True, not all (or sometimes much) of the negotiating that goes on in Congress nets a clearly more positive outcome. I mean, examine health care right now. The best thing that the health care negotiation has done is allow EFCA to hide, under the radar style, and let our legislators work for a more realistic bill that won't harm the economy further.
I am, and have been, completely against the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), specifically the "card check" provisions that would provide unions the ability to force themselves to be recognized by companies with little more than trickery and smoke & mirrors. I believe card check recognition for unions would irrevocably harm business in America, especially small and local businesses that operate in industries such as transportation, grocery and warehousing & distribution.
In a nutshell, the last thing the economy in America needs is another level of complexity in business expenses to make it harder for businesses to operate. I submit that we now have enough complexity in federal and state laws to protect the interests of employees.
So with all that said, it appears that the card check provision of EFCA is nearing its swan song.
http://www.jacksonlewis.com/legalupdates/article.cfm?aid=1795
However, EFCA is still on track to pass with provisions that would significantly strengthen the position of unions and weaken the position of companies to lobby and educate their workforces against them, so educate yourself now and don't be caught off guard later.
ZW
http://www.azmobilehr.com/
Monday, July 27, 2009
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Healthcare "Reform"
So, the AMA (American Medical Association) has endorsed the current House bill involving health care reform, including a government-run health care option. As recently as several weeks ago, this was considered, if not highly improbable, at least not a safe bet. So, where did the sudden reversal come from? President Obama met with them at an AMA conference and apparently in one speech garnered enough good will to get a public endorsement of his healthcare plan. (If you have an hour, here it is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uG3IJazP5gk)
Pretty impressive. Whether you like him or not, he's a marvel at spending political capital.
This whole debate is fascinating to me, as I'm sure the next electoral cycle will be. Republicans are going for broke, betting against nearly every piece of legislation that comes up. Democrats are, well, spending till we're broke hoping that they can pass enough legislation to fix America's ills within a six-month time frame. I anticipate a very familiar finger-pointing based party line political fight come the mid-term election cycle. I don't know that either side has set themselves up well. I predict the general state of the economy come election-eve will be the deciding factor.
I digress, back to healthcare.....
A Potential Winner - residents of smaller and rural areas that currently have very few private insurance options available, individually or as a part of an employer's group plan. These folks will have greater options and access to coverage that is likely to be less expensive because of the market forces that spread risk over a greater pool of lives.
A Potential Loser - private insurers. The reason they are fighting a government plan is because they will lose participants to a public health care option. Greater competition will likely drive costs down, stripping additional profits from these companies.
And what about those who choose not to cover themselves who may be forced into picking up a public health care plan? That's the biggest question on my conscience. Should people be forced into health care plans? The easy answer is no. But, they do seek services when emergencies and illness happen, ultimately leaving the taxpayers to pick up most, if not all, of their bill. So, shouldn't they have to have some "skin" in the game to begin with?
Right & Wrong - I can't tell you that. There are wonderful arguments on both sides of the debate. What I do know is that the status quo hasn't worked for a long time. Private insurers can cry all they want, and a new system will likely be far from perfect, but some form of change needs to happen. And sometimes, any change can be good because it will force more decisions down the road to refine and reflect on what is working and what is not. The more I read and research, it looks like some form of reform is bound to be enacted this year. The momentum is there.
ZW
http://www.azmobilehr.com/
Pretty impressive. Whether you like him or not, he's a marvel at spending political capital.
This whole debate is fascinating to me, as I'm sure the next electoral cycle will be. Republicans are going for broke, betting against nearly every piece of legislation that comes up. Democrats are, well, spending till we're broke hoping that they can pass enough legislation to fix America's ills within a six-month time frame. I anticipate a very familiar finger-pointing based party line political fight come the mid-term election cycle. I don't know that either side has set themselves up well. I predict the general state of the economy come election-eve will be the deciding factor.
I digress, back to healthcare.....
A Potential Winner - residents of smaller and rural areas that currently have very few private insurance options available, individually or as a part of an employer's group plan. These folks will have greater options and access to coverage that is likely to be less expensive because of the market forces that spread risk over a greater pool of lives.
