It turns out that many colleges and universities are cutting the hours of their adjunct (read: part-time) professors, to keep them below the 30 hr/wk Obamacare eligibility line. Surprising absolutely no one with a brain, colleges and universities are moving to protect their bottom lines as much as possible. However, this seems to have surprised the supposedly highly-educated college staff.
From the article:
“I think it goes against the spirit of the [health-care] law,” Mr. Balla said. “In education, we’re working for the public good, we are public employees at a public institution; we should be the first ones to uphold the law, to set the example.”
A couple of things with this. First off, you are not working for the public good, and you are not public employees. You are working for a paycheck, as proven by your grousing about a smaller paycheck, and you are a private employee. This is true even of State system Universities. Public employees are police, firefighters, and politicians. You don't want to be a "public employee," Mr. Balla.
More important, though, is this line: "I think it goes against the spirit of the [health-care] law." You see, Mr. Balla supported Obamacare (I'm guessing, but it seems pretty evident) because it would give "People" (read: "him") "Free" (read: Employer paid) health insurance. He never once considered that employers, whether his beloved colleges or the local Stop-and-Rob, or the local burger joint, might look at the requirements of the law and decide the best way to protect their bottom line would be to have as few people eligible for insurance as possible.
Put simply, there is no such thing as "the spirit" of any law. Laws are written down very carefully. It is true that the more complicated a law is, the more loopholes and exceptions will exist. But there is no requirement for any employer to keep people on at 30+ hours per week. If you want to test this, do something that is technically illegal, but is within "the spirit of the law," for instance: speeding.
Traffic laws, especially speed limit laws, we are told are to "ensure our safety." So it stands to reason that the "spirit" of speed limit laws is "drive a safe speed." Well, on an open stretch of highway with no other traffic, a safe speed might well be 90 miles per hour. Indeed, it might be safer than the actual posted speed limit of 65 or 70 MPH, because by driving faster you're actually on the road less, meaning there is less time for something to go wrong. Try explaining that when the State Trooper pulls you over for doing 20 miles over the speed limit.
Laws are written explicitly. Anyone who believes they can write a law, or that any law has been written, such that it will be enforced based on its "spirit" is a fool, a shyster, or both. In this case, I believe Mr. Balla is both. He's a shyster because he thought it was a nifty trick to get the government to force his employer to provide insurance despite his part time status. He's a fool because he believed that would work.