2005
|
posted 04-22-2013 04:06 PM
posted 04-21-2013 01:11 PM Central (GMT -6:00) (2:11 PM Local)
Regal Cinema sees backlash over Obamacare cuts
Moviegoers are vowing to boycott the country's biggest theater chain after it slashes employees' hours to avoid the new law.
By Aimee Picchi Thu 10:58 AM
Share
1.4k
Share
2.3k
1.3k
Regal Entertainment Group (RGC) is finding itself at the center of a drama worthy of a big-screen blockbuster.
The country's biggest movie theater chain has stirred a hornets' nest of controversy after announcing in a company memo that it's cutting hours for thousands of nonsalaried employees to avoid providing health care insurance under Obamacare, according to Fox News.
But that isn't going over well with some customers, who point to Regal's hefty $334 million in 2012 profits and its chief executive's massive 31% pay hike. The company's shares rose 17% last year.
"SHAME on you for cutting employees' hours to avoid giving them healthcare while your CEO made $4.4 million and other executives were given large bonuses. You lose my business," one person wrote on Regal's Facebook page.
Chief executive Amy Miles earned $4.45 million in 2012, up from $3.4 million in the previous year, according to a regulatory filing.
Many people writing on Regal's Facebook page vowed to stop attending films at its theaters, which operate under the Regal, Edwards and United Artists brands. Another wrote, "It is so sad to see companies work so hard to keep from treating their employees fairly. The greedy people at the top forget who makes them rich. Shame on you. I for one will find other movie houses to attend shows from now on."
Obamacare has become a lightning rod among American business owners, with some fast-food franchisees saying they'll have to delay expansion plans or charge more for their food, for example. Dunkin' Brands (DNKN +1.15%) is lobbying the government to change its definition of "full time" to employees working at least 40 hours a week instead of the law's current 30 hours a week.
But Regal Cinemas might be at the receiving end of one of the worst consumer backlashes yet. It's one of only a handful of companies to announce definitively how it plans to cope with the Affordable Care Act, which goes into effect next year. Other companies planning cutbacks because of Obamacare include Applebee's and Denny's (DENN +0.72%), which both suffered from poor brand perception afterward, according to a December report from Today.com.
Regal is also facing pushback from employees, according to Fox News. After getting their hours cut by 25% or more, some full-time managers have resigned, the story notes.
According to a memo obtained by Fox News, Regal advised managers to tell affected employees that "to comply with the Affordable Care Act, Regal had to increase our health care budget to cover those newly deemed eligible based on the law's definition of a full-time employee. To manage this budget, all other employees will be scheduled in accord with business needs and in a manner that will not negatively impact our health care budget."
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mike Blakesley
Film God
Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 04-22-2013 06:22 PM
I'm tired of people griping about CEOs making too much money. First of all, they usually make that much because they're worth that much. If you want to get good executives you have to pay for them, period.
Next, even if you DID take away all that "excess" executive pay (and who's going to decide how much is excess?), it probably still wouldn't be enough to pay for all the tens of thousands of employees' health insurance. There are three options: Avoid paying for it, or trim employees to pay for it, or raise prices to pay for it.
Most "uninsured" people in this country seem to think that health care should be free...well NOTHING in life is free, which shouldn't be a surprise to anybody with a brain.
Regal is just doing this move to keep their costs down -- which if they don't do, they'll have to raise their ticket and concession prices to pay the tab (or cut down on staffing, which would be crazy given stories we hear about understaffing).
I can't believe I'm actually defending my second-least favorite big theater chain here but if it makes sense, it makes sense.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tony Bandiera Jr
Film God
Posts: 3067
From: Moreland Idaho
Registered: Apr 2004
|
posted 04-22-2013 06:48 PM
quote: Mike Blakesley
I'm tired of people griping about CEOs making too much money. First of all, they usually make that much because they're worth that much. If you want to get good executives you have to pay for them, period.
A theatre chain as badly managed as Regal is, does not seem to be one where the CEO is good or "worth that much."
And Regal isn't the only example..how about Ebay/Paypal? ![[Mad]](mad.gif)
quote: Mike Blakesley
Regal is just doing this move to keep their costs down -- which if they don't do, they'll have to raise their ticket and concession prices to pay the tab (or cut down on staffing, which would be crazy given stories we hear about understaffing).
See above comment. A chain consistently shortchanging customer service by understaffing and the other evils they do is not one I would consider to be well-run or one where the CEO ranks as deserving of top dollar. ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
quote: Mike Blakesley
I can't believe I'm actually defending my second-least favorite big theater chain here but if it makes sense, it makes sense.
I can't believe you posted that either, as your position makes no sense based on what I have read from you in the past. You strike me as someone who genuinely cares about providing outstanding customer service, worthy of the high pay of some of these CEO's. If anyone deserves high pay, it is you, and folks like you, who think of the CUSTOMER and EMPLOYEES first. ![[thumbsup]](graemlins/thumbsup.gif)
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Terry Lynn-Stevens
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1081
From: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Registered: Dec 2012
|
posted 04-23-2013 12:27 PM
I feel bad for the part time workers who will not have any health paid for them, but this is just a response from those who cannot/or do not want to pay for Obamacare. If I am correct, the United States is supposed to be a country where the top have more and the bottom have less, in this case, Obama trying to impose health care coverage and have a company have to pay for the cost of it goes against the whole idea of what America is about.
This idea of reducing part time workers hours has been predicted for a while now.
Now, if Obama really wanted to do something that would benefit everyone, perhaps the government should of come up with a plan that will eliminate billing the end user for the health care. In Canada and other parts of the world, the government will pay for major health care visits...this would be the only solution that would work if you want to cover everyone.
Can anyone confirm something for me, with Obamacare, is now illegal to not have insurance regardless if you have a company pay for it or if you have to pay for it yourself?
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 7 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic