lod01
Footballguy
That it would do but make no mistake, this is not meant as a benefit to the employee. It's a benefit to the corporate bottom line. AOL's use of obamacare as the reason to do this is so pathetic, it justifies my statement that the corporate world will blame anything it can to make a buck.It does quite a few things at the same time. It could help reduce turnover (your cousin possibly didn't leave when he otherwise would have, in your example). It can also reduce costs. It can also ### over the employee.No it's not. it's an effort to #### over the employee. They can also lay off people in November or December and those people don't get the $ for that year. My cousin works for IBM and was considering leaving and had to calculate whether it was better to forgo the $ and leave before Dec. 31st or take the higher paying gig after the 31st.Actually lots of companies have been implementing this idea - kinda like some "golden handcuffs" to keep employees through the year. It's an effort to help reduce turnover.Looks like AOL has decided to butt #### their employees and blame it on obamacare: You get no gains on your 401k match for that year. Love the part where you can't leave or you get the double butt #######.
Starting in 2014, AOL will distribute the 50 percent company match on up to 6 percent of employees' pre-tax income in a lump sum after the end of the year, instead of paying the benefit throughout the year as it had done previously. That means workers who leave AOL before Dec. 31 won't get the year's company match at all.
Now how do we know they are just using it as an excuse to butt #### their employees? Because IBM adopted this butt ####### technique years ago.
In a down market, it can also save the employee for losses in their 401(k). It all depends on how you want to look at it.