When Your Boss Makes You Pay for Being Fat

[antigop]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324600704578402784123334550.html

Are you a man with a waist measuring 40 inches or more? If you want to work at Michelin North America Inc., that spare tire could cost you.

Employees at the tire maker who have high blood pressure or certain size waistlines may have to pay as much as $1,000 more for health-care coverage starting next year.

As they fight rising health-care costs and poor results from voluntary wellness programs, companies across America are penalizing workers for a range of conditions, including high blood pressure and thick waistlines. They are also demanding that employees share personal-health information, such as body-mass index, weight and blood-sugar level, or face higher premiums or deductibles.

Corporate leaders say they can't lower health-care costs without changing workers' habits, and they cite the findings of behavioral economists showing that people respond more effectively to potential losses, such as penalties, than expected gains, such as rewards. With corporate spending on health care expected to reach an average of $12,136 per employee this year, according to a study by the consulting firm Towers Watson, TW +0.45% penalties may soon be the new norm.

Employers may argue that tough-love measures, such as punishing workers who evade health screenings, benefit their staff and lower health-care costs. But such steps also portend a murky future in which a chronic condition, such as hypertension, could cost workers jobs or promotions—or prevent them from being hired in the first place.

[Skittles]

1. be careful with this crap

sure, it's easier to pick on the smokers and the fat folk but how long will it be before it becomes, "Do you use an ATV? Do you use highways? stuff like that

[Kalidurga]

2. The focus on weight could backfire in a big way.

People who are a bit overweight might end up being healthier than people who are normal weight. Why cuz it's just assumed that if a person is a normal weight they are healthier and they may not get as regular check ups and they might not care as much about what they eat.

[newthinking]

3. This is the replacement for "pre-existing" conditions. Same old crap. Don't buy it as being for our

welfare.

Companies are already starting to use "HEM" to make people take blood tests and then fine them or add "deductables". The end result though, will be far more heignous if it is not stopped in it's tracks, because not only does it cause hardship, but it puts people out of work and limits their ability to find work.

[newthinking]

4. 1/3 of the country is obese. It is epidemic and endemic. This approach is discriminate

2/3 of those over 20 are overweight.

We need to stop calling this an individual issue and start really working on answers.

If companies really want to encourage workers to lose weight why not give them an additional half hour at lunch in exchange for verified exercise? I guarantee that would shrink more waists. But that does not allow them to pass on costs does it?

[Heywood J]

5. "they cite the findings of behavioral economists showing that people respond more effectively to

potential losses, such as penalties, than expected gains, such as rewards."

By that logic, they could justify threatening their employees with any number of things. When do they start demanding DNA information to fine people for being predisposed to conditions?

Does this mean executives who have waist sizes above 39" will be penalized too, and have their personal medical information shared on comparatively-insecure company servers? I think I can guess the answer.

punishing workers who evade health screenings

"Give us your confidential medical information and submit to probing or we'll punish you!" Unionization never went far enough.

With corporate spending on health care expected to reach an average of $12,136 per employee this year, according to a study by the consulting firm Towers Watson, penalties may soon be the new norm.

Nothing about reining in the excesses at insurance companies and hospitals, or extending more benefits to keep people healthy before they become sick in the first place. Just keep hitting people with the stick until they fall over and die.

[antigop]

6. +100 nt

[jlrum]

7. When Your Boss Makes You Pay for Being Fat

For years non smokers have blamed every illness and the high cost of health insurance on the smoker. As for back as 2004 I tried telling people if you validate a reason for an insurance company to charge more because you do not like it, it will come back and haunt you when the insurance companies start charging for obesity. Go back and research and you will find obesity was costing as much as smokers were costing in health care. Don't complain now, the precedent has been set, and you validated it, no leg to stand on when you scream about being singled out. Yes I smoke and yes I am skinny and yes I pay more for insurance, but now you are fat and you can pay more. Life's a bitch isn't it.

[In_The_Wind]

9. Hello ~ jlrum

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

Yes, life is a bitch sometimes.

[arcane1]

8. This is a sad, yet 10,000% logical and rational response to for-profit medical care.

Yes, unhealthy habits will inevitably result in more medical expenses, but as long as a buck is to be made, this will be the result

[raccoon]

10. And if worker is on meds that cause weight gain? Has an underactive thyroid? Lawsuits, anyone? nt