Monthly Archives: March 2015

Hobby Lobby’s Aftermath

Edward Zelinsky (Cardozo) has just posted on SSRN his article (42 Rutgers Law Record 109-25) The Aftermath of Hobby Lobby: HSAs and HRAs as the Least Restrictive Means.

This is his Abstract:

In Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court held that, under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA), closely-held corporations’ employer-sponsored medical plans need not provide forms of contraception to which the shareholders of such corporations object on religious grounds. The question now arises how the President, the Congress and the Departments of Health and Human Services (HHS), Treasury and Labor ought to respond to the Hobby Lobby decision.

The best alternative is to require any employer which objects to providing contraception to fund for their respective employees independently-administered health savings accounts (HSAs) or health reimbursement arrangements (HRAs). An HSA or HRA permits the covered employee to spend employer-provided, pre-tax health care dollars on any medical service the employee chooses without implicating the employer in the employee’s spending decision. The HSA/HRA alternative respects the religious rights of sponsoring employers since, unlike conventional insurance or self-insured health plans, the sponsoring employer’s plan does not provide a menu of choices which frames the employees’ decisions. Simultaneously, the HSA/HRA approach respects the autonomy of employees to spend health care dollars on whatever medical services such employees select including services to which the employer objects.

Leave a comment

Filed under civil rights, employment, federal, Insurance

Surviving Right to Work States

This is an interesting article published by the Washington Post. It discusses some key points that Unions can follow to survive in the tough anti-union atmosphere. This article bases its arguments on scholarly published articles.

The problem that I see is that Unions must represent all employees, regardless of membership.  Any changes would have to occur at the legislative level, which means: it will just not happen.

The underfunding of Unions continues to be a big struggle.  How can you get enough staff to represent members when there is no money to pay them? RTW laws are a slippery slope.

via Laws that decimate unions may be inevitable. Here’s how labor can survive. – The Washington Post.

Leave a comment

Filed under employment, labor, union