People trying to hurt their workers using Obamacare as an excuse have seen drastic drops---

[eridani]

Great news: the people trying to hurt their workers instead of providing them health insurance, and using Obamacare as an excuse, have seen drastic drops in their brand's reputation.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/10/10/1245978/-Obamacare-manipulators-Papa-John-s-Applebees-see-brand-s-reputation-plummet?detail=email#

According to YouGov BrandIndex, a leading marketing survey that measures brand perception in the marketplace (called “Buzz”), Papa John’s had good reason for concern as the pizza chain’s brand identity has plummeted from a high of 32 on election day, to a remarkably low score of 4 among adults who have eaten at causal dining restaurants during the past month.

Ouch.

Papa John is not alone in his anti-Obamacare misery.

Fast food server, Applebee’s, possessed a healthy Buzz score of 35 before Zane Terkel, CEO of one of the company’s largest franchisees, appeared on television to complain about the law and to announce that he would not be building more restaurants or hiring any more workers in response to his objections to Obamacare.

Applebee’s “pre-Terkel” Buzz score of 35 now sits at a pathetic 5.

[Cha]

1. Karma.. treat your employees well! Look at Costco and

Starbucks!

[eridani]

2. And Disney--moving their workers from part time to full time n/t

[Cha]

5. I didn't know that.. kinda of a shocker.. good for Disney!

[nxylas]

3. This is why the right needs high unemployment

They need people to be desperate for a job, any job, because they know what would happen if people actually had a choice between working for Walmart or working for Costco.

[LuvNewcastle]

4. Exactly. That's what's behind all the anti-welfare and food stamps talk.

They're trying to create more cheap labor in the U.S. And if people can get insurance without going through an employer, they'll be less loyal, also, which is one reason why they hate Obamacare so much. They need all of us to be totally dependent on our capitalist overlords. Of course, all of this argument will be for nothing if the TPP is passed.

[Turbineguy]

8. Yes, it turns out all those freedom lovers

aren't so freedom loving after all. Unless of course it's the freedom to be miserable.

[OnionPatch]

21. Yep. You'll never hear them address the fact that

the social safety net keeps all wages from falling below a certain limit. Your neighbor's unemployment check keeps your wages steady. Instead, they would love to throw all the unemployed on the streets so people will be scrabbling and fighting over the few jobs there are, accepting less and less pay simply because the only other choice is starvation.

[Cha]

6. Wow.. I wondered what their end game was.. I

was thinking Hoovervilles and mass soup kitchens. But, your statement makes a lot of sense.

May they rot in hell and never get what they need.

[freshwest]

19. And portable healthcare would allow workers to leave abusive employers...

[Cha]

7. And, they don't want people to be educated for

the same reason.

Tons and tons of babies but no money to feed them. How are they going to grow up and vote republicon if they don't get nourishment?

[Cirque du So-What]

9. The 'pro-life party' doesn't trouble its beautiful mind with concerns like that

Conservative strategy is to ensure that these tons of babies have been effectively disenfranchised at the voting booth by the time they come of age.

[keroro gunsou]

15. from the master -

"pre-born, you're fine. pre-school, you're fucked.""

[Cirque du So-What]

16. ...and on and on...

Make it past pre-school, you enter a system to prepare you for life in the prison-industrial complex.

[1StrongBlackMan]

18. Or ...

more real-world like, if people could work at walmart UNTIL getting a position at Costco. Workers never have a choice to work one place or another; we only have the choice to apply for, and accept, one place rather than the other.

But I get your point.

[Laelth]

13. Ian Welsh makes an important point, and it's worth repeating.

Liberalism, in its classic form, is, among other things, the proposition that you get more out of people if you treat them well. Conservatism is the proposition that you get more out of people if you treat them badly.

http://www.ianwelsh.net/the-logic-of-the-surveillance-state/

-Laelth

[CBHagman]

28. I hadn't heard that precise definition, but it fits what I hear from relatives and friends...

...who lean more to the GOP side of things.

In the recent past someone else (I forget who it was) suggest that the liberal assumes the basic goodness of humankind, whereas the conservative tends more towards believing in its evil.

[DeSwiss]

10. K&R

[truebluegreen]

11. +1

[safeinOhio]

12. ++2

[littlewolf]

14. our HR dept. called Friday to give us a heads up

on whats coming. our sign up period is mid Nov.
rates are going down, not sure by how much, but down.
deductible doubles, co pay goes from we pay 20 they pay 80
to we pay 40 they pay 60.

I only take the vision and dental insurance.
I have Tricare so I do not have to deal with
health insurance.

I know this has nothing to do with ACA.
this is what the company is offering.

[jopacaco]

17. Barnes and Noble

My niece works for Barnes and Noble in Florida. She has worked there for quite a few years and has always been kept below 40 hours a week to keep her from getting full time benefits. Her hours (and her boyfriend's who also works there) have now been slashed to 19 a week because her "yearly average" must be kept below 26 hours a week so she does not qualify for employee health care benefits. There is no excuse for treating employees like this.

[Motown_Johnny]

20. Cutting hours to avoid providing healthcare was always insane.

At the very least, you would increase costs due to hiring, training and paying employees more than you would save from not providing healthcare.

Add to that the very simple fact that every single one of your employees would be looking for a full time job that provides healthcare and trying to pinch that penny is a huge waste of money. Your turnover would be huge and the employees you would be stuck with are the ones who can't get a better job.

I always trusted in the free market to sort this one out (and that doesn't happen very often). You would have thought the RWingers would have thought of that too.

[jsr]

22. Let's hope that trend continues

[IronLionZion]

23. Single-payer is pro-business

If you think about it, employers get screwed by insurance companies too. Employers don't have these problems in Canada which is why many American companies (big 3 auto) have endorsed it already.

[hootinholler]

24. Anyone else notice the huge NFL marketing push by Papa Johns?

I'm hoping it's too little too late.

[PATXgirl]

25. Good that Papa Johns is hurting. Wish someone would organize a "consumer strike"

There could be a website or an app with a jerk wad company of the day / week. And people wouldn't shop at that one store for the entire day or week. For walmart, the month, to make a statement.

We, the consumers, are paying attention to how you treat our fellow Americans and we don't like it and won't stand for it.

We, the taxpayers, are tired of your business using welfare and food stamps to supplement your payroll.

They may not listen to their employees but consumers could hit them where it hurts.

[mountain grammy]

26. Let's remember these are hugely rich and profitable corporations employing millions of people,

the largest employer in the US is Walmart, paying minimum wage with no benefits, no guaranteed hours, no respect. We wonder why we're in trouble? All the money at the top.

The OP gives me hope that people are catching on.

[Trekologer]

27. In previous years, employers who dropped health care would have been thought as cheap bastards

Today they have an excuse. But people still think of them as cheap bastards.

[MrsKirkley]

29. If low paying employers refuse to offer family coverage, their workers should be thanking them.

Family members of low income workers are usually much better off getting subsidized health insurance on the exchange because the subsidies help pay deductibles. If the employer offers family coverage, family members are ineligible for subsidies. For low income families, employer provided family coverage usually means paying for health insurance they can't afford to use.