Article “How many businesses cut part-time hours because of the Affordable Care Act?” raises a good question and is a relatively well researched article.
The problem is that neither the reporter or editor apparently understands the most rudimentary Economics. So they fail to mention that eliminating part time jobs for some creates full time jobs for others, often the same people.
Here is why:
The bizarre system whereby employers largely payfor health care rooted in the Second World War regulator short sightedness created an invidious incentive for employers to hire part time workers. By doing so, companies usually could avoid offering health insurance.
Health insurance, even for full time employees, costs an employer about $3 an hour. If part time workers are readily available for $8 an hour, why not use two part timers to do the job that otherwise would cost $11 ($8 + $3) an hour for a full time employer?
According to Business Insider: “The Labor Department has been collecting this since 1968, a time when only 13.5% of US employees were part-timers. That number peaked at 20.1% in January 2010. The latest data point, five years later, is only modestly lower at 18.5% last month. If the pre-recession percentage is a recovery target, we’re only about half-way there.”
If plumber company XXX decides to lay off a couple of part time workers, either it will replace them with a full time worker or lose business. If it chooses to shrink its business, customers will simply go to plumbing company YYY who will hire the laid off workers, either part time or full time. Either way, Mrs. Jones is going to have her commode fixed.
The demand for plumbers won’t diminish. The alarming trend from full time to part time work will simply be reversed. More workers will have health insurance. All this is a good thing.
