What's new

FedEx Freight | Could This Be Discrimination ?

S

shakey

TB Lurker
Credits
0
Discrimination in the workplace takes place when an employer discriminates against an employee in relation to work-related decisions, including such issues as hiring, firing, promotions, and availability of benefits. There are federal and state laws in place to protect employees from discrimination in the workplace.

Availability of benefits... hmmmm... I also find it hard to accept that because my spouse works for a place that does have awful insurance that I should be penalized. Just a thought...
 
Yes indeed but they do not discriminate between employees who’s spouses have availability to health insurance and employees who’s spouses don’t. It’s simple if you want to carry your spouse there’s a premium for that. Please Fedex don’t discriminate against my spouse just because you can.
 
Some of us were here when insurance was a benefit. Plenty of us already pay a penalty for our wife being on the plan without any children. I know my wife will be leaving our plan and if the numbers are right I will follow to her's. I suggest others crunch the numbers.
 
Someone correct me if wrong here , but the company is so on edge about singling people out , discrimination, etc , but isn’t that what they are doing to our spouses by charging a $150 surcharge on our insurance if they can carry it through their employer ?
 
Hoot Owl said:
I’m quite sure GK is wrong about New Penn too.... They should be contractually the same as YRC. Spouse covered at no extra charge and they pay zero for their insurance.
Click to expand...
It depends on which health plan their covered under. In NY the spouse has to take their insurance as primary coverage as long as the premium is less than 5% of their gross. This doesn't include deductibles or anything else. Many single plans with high deductibles are less than 5% of weekly gross pays. I know I ran into this myself. Different teamster plans have different rules as to spousel coverage.
 
Spousal surcharge based on the spouse's ability to obtain insurance at their employer is not discriminatory. A few points to be made:

Benefits are not being DENIED (that, is the key word) based on race, sex, sexual orientation, religion, national origin, physical disability, or age
Federal law requires insurance to be offered to full time employees of the company as well as dependent children of the employee, NOT the spouse.
Your spouse's employment status and availability to insurance through their employer is not a protected class/status.
This has been standard practice for companies for a while that has been relatively well vetted in the courts. My previous employer began doing this not long after ACA was signed by BHO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top