During a four-year period, the number of uninsured people in America rose by nearly five million. Twenty-five percent of companies with 500 or more employees don't offer health insurance. Employers that do offer health insurance to their workers are reducing benefits and asking that workers assume a greater portion of the expenses. Those trends have triggered activity by employee advocacy groups around the country.
'Fair-share health care'
A coalition composed of the AFL-CIO, the United Food and Commercial Workers Union, the Service Employees International Union, and other advocacy groups has banded together, seeking changes to employer- provided health insurance. The groups have shifted their focus away from the federal government to state legislatures and are promoting a "fair-share health care bill." Basically, the proposed law requires companies of a certain size to spend a percentage of their total wages for employer-provided health insurance. Alternatively, they would be required to pay the amount into a state fund designed to offer health care to uninsured workers.
Industry groups have opposed that concept for a number of reasons. First, many employers believe it discourages companies from relocating to or creating jobs in a state that has enacted the law. Also, a state law may be unenforceable and superseded by the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act.
In its 2004-05 session, the Maryland Legislature passed its version of a fair-share health care bill that would require an employer with 10,000 or more employees to devote at least eight percent of its payroll to health insurance. The governor vetoed the bill in May 2005, but on January 12, 2006, the legislature overrode that veto. The new law is being challenged in court by a trade group for merchants.
My business isn't in Maryland, so why do I care?
Maryland's enactment of a fair-share health care law isn't an isolated event; similar efforts are taking place across the country. A group called Americans for Health Care has targeted 30 other states to press for the passage of a similar law, perhaps covering smaller employers. Efforts reportedly will include telephone call banks, letter campaigns, and a series of events aimed at raising public awareness and increasing pressure on legislators to adopt a bill like Maryland's law.
Copyright © 2006 M. Lee Smith Publishers LLC. This article is an excerpt from OKLAHOMA EMPLOYMENT LAW LETTER. Oklahoma Employment Law Letter does not attempt to offer solutions to any individual problems or to provide legal advice to its readers.
About the Author
Charles S. Plumb, is a partner with Doerner, Saunders, Daniel & Anderson, L.L.P. representing employers in all phases of employment law and labor relations. Mr. Plumb provides advice and representation to employers regarding a wide range of employment questions, including collective bargaining issues, grievance arbitration, and representation before federal and state administrative law agencies. His litigation experience includes trials in state and federal courts concerning discrimination, wrongful discharge, retaliatory discharge, breach of contract, constitutional law violations and the like.
Mr. Plumb received his undergraduate degree in Business Administration from Southern Methodist University and his law degree, with honors, from Ohio State University. He is listed in The Best Lawyers in America, and is a member of the American Bar Association's Labor and Employment Law Section and the Media Law Resource Center's Employment Law Committee.
E-mail: cplumb@dsda.com
