nebula Posted March 24, 2010 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.75 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.94 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted March 24, 2010 On the Tab: Food, Drinks & Health Care March 24, 2010 - 10:48 AM | by: Claudia Cowan One of the provisions in the new health care law requires small businesses to provide coverage for workers. Such an "employer mandate" has been in place in San Francisco, Calif., for over a year. The mandate has earned mixed reviews at best. Under the law, businesses with 20 or more employees are required to provide medical coverage, either on their own or by paying into a city-run program. That's what most restaurants are doing -- albeit grudgingly. To cover the cost, owners are either having to raise their menu prices or tack on a so-called "Healthy Surcharge" onto the tab. At some places, it's around 4 percent of the check. Others charge a flat fee of a dollar or two. Either way, customers are footing the bill for the health care of their waitstaff, busboys, and cooks, regardless of whether the workers work part time, live in San Francisco, or are in the U.S. legally. How well the plan is going over seems to depend on where the restaurant is located. Management at many neighborhood bistros and cafes say customers don't seem to mind paying the extra surcharge. But folks running downtown restaurants -- many of which depend on visitors -- say the mandate is hurting their bottom line. Read the rest here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.jpg.03b9a592ab3fbf402fba028ca0d40a97.thumb.jpg.2258d605d3ad1f34b6effde23d20e7d7.jpg)
Recommended Posts