Don\u2019t blame the health law for high levels of part-time employment. In fact, using the law\u2019s definitions, part-time work isn\u2019t increasing at all as a share of employment, at least not yet.<\/p>\n
- \n
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/s.wsj.net\/public\/resources\/images\/BN-AC009_HOURS2_E_20131022085315.jpg\")
<\/dt>\n<\/dl>\nNearly 8 million American were working part-time in September because they couldn\u2019t find full-time work. Overall, 27 million people \u2014 nearly a fifth of all employees \u2014 are working part-time, well above historical norms.<\/p>\n
Many critics of the Obama administration have pointed the finger for the prevalence of part-time jobs at the Affordable Care Act, the 2010 law better known to some as \u201cObamacare.\u201d The law\u2019s so-called \u201cemployer mandate\u201d requires most midsize and larger companies to offer health insurance to their full-time employees. That, critics argue, provides companies with an incentive to hire part-timers instead.<\/p>\n
The Obama administration earlier this year said it would delay the requirement until 2015 to give companies more time to comply. But some employers have said they are nonetheless cutting back on full-time hiring. Indeed, part-time employment rose early this year, while full-time employment growth stalled.<\/p>\n
But a closer look at the data provides little evidence for the notion that the health law is driving a shift to part-time work, although it could as the mandate deadline approaches.<\/p>\n
First of all, over a longer time frame, part-time work has actually been falling as a share of employment in recent years. Before the recession, about 17% of employed Americans worked 35 hours or less, the standard Labor Department<\/strong> definition of \u201cpart time.\u201d During the recession, that figure rose, briefly hitting 20%. It\u2019s been trending down since then, but only slowly, hitting 19% in September.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n