Forums
Minimum Hrs for Benefits
Legal Forum
Minimum Hrs for Benefits
Discuss employment-law issues such as family leave, overtime, disabilities law, harassment, immigration and termination.
We state in our EE Manual that people are classified as Full Time employees when their normal work week is 35 hours or greater. (We work a 40 hr week) We also state that Full Time EE’s qualify f
0
Cat:Topic ForumsForum:ForumId54
Cat:Topic ForumsForum:ForumId54Discussion:DiscussionId17381
Forums » Topic Forums » Legal Forum » Minimum Hrs for Benefits
|
Minimum Hrs for Benefits
posted at 7/7/1999 4:59 AM EDT
|
Posts: 18
First: 7/7/1999 Last: 10/18/2007 |
We state in our EE Manual that people are classified as Full Time employees when their normal work week is 35 hours or greater. (We work a 40 hr week) We also state that Full Time EE’s qualify for health benefits
I currently have 3 EE’s with chronic attendance problems. They used up all of their sick/vacation in the first 5 months of the year. We are about to go through the process (first time for us) of warning them that they will be reclassified as Part Time and no longer qualify for any benefits and they may ultimately be terminated if we can not maintain them as PT. The questions… 1) Is this the right approach to deal with this? 2) All things considered, would it be preferable to aim towards termination and leave out the issue of reclassification/pulling their benefits? (keeping them on as PT is appealing at the moment) 3) Are there any laws dealing with minimum hours worked to qualify for bene’s? We have a sec.125 in place were the EE’s pay 20% of the health premium and 100% of LTD, STD,… 4) Is it possible to offer health benefits to PT EE’s were they pay 50-100% of (or perhaps sliding scale or pro-rate) the premium? This a small 12 EE manufacturing company in Pennsylvania that simply can not afford to have PT people taking up FT positions and FT benefits. Thanks Jim |
|
|
Minimum Hrs for Benefits
posted at 7/7/1999 9:28 AM EDT
|
|
Posts: 833
First: 6/11/1999 Last: 8/23/2001 |
1. What's "right" is what works toward your goal. Is the goal to correct the behavior, or punish the employee? And please don't take that as being "preachy"..it's a real question you need to ask yourself.
2. You may open up a can of worm by re-classifying people, and will definately start this micro-management HR function of a weekly check over who qualifies of doesn't. Your carrier will have a fit with the add and drops, and, once you drop them because of their hours, you're generated a COBRA-qualifying event, and have to start the notification process. I'd vote for progressive discipline. Reclassifications will pose a huge bureaucratic burden, and what do you do when you reclassifiy and then find the underlying reason was FMLA qualified? There's a bunch of dangers here. 3) Conditions for benefits are generally set or negotiated by the carrier. The hours limitations are the enrollment qualifications of the insurance company. 4) Sure, if the carrier was willing to cover them and your company was willing to subsidize the cost. You'd need to discuss that with your benefits person and the carrier's underwriting/risk management staff. Jim, talk to your attendance problems and warn them if necessary. Apply discipline up to termination. The hours you save in recruitment by trying to preserve the employees part-time, you'd waste in an administrative nightmare that would be potentially both inconsistant and dangerous. Set up an attendance policy and stick by it. |
|
|
Minimum Hrs for Benefits
posted at 7/8/1999 2:42 AM EDT
|
|
Posts: 34
First: 7/8/1999 Last: 5/8/2002 |
Sounds to me like you have some performance issues rather than are they PT or FT. In this case my company would put them on warning stating what their hours are and that they are full-time employees. We would also state that any time they wish to use going forward (if all of their time for the year has been used) would have to be LWOP. All absences going forward need to be documented (be sure to consider FMLA laws too)
As far as your benefits, what do your SPD's say as far as coverage? You need to follow that for the #of hours. If you offer benefits to someone who is classified as PT, you may find yourself in a clinch. If you wanted to offer benefits to your PT folks, they would still have to pay the same premium as other folks (unless different coverage is offered...the premiums are mandated by your carrier). You would need to work these details out with your carriers and make sure it is added to your SPD...this is mandated by ERISA. |
|
|
Minimum Hrs for Benefits
posted at 7/11/1999 8:01 PM EDT
|
|
Posts: 2217
First: 6/16/1999 Last: 12/13/2001 |
I basically agree with Jim's view that poor-performing employees should be handled by addressing the poor performance, including where the problem is non-compliance with your absence control policies. Are you operating under any constraints due to a collective bargaining agreement, modification on the employment at will doctrine in your employee handbook, etc.? Have the employees' been counseled/warned/disciplined to date? Any issues regarding FMLA leaves for any of them-- i.e., were they entitled to the leaves they took? Some of the potential problems mentioned in other responses to reclassifying the employees as part-time are well-taken.
|
Forums » Topic Forums » Legal Forum » Minimum Hrs for Benefits
