Firms Make It Their Business To Push Health Incentives

[Conservativesux]

Firms Make It Their Business To Push Health
Incentives, Monitoring Aimed at Cutting Costs

By Ariana Eunjung Cha

Washington Post Staff Writer

Sunday, February 20, 2005; Page A01

CYPRESS, Calif. -- At age 45, Rick Graham was 5-foot-8 and 235 pounds. His blood pressure was soaring, and he didn't have as much energy as he did when he was younger. The business analyst tried every diet in the book, but the weight kept coming back. Finally his employer decided to do something about it.

If Graham would try to eat better and exercise, PacifiCare Health Systems Inc. offered a novel reward: cash.

Jennifer Horn, chief of staff at PacifiCare Health Systems' corporate health services group, warms up with fellow workers during a company-sponsored yoga class Wednesday at PacifiCare's offices in Cypress, Calif. The company offers financial incentives for healthy living. (Steven Lewis For The Washington Post)

So now, once every 24 hours or so, Graham logs on to a computer system managed by his company and types in everything he has eaten: packet of instant oatmeal (104 calories), can of V-8 juice (35 calories), mini box of raisins (42 calories), Mandarin chicken (280 calories), wedge of banana cream pie (300 calories), pepperoni pizza (560 calories), eight cups of water (0 calories) and so forth. He then inputs any exercise he has done, which on this particular day happened to be nothing but is usually 25 minutes on a treadmill and 20 minutes on a stationary bike.

For keeping track of his food intake and his fitness routine, PacifiCare pays him about $15 every other week, or $390 a year.

More at:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A38566-2005Feb19.html

[liberalhistorian]

1. I'm getting a little disturbed

at just how much employers are starting to worm their way into our private and personal lives that have nothing to do with time on the job. Even more disturbing is their growing belief that they have the RIGHT to do so, when nothing could be further from the truth.

It's bad enough that employers already control far too much of our lives as it is, from vacation time to when we can take off if we're genuinely ill, to often having us choose between our jobs or our families, etc., etc. But this is getting to be too much, and the recent story of the employer who fires smokers and refuses to allow employees to smoke EVEN AT HOME AND ON THEIR OWN TIME is, I'm afraid, just the beginning. We've come full circle now, since this is the way it was at the turn of the century with the "company towns." And what's especially disturbing is that it's hidden beneath the smokescreen of "concern" for employees, when that's bullshit.

And, if they really want to do something about stress and improving the health of employees, how about not laying off tons of