Employer Fires 22 People Because Obama Won

Discussion in 'Politics' started by pspr, Nov 8, 2012.

  1. pspr


    In addition to the story below, Boing has announced massive layoffs.

    A Las Vegas business owner with 114 employees fired 22 workers today, apparently as a direct result of President Obama’s re-election.

    “David” (he asked to remain anonymous for obvious reasons) told Host Kevin Wall on 100.5 KXNT that “elections have consequences” and that “at the end of the day, I need to survive.”

  2. should be an interesting next 4 years. :cool:

    obama broke the record for fastest job losses after election. it took what, 2 minutes and we're down 22. :p
  3. pspr


    Interesting if you are Putin waiting for America to collapse. From this side of the pond it is like waiting for Sandy to hit the entire country.
  4. Tsing Tao

    Tsing Tao

    I mentioned this in a previous, pre-election thread regarding Obamacare. I said that an associate of mine who runs a size-able general contracting business in the Miami area already told his workers he was removing (if memory serves) something like 20 of them and putting an additional 25 on 29 hours a week because of the Obama care rules.

    Then we have that story about Darden Restaurants moving everyone to part-time and not accepting any more than 29.5 hours a week because of the health care mandate.

  5. Any real employer would only fire people when they are no longer essential to their business. If this guy fired some employees, it's because they are no longer needed, not because of the What If of political outcomes. A Yin for every Yang.

    Supply and Demand are the foundations of capitalism, and much like how well the gun companies are doing, if employers and/or traders let their ideologies dictate their business practices, then they would not survive. Obama did not and will not circumvent the 2nd Amendment rights, as a case in point.

    I know it makes a good talking point, and if there were some evidence that he would have kept those employees if Romney would have won, then you might have something. For now, just ideological talking points.
  6. A smart move perhaps, and one that would solve a lot of problems. Since 20% of all low skilled jobs will never come back to the U.S., it makes sense to make a 30 hour work week. If it helps with their healthcare costs, great, let the employees pay their own, or get fined or taxed. Pay their share.
  7. Tsing Tao

    Tsing Tao

    The healthcare law mandates that employers with over 50 people have to provide full time employees and their dependents with coverage. A little known provision in the law redefines "full time" as 30 hours per week. Hence, Darden's move to get people below 30 hours a week to get around the law.

    Employers don't just get rid of people if they don't need them anymore, you know. They do it to cover expenses. If expenses reach a certain point, people must make up the slack since they are one of the greatest costs a company has.
  8. These 30 hr a week jobs are shid. The schedules make it almost impossible to work two jobs.

    If you want more than 30 hours you become a salary manager working 60-70 hours week, mostly at the same rate as part timers but your weekly check is higher.

    part time employees are not loyal or consciousness, you waste your time training them. pffttttt.
  9. jem


    my wife just got an 8 percent cut in her hourly pay at a hospital.
    they blamed it on obamacare.

    she only works part time and I pay for the family medical insurance... so I am a bit dubious. but they claim that obamacare expenses are causing them to make big cutbacks.
  10. Lucrum


    I'm nervously waiting to see how Odumbo-care is going to affect me.
    My employer currently pays my entire family premium as part of my compensation. Not sure if that's going to last or not.
    #10     Nov 8, 2012