A Potential Loser - private insurers. The reason they are fighting a government plan is because they will lose participants to a public health care option. Greater competition will likely drive costs down, stripping additional profits from these companies.
And what about those who choose not to cover themselves who may be forced into picking up a public health care plan? That's the biggest question on my conscience. Should people be forced into health care plans? The easy answer is no. But, they do seek services when emergencies and illness happen, ultimately leaving the taxpayers to pick up most, if not all, of their bill. So, shouldn't they have to have some "skin" in the game to begin with?
Right & Wrong - I can't tell you that. There are wonderful arguments on both sides of the debate. What I do know is that the status quo hasn't worked for a long time. Private insurers can cry all they want, and a new system will likely be far from perfect, but some form of change needs to happen. And sometimes, any change can be good because it will force more decisions down the road to refine and reflect on what is working and what is not. The more I read and research, it looks like some form of reform is bound to be enacted this year. The momentum is there.
ZW
http://www.azmobilehr.com/
Thursday, July 9, 2009
Illegal Immigration Isn't Solved Yet?
It's been some time now since we've heard a lot about E-Verify compliance at the local AZ level. Since January 2008, when the "Legal AZ Workers Act" (LAWA) went into effect and expanded the demands of AZ businesses in verifying the legal status of those they hire, there has been surprisingly little said about the enforcement practices and potential penalties to businesses that don't comply with the law. Sure, Sheriff Joe has been out on the prowl, but besides that, LAWA still seems to be the red-headed step child of US illegal immigration law. It continues to be a largely unfunded mandate that sits on the books while county attorneys wait to see what happens, not wanting to be too bold and get caught up in the federal fray.
Well, today I have nothing to say about AZ's "leadership" in the immigration reform category. However, there is some news as of late on the federal level.
President Obama's new head of ICE (US Immigration and Customs Service), John Morton, has been vocal about a distinct shift in focus from high-profile raids targeted at punishing illegal workers directly to focusing on employer violations including heavy economic fines for those violators.
It turns out that good old-fashioned I-9 audits are back..... with a vengeance; or so ICE promises. In addition, ICE will be focusing on what can be described as "forensic investigating". Specifically, using the tools available, like E-Verify, to find probable violators for auditing. Not too scary if you operate your business in a state that has yet to mandate use of E-Verify. Slightly more scary if you live here in AZ.
For instance, let's say you haven't been very good at hitting the 3-day deadline after hire to verify a new employee in the E-Verify system. Guess what? E-Verify records all those missed dates and allows ICE to data-mine and find your pattern of rule-breaking. These inconsistencies and rules violations may make you a perfect target for an audit.
Just this week, Krispy Kreme was fined $40,000 for I-9 violations. Your business might not be as big as Krispy Kreme, but could you afford a $20,000 fine? How about a $10,000 fine? Ouch.
When was the last time your I-9 and hiring practices were audited? Just a thought.
ZW
http://www.azmobilehr.com/
Well, today I have nothing to say about AZ's "leadership" in the immigration reform category. However, there is some news as of late on the federal level.
President Obama's new head of ICE (US Immigration and Customs Service), John Morton, has been vocal about a distinct shift in focus from high-profile raids targeted at punishing illegal workers directly to focusing on employer violations including heavy economic fines for those violators.
It turns out that good old-fashioned I-9 audits are back..... with a vengeance; or so ICE promises. In addition, ICE will be focusing on what can be described as "forensic investigating". Specifically, using the tools available, like E-Verify, to find probable violators for auditing. Not too scary if you operate your business in a state that has yet to mandate use of E-Verify. Slightly more scary if you live here in AZ.
For instance, let's say you haven't been very good at hitting the 3-day deadline after hire to verify a new employee in the E-Verify system. Guess what? E-Verify records all those missed dates and allows ICE to data-mine and find your pattern of rule-breaking. These inconsistencies and rules violations may make you a perfect target for an audit.
Just this week, Krispy Kreme was fined $40,000 for I-9 violations. Your business might not be as big as Krispy Kreme, but could you afford a $20,000 fine? How about a $10,000 fine? Ouch.
When was the last time your I-9 and hiring practices were audited? Just a thought.
ZW
http://www.azmobilehr.com/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
