[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 1 (Tuesday, January 6, 2015)]
[Senate]
[Pages S17-S18]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Ms. COLLINS (for herself, Mr. Donnelly, Ms. Murkowski, and Mr. 
        Manchin):
  S. 30. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify 
the definition of full-time employee for purposes of the employer 
mandate in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; to the 
Committee on Finance.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, today, Senator Donnelly and I are 
reintroducing the Forty Hours is Full-time Act to correct a serious 
flaw in the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, that is 
already causing workers to have their hours reduced and their pay cut. 
We are pleased to be joined in this bipartisan effort by Senators 
Murkowski and Manchin. Our legislation would raise the threshold for 
``full-time'' work in Obamacare to the standard 40 hours a week. This 
is consistent with the threshold for overtime eligibility under the 
Fair Labor Standards Act, and the common-sense understanding of ``full-
time'' work.
  Under Obamacare, an employee working just 30 hours a week is defined 
as ``full-time,'' a definition that is completely out-of-step with 
standard employment practices in the U.S. today. According to a survey 
published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average American 
actually works 8.7 hours per day, which equates to roughly 44 hours a 
week. The Obamacare definition is nearly one-third lower than actual 
practice.
  Similarly, the Obamacare definition of ``full-time'' employee is ten 
hours a week fewer than the 40 hours per week used by the GAO in its 
study of the budget and staffing required by the IRS to implement 
Obamacare. In that report, the GAO described a ``full-time equivalent'' 
as: ``a measure of staff hours equal to those of an employee who works 
2,080 hours per year, or 40 hours per week. . . .'' Even the Office of 
Management and Budget recognizes that 30-hours is not ``full-time.'' A 
circular it issued to Federal agencies actually directs them to 
calculate staffing levels using more than 40 hours a week as a ``full-
time equivalent.''
  The effect of using the 30-hour a week threshold is to artificially 
drive-up the number of ``full-time'' workers for purposes of 
calculating the penalties to which employers are exposed under 
Obamacare. These penalties begin at $40,000 for businesses with 50 
employees, plus $2,000 for each additional ``full-time equivalent'' 
employee. While these draconian penalities were scheduled to begin in 
January of last year, we have yet to feel their full effect because the 
Obama administration delayed their implementation through 2014, perhaps 
knowing the negative impact that will result. But that artificial 
grace-period expired January 1 for employers with 100 or more workers 
and will end for employers with between 50 and 99 employees in January 
of next year.
  Needless to say, these penalties will force many employers to 
restrict or reduce the hours their employees are allowed to work, so 
they are no longer considered ``full-time'' for the purposes of the 
law. In addition, these penalties will discourage employers from 
growing or adding jobs, particularly those close to the 50-job trigger.
  These are not hypothetical concerns. According to the Investors 
Business Daily, more than 450 employers had cut work hours or staffing 
levels in response to Obamacare as of September of last year. Employees 
of for-profit businesses are not the only ones threatened by 
Obamacare's illogical definition of full-time work. Public sector 
employees and those who work for non-profits are also affected.
  I am concerned that educators, school employees, and students will be 
particularly hard hit. As the ASAA, the School Superintendents 
Association, explained in a letter in support of our bill, Obamacare's 
30-hour threshold puts an ``undue burden on school systems across the 
Nation, many of [which] will struggle to staff their schools to meet 
their educational mission'' while complying with this requirement.
  For example, the school superintendent of Bangor, ME, has told me 
that Obamacare will require that school district to reduce substitute 
teacher hours to make sure they don't exceed 29 hours a week. This will 
harm not only the substitute teachers who want and need more work, but 
it will also harm students by causing unnecessary disruption in the 
classroom.
  Likewise, in Indiana, a county school district had to reduce the 
hours of part-time school bus drivers to make sure they do not work 
more than the 30-hour threshold. As a result, the school district has 
been forced to cut field trips and transportation to athletic events, 
and employees who used to work more than 30 hours total in two jobs 
have been forced to give up one of their jobs, hurting their financial 
security.
  The 30-hour rule will also affect our Nation's institutions of higher 
education. According to the College and University Professional 
Association for Human Resources, Obamacare's full-time work definition 
has already caused 122 schools to announce new policies capping hours 
for students and faculty.
  It is troubling that the 30-hour threshold will also harm delivery of 
home care services. The requirement will likely result in reduced 
access to needed services for some of our Nation's most vulnerable 
citizens: home-bound seniors, individuals with disabilities, and 
recently discharged hospital and nursing home patients. Information 
provided to my office by the Home Care & Hospice Alliance of Maine 
shows that many of its member organizations will be forced to reduce 
work hours for employees or even to cease operations due to Obamacare's 
definition of ``full-time'' work. If that happens, hundreds of home 
care workers could lose their jobs, and a thousand seniors could lose 
access to home care services--in Maine alone.
  Data from Maine's Medicaid program show that home care services are 
extremely cost-effective compared to alternatives. Thus, by making it 
harder for home care service providers to give their workers the hours 
they need,

[[Page S18]]

