Health Care Reform
Future of Reform Legislation Remains Uncertain

Despite President Barack Obama’s call for a vote on health care legislation before the August Congressional recess, Representatives and Senators headed back to their home districts this month without a solidified bill aimed at reforming the nation’s health care system. What the state of the debate will be when they return in September is becoming increasingly clouded.

Prior to the recess, the House’s Energy and Commerce Committee -- the last of three panels to vote on reform proposals – came to a compromise with conservative Democrats, known as the Blue Dog Coalition, and agreed upon a proposal. The Blue Dogs had voiced opposition to the original plan’s overall cost. However, that deal angered liberals in the party, who threatened to oppose it. After further compromise, the committee decided on a plan that would extend benefits to millions of uninsured Americans and create a government-run insurance option.

Meanwhile, the Senate Finance Committee worked through the recess and inched closer to a formal bill. The Senate version would chop about $100 billion from the projected cost of $1 trillion over 10 years by placing a tax on benefits and would establish a network of nonprofit cooperatives instead of a government plan.

Committee Member Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) said a government run plan that competed with private insurance companies would not pass in the Senate.

The Obama Administration, a strong supporter of the government-plan option, did not say it would oppose such legislation but said an acceptable bill would have to increase competition for insurers.

Public support for a major overhaul of the health care system has been slipping in recent weeks. According to a New York Times/CBS Poll on July 30, 69 percent were concerned that their care would suffer under a government plan. In a Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, 42 percent of respondents in July said Obama’s health care plan was a bad idea, up from 32 percent in June.



Terminations
Continued Layoffs Prompt EEOC to Increase Guidance

As the slumping economy continues to force employers to resort to layoffs, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has stepped up its guidance effort regarding terminations.

Earlier this month, the EEOC released a new Q&A on separation agreements. While this document is designed for employees, it lists a few warnings for employers.

According to the Q&A, a general release:

• Cannot include a waiver of rights to file a complaint with the EEOC

• Must have language that advises the employee to consult with an attorney and must acknowledge that the employee has had sufficient time to do so

To view the Q&A, go to this URL: http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/qanda_severance-agreements.html

The EEOC also recently heard testimony about the impact of widespread layoffs on older workers and the risk of age discrimination in harsh economic times. The commission is considering proposals to address the issue.

In the meantime, employers should be careful to ensure that termination decisions do not appear to be discriminatory, experts say.

Seniority, as well as disciplinary record and statistics showing a worker’s productivity, should be considered when making staff cuts, according to John T. Anthony III, an attorney with Carlton, DiSante & Freudenberger.

. . . . . . . . . . . . Bulletin Briefs . . . . . . . . . . . .

• HIT THE HARDEST: A new government study found that small businesses with fewer than 20 employees pay up to 18 percent more to provide health insurance for their employees compared with large companies. Small businesses pay more proportionately because they lack the bargaining power of their large counterparts and often face higher administrative fees, according to the White House Council of Economic Advisers. A separate analysis by Deloitte Consulting found that small firms also pay higher 401(k) fees for similar reasons.