http://biz.yahoo.com/bizwk/070802/aug2007db2007081804238.html?.v=1&.pf=insurance
Basically, the company listed in the article will charge $10 for poor BMI, $5 each for cholesterol, BP, glucose, and smoking; each amount is per paycheck. Sounds good at 1st, but how long 'til the lawsuits roll in?
While I support the employers right to be an idiot, that is idiotic
.
There have been other companies (in Michigan I think) that charged employees more for insurance for smoking or being over weight. I don’t disagree with the policy in concept, but BMI has so little to do with good health that I think this is a flaw in their system.
Sorry, I just scanned it. It mentions healthcare costs as a/the reason. What about employees who get their healthcare paid through insurance by their spouse at another company?
Anyway, whenever this stuff is brought up hereor elsewhere, no one ever mentions he employer’s right to not provide healthcare benefits. I mean, if it is that big of a problem, let the employees get their own coverage. Then again, maybe the employer is making money off providing healthcare. How’s that you say? What percentage of Americans have health care “coverage” provided through an employers self funded plan? And just how is that regulated? Boy Howdy . . . such issues are NEVER considered.
I agree. It seems like a misguided attempt to answer what to do about quickly rising insurance premiums. I hate paying more when my family and I live a healthy lifestyle, but this looks like a lawsuit in waiting.
why should it be regulated?
solution is simple, end the scourge that is employer provided health care plans. let people choose their own healthcare providers. it will force the healthcare industry to compete for OUR interests instead of our employers interests.
Not being hugely educated on the subject, I’d have to say that the populace feels entitled to healthcare insurance. If its not offered, the employee quits, and the company is demonized in the media. So now its a catch-22.
Got any links on the self-funded plan thing?
solution: when employers cut the healthcare benefits, redistribute the savings among the employees:
“oh we are cutting your healthcare benefits which cost us $30k a year to give you, but we are raising your pay $20k a year, everyone wins, have fun”
.
I’m in the hating of BMI as a fitness measure too. In college, I was overweight according to the one-size-fits-all charts, even though my actual percentage of body fat was on the low side of average.
Anyway, whenever this stuff is brought up hereor elsewhere, no one ever mentions he employer’s right to not provide healthcare benefits.
Depends on where you live. In Hawaii if you work something like 3 consecutive 20 hour weeks the employer has to provide health insurance, small business included.
Soon they will be wanting to carry out unannounced home inspections to make sure we don’t have too many twinkies in the pantry and we’re all eating our daily allotment of vegetables.
And some people will applaud.
And weak genetics. You know some families are prone to cancer. They’ll need to be charged more, or maybe excluded under the “potential pre-existing condition” clause.
Hey, why should I have to pay more to support some mooch who’s grandparents all died of cancer? That’s money stolen right out of my pocket.
Bleah.
While it sucks and sounds ridiculous, the idea of “insurance” in a free market becomes pointless as information increases.
If you can predict with reasonable certainty what your health costs will be, nobody is going to want to insure you, why should they?
It isn’t insurance anymore, once you KNOW someone is going to get cancer or a heart attack.
I get the concept… but I think it needs to be refined to look at some better/more factors.
It’s not much different than getting charged for your auto insurance based on your driving record and local traffic statistics. Or your mortgage rates being based on your credit history.
Employers can offer medical benefits/insurance under ERISA. (You might check that word in a Google search.) I think many people believe they (self insured plans) should be regulated so an Enron thing doesn’t happen. But it does.
Another thing that is seemingly overlooked is the role of the medical provider in this situation. It seems that either the employee or employer/insurance company gets the blame but how much of the increase in medical premiums is attributed to the same medical procedure that costs more this year compared to last year.
Another overlooked consideration in all of this is the non-uniformity of “coverage.” “Covered” medical benefits can vary from one plan to the next as well as the premium, co-pays, one time and yearly deductibles. So many of the comparisons do not consider such.
And then there are lawyers.
Nothing against any of these parties/professions, but I think that solutions to these issues and discussions relating to them should consider all factors and not just be a soapbox endorsing a general ideology. To me, one thing is very clear: this “system” lacks uniform standards for making accurate assessments. In every type of analysis I’ve been involved with, you determine initial benchmarks (where you are) before deciding your goal (or at least, how to get there). Uniform defintions, reporting stands, etc. are required prerequsites.
It seems like you are trying to propose that government regulate everything to create a more efficient, fair system.
I am suggesting that employers REMOVE themselves from the healthcare loop (it makes NO sense that they are in it) and let people pick their own healcare. This will let the free market work some of its magic. Right now the insurance companies customers are companies looking for cheap healthcare coverage, instead of PEOPLE looking for good coverage that meets their needs.
A couple of things. I think the government could require standardized reporting, etc. without being an overbearing regulator. It does seem prudent that an accurate evaluation would be in order before going to some of the proposals that have been mentioned.
The government regulates the financial solvency of insurance mechanisms to ensure consumers that the insuring entity has the funds (and fiduciary responsibility) to pay the claims. Right now, the regulating authority of insurance companies is state governments whereas self-funded plans are regulated by the federal government.
BMI is a scam but I agree basically with the policy, auto insurance companies do it by raising your rates if your a bad driver.