• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

employer is taking away my insurance

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

mr manager

Junior Member
What is the name of your state? Ca

I work at a hotel and after 6 years of having health insurance with them they are taking it away from me. I work 4 days a week from 5:30 to 1:30. They are now saying I have to work 40hrs a week and not 32hrs to be covered! Is this true can they do this? I mean I have worked for 6 freakin years and always had health ins with them and i have had the same schedule for 4 of the 6 years........and now they decide they can do this...Crazy! Thanks in advance for the advice!!!!!!!
 


cbg

I'm a Northern Girl
An employer is allowed to change their policies and their benefit schedule. If their current policy is that only employees who work 40 hours a week are eligible for insurance, then yes, they can do this. Because you have had insurance with them before does not mean they have to cover you forever, regardless. Except in Hawaii (and not always there) an employer has no obligation to provide health insurance to their employees in the first place.
 

mr manager

Junior Member
What?

O.K let's say your right, then why did they grant me insurance prior to this and I had the same schedule?...32 hours a week!

Do you know of a site or where I can get something in writting about this subject?

Thank You in advance..........Mr Manager
 

cbg

I'm a Northern Girl
I AM right. No law requires them to offer insurance benefits in the first place, and no law prohibits them from changing the eligibility requirements.

The answer to your question is obvious. Previously they were willing to offer insurance to employees working less than 40 hours a week. For some reason, possibly but not definitely either because of the increasing costs of insurance or because of differing requirements of a new insurance carrier, they have decided to offer it only to employees working 40 hours a week or more. The law does NOT require them to continue offering it to you if the eligibility requirements have changed and you no longer qualify. They have no legal obligation to "grandfather" you in.

Based on the info in your post, your employer has done nothing illegal, broken no laws, and you have no legal recourse. If you want to see something in writing, ask to see a copy of the plan document.
 

mr manager

Junior Member
Thanks ;)

Thanks for the info but guess what, THEY ARE AZZHOLES TO PULL SH!T OFF LIKE THIS, ESPECIALLY TO AN EMPLOYEE THAT HAS WORKED FOR THEM FOR 6 YEARS, NOT ONE SICK CALL OR ONE LATE PHONE CALL. Thanks for the advice! :mad:
 

cbg

I'm a Northern Girl
That may be so. I'm not saying they aren't. I'm saying that they are not violating the law.
 

ablessin

Member
CBG is right.... I am sort of surprised that they don't let you pay a higher premium and keep you on the plan.... like if you now pay (say) $20 a week, and you're 32 hours a week, maybe increase your premium to (say) $40.00 a week, or something along that lines.

But, no - they are not required to supply to supply the employees with insurance coverage - it's a paid benefit, like vacation time.

It stinks, I think most companies offer them to keep competitive with everyone else. But it's not a requirement - I think the only thing required, is a retirement account, and according to my HR rep here, it's a IRS law, but that is a totally different subject!!!!!
Good luck
 

cbg

I'm a Northern Girl
An employer is not required to provide a retirement account. With the sole exceptions of workers comp and paying into the state unemployment plan, there is no benefit that an employer is required to offer. (Five states require the employer to provide a disability plan, and the state of Hawaii requires some employers to provide health insurance.)
 

ablessin

Member
I was told by mt HR department (when I was seeking to take a withdrawl from my retirement account) that by law I could only take funds that I contributed to the plan, not anything deposited by my employer. I was told that by law my employer has to provide a retirement fund and that was why I could only take the monies I personally contributed to the account out.

It may depend on what state you live in - I don't know... all I know is what I was told and I know people who have 401 K accounts that they don't pay into but their work does.... so I don't know. This is what I was told :

"I want to provide you with some information about the eligibility of taking a withdrawal from the Retirement Program. The IRS determines the rules as to who is eligible to take a hardship withdrawal. First of all, as long as you are an active employee, it is only possible to withdraw your voluntary contributions (no University contributions until termination). Second, active employees under age 59 ½ are only eligible to withdraw voluntary contributions if there is a hardship withdrawal situation or if permanently disabled. Hardship withdrawal situations are if you have an immediate and heavy financial burden for education, housing or medical reasons. So, if you have education bills, if you are purchasing a primary residence or preventing foreclosure/eviction, or if you have unreimbursed medical bills, you can request a withdrawal to pay for these specific situations. Just being in a financial bind doesn't necessarily count, it has to be one of the three reasons."



But it has nothing to do with the posters question regardless.
 

cbg

I'm a Northern Girl
Your HR department is at least partially wrong. There is NOTHING in the law of any state that requires an employer to provide a retirement account. In addition, retirement accounts are regulated at the Federal level, not the state level.

It is true that the IRS regs determine who is eligible to take a hardship withdrawal and who is not, assuming that a 401k fund exists in the first place. But the law does NOT require an employer to provide one, and if your HR department believes differently, then they need to go back to HR school.

BTW, I am an HR professional with 25 years experience and have several years background in administering 401k funds.
 

ablessin

Member
Well, maybe they just were trying to tell me that I can't withdraw $ that THEY deposit into my 401K plan then.
They didn't need to go all goofy with some over-exagerrated false info about how they have to provide me with the beneift and yadda-yadda....
Now I feel like an idiot.

Thank you for the info - I feel better informed now. I may go back to them and ask what the heck she was talking about!!!!!

THANKS
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top