On the recordApril 3, 2014
I thank the gentleman for the courtesy of yielding, especially today as I rise in support of H.R. 2575. I was first approached about the problem with the 30-hour full time definition by Steve Palmer, one of the owners of Palmer Place restaurant, an institution in LaGrange, Illinois. This is a family business committed to their community and their employees. They offer insurance coverage to their workers when possible. Because of the nature of the business, many of their employees are part-time and work flexible schedules. But the ACA's definition of full-time work has put the Palmer family's one restaurant on the cusp of being classified as a large business. The family, thus, finds itself facing a hefty new expense for health insurance or a fine. This is the scenario being faced by many family-owned businesses struggling to plan for the future. The workers at some of these businesses are about to get a far different deal than they bargained for when they accepted their jobs. As a result of the 30-hour rule, some part-time employees are seeing their hours reduced. The CBO has confirmed that shifting to a 40-hour full time definition would lead some workers to seeing an increase in their take-home pay. In addition to lost wages, many workers could lose scheduling flexibility so that they won't cycle in and out of full-time status from week to week. These are ways that workers will lose.…





