If there are legitimate reasons i want to make if clear to nonprofit organizations to government and others. The last people up is Donald Levitt who will talk about sick leave thank you supervisors good afternoon. Ill make is brief and is i think the Family Friendly you workplace ordinance will fit nicely into the services were already providing to the city and enforcement and outreach around San Francisco labor laws. I like that the thresholds were made consistent with the Health Care Security ordinance both in what is a covered employer and the number of hours that workers would work to be covered by the ordinance. I wanted to point out in case its not clear an appeal to our office can only come from an employer who we found to be out of compliance with the ordinance or from a worker who feels that the employer has not followed the procedures they have a right to increase the law or theyve been retaliated against for asking the question that its not our offices role to even exam whet
Demographics, ethnicity, lgbt or not, do you have a sense . We do, and i will 19 thousand 500 of them are largely going to be undocumented residents we anticipate. They may be other people who are not subject to the mandate because of hardship or other reasons but largely undocumented. The 15 thousand 500 will likely be those that are at the highly end of the healthy San Francisco limit, it cares for people up to 500 of poverty and those who are medi cal eligible will be able to apply to medi cal without no cost to thel, so that will be an easy decision, as the income gets higher, the cost sharing gets higher. What percentage will be lgbt . I do not have that percentage. Thank you. Within the department of Public Health, we really have a twofold focus on Health Reform implementation. First is about dphs own Health Care Delivery system. We are looking to ready our system to be the provider of choice for our patients, our uninsured parents have not had a wide choice of Health Care Provid
Know, compliance with the health and security ordinance, what ways do employers have . Yeah, i certainly expect and theres all indications that theres a lot of robust policy discussions about this and any potential changes but for the time being, or pending any changes, i think our expectation or our understanding is commencing in 2014, again, no with standing the possibility of changes at the federal or local level, employers would simply provide Health Insurance or contribute to the city option, those would be the two principle methods of complying with our local spending requirement. I see. So, talking about the 53 of employers who place restrictions on these accounts, then were talking abthese folks now going the route of insurance or healthy San Francisco . Yes, going the Health Insurance or contributing to the city option, the contribution tos the city option as has been indicated previously, the pool and the size of the healthy San Francisco problem, excuse me, the healthy San F
End of the healthy San Francisco limit, it cares for people up to 500 of poverty and those who are medi cal eligible will be able to apply to medi cal without no cost to thel, so that will be an easy decision, as the income gets higher, the cost sharing gets higher. What percentage will be lgbt . I do not have that percentage. Thank you. Within the department of Public Health, we really have a twofold focus on Health Reform implementation. First is about dphs own Health Care Delivery system. We are looking to ready our system to be the provider of choice for our patients, our uninsured parents have not had a wide choice of Health Care Providers but Health Insurance provides them with that choice, we want them to choose us. A recent survey indicated that 60 of lowincome individuals who are uninsured would change their provider if they were given the choice to do so so we are responding to that challenge and integrating the service we offer throughout our Delivery System so we do a bette
2014, again, no with standing the possibility of changes at the federal or local level, employers would simply provide Health Insurance or contribute to the city option, those would be the two principle methods of complying with our local spending requirement. I see. So, talking about the 53 of employers who place restrictions on these accounts, then were talking abthese folks now going the route of insurance or healthy San Francisco . Yes, going the Health Insurance or contributing to the city option, the contribution tos the city option as has been indicated previously, the pool and the size of the healthy San Francisco problem, excuse me, the healthy San Francisco program is likely to be reduced and consequently, the contributions that employers make to the city option will be routed to medical reimbursement accounts that are administered by the city for individual employees, these are similar to frankly the Health Reimbursement accounts that are used widely today and administered p