Several thoughts.

1. Imagine you have cancer and you're working through it on your spouse's Disney healthcare, but you also need to work full-time to make ends meet. You might be forced to quit your job or only do part-time hours so that you can continue on the better health insurance. Forcing people into this sort of financial dilemma is... well, I think the most accurate term is "evil."
2. As they said in the article, this affects lower income employees more. If you're a high income employee at Disney, maybe you don't need your spouse to work. So, this will disproportionately remove lower income people from their insurance, while higher income people receive twice the healthcare benefits. This makes very little sense.
3. This is more evidence that the very concept of tying workplace to healthcare is madness. In the end, universal healthcare is just the optimal solution.

Why don't we already have universal, single-payer healthcare? Let's not forget that it's the corporations and ultra-wealthy people who have the most sway in our government. Look, here's Disney bitching and moaning about how awful and expensive it is to offer adequate healthcare for their employees. So obviously, you'd think they should just support universal healthcare and be done with all of this healthcare expense.

But the truth is that they don't want to. They want to tie healthcare to the company because smaller companies often have worse healthcare packages because they have less negotiating power, and this is a way of enslaving people. Tying them to one company so that they can never leave. But also, make it as cheap as possible in the meantime. Reduce benefits just enough so that they constantly suffer but can't afford to leave. They want to have it both ways. Employees not getting enough benefits as well as getting enough benefits that they can't afford to leave.

This is entirely inhumane.