Obamacare's definition of ``full-time'' work will end up reducing the 
home care services available to seniors, depriving them of care or 
forcing them into costlier care, driving up Federal costs.
  Before I close, I would like to read a few lines from a letter I 
recently received from Randy Wadleigh, the owner of a well-known and 
much-loved restaurant institution in Maine called ``Governor's.'' 
Randy's letter sums up what Maine employers have always told me--their 
employees are the heart and souls of their businesses, and are the face 
of their companies to the public. As Randy puts it, businesses 
recognize the importance of their workers ``because without GREAT 
employees, businesses really don't have anything. [The 30-hour 
threshold] is hurting many of our employees. They don't understand it, 
they can't afford it and they just want to work more hours.''
  The bipartisan bill we are introducing today will protect these 
workers by changing the definition of ``full-time'' work in the ACA to 
40 hours a week, and making a corresponding change in the definition of 
``full-time equivalent'' employee to 174 hours per month. This is a 
sensible definition in keeping with actual practice.
  Among the many organizations that have endorsed our bill are: the 
College & University Professional Association for Human Resources, the 
National Association for Home Care & Hospice, the American Hotel & 
Lodging Association, the American Staffing Association, the Asian 
American Hotel Owners Association, the Associated Builders and 
Contractors, the Food Marketing Institute, the International Franchise 
Association, the National Association of Convenience Stores, the 
National Association of Health Underwriters, the American Rental 
Association, the National Association of Manufacturers, the National 
Association of Theatre Owners, the National Grocers Association, the 
National Federation of Independent Business, the National Restaurant 
Association, the National Retail Federation, the Retail Industry 
Leaders Association, ASAA, the School Superintendents Association, the 
Society for Human Resource Management, and the U.S. Chamber of 
Commerce.
  Regardless of the varying views of Senators on the Affordable Care 
Act, surely we ought to be able to agree to fix this problem in the law 
that is hurting workers' paychecks and creating chaos for employers. I 
urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the letters of support be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                                December 19, 2014.
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Collins: On behalf of AASA: The School 
     Superintendents Association, the Association of Educational 
     Service Agencies, the National Rural Education Association 
     and the National Rural Education Advocacy Coalition, I write 
     to express our support for the Forty Hours is Full Time Act. 
     Collectively, we represent public school superintendents, 
     educational service agency administrators and school system 
     leaders across the country, as well as our nation's rural 
     schools and communities. We have followed closely the 
     Affordable Care Act and stand ready to implement the law, and 
     see your proposed legislation as one way to alleviate an 
     unnecessarily burdensome regulation.
       The Forty House is Full Time Act would change the 
     definition of ``full time'' in the Affordable Care Act (ACA) 
     to 40 hours per week and the number of hours counted toward a 
     ``full time equivalent'' employee to 174 hours per month. The 
     current ACA arbitrarily sets the bar for a full work week to 
     30 hours. This is inconsistent with how most Americans think: 
     full-time is a 40 hour work week. The current definition 
     causes confusion among employers who struggle to understand 
     and comply with the new requirements, especially ones that 
     are in conflict with long-standing practices built on the 
     long-standing 40-hour work week premise.
       We welcome the opportunity to ensure our employees have a 
     positive work environment and we remain committed to 
     providing a robust set of work benefits. We are concerned 
     that the ACA, as currently written, puts additional, undue 
     burden on school systems across the nation, many of whom will 
     struggle to staff their schools to meet their educational 
     mission while meeting the strict 30-hour regulation.
       We applaud your continued leadership on this issue and look 
     forward to seeing the Forty Hours is Full Time Act move 
     forward.
           Sincerely,
                                               Noelle M. Ellerson,
          AASA, The School Superintendents Association, Associate 
      Executive Director, Policy & Advocacy, AESA, NREA and NREAC 
     Legislative Liaison.
                                  ____

         Governor's Restaurant & Bakery, Governor's Management 
           Company, Inc.,
                                  Old Town, ME, December 22, 2014.
     Re Definition of full time hours for the ACA

     Hon. Susan Collins,
     413 Dirksen Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Susan: Governor's Restaurants have been a staple in 
     Maine since 1959. We have 6 locations and employ over 300 
     full and part time fine Maine folks while serving the great 
     people of Maine. In general, we've had longevity because we 
     pay attention to business and play by the rules dictated to 
     us by local, state and federal agencies. In a nutshell, we 
     take pride in doing the right things.
       As our company's CEO, I recently conducted health insurance 
     enrollment meetings at all of our locations for those 100+ 
     eligible full time employees (as currently defined at 30 
     hours per week}. We are strongly in favor of changing the 
     current definition of a full time employee from 30 hours to 
     40 hours . . . but not necessarily for the reason(s} you may 
     think.
       On behalf of our employees, we've just got to increase the 
     threshold to 40 hours. Our offered health plan is defined as 
     affordable and meets minimum standards as defined by the law, 
     but when you express to the employee that they must 
     contribute +/-$30 per week it becomes a heartfelt choice to 
     pay for food, child care, rent OR pay for health care. On 
     more than one occasion, I had employees (all of whom worked 
     less than 32 hours per week} break down in tears because they 
     just can't afford coverage. At the same time, those that 
     worked over 38 hours, were more likely to participate and in 
     fact could afford coverage.
       When ACA was first introduced, I could never understand why 
     the law defined 30 hours per week. Our company has had to 
     make dramatic cuts in hours to some staffers to reduce 
     exposure. But once again this hurts the employee.
       So you see the obvious selfish thing to do as a business 
     person is to cry foul about the health care law and how it 
     affects our bottom line. But our company takes a bit of a 
     different approach. We recognize the importance of our people 
     because without GREAT employees, business owners really don't 
     have anything. This law is hurting many of our employees. 
     They don't understand it, they can't afford it and they just 
     want to work more hours. 30 hours is too restrictive to them. 
     40 would be better for them and ultimately for business and 
     such change would benefit both the employee and the employer.
       Thanks for your great work in Washington.
           Sincerely,

                                               Randy Wadleigh,

                                                    Owner and CEO,
                                    Governor's Management Company.
                                 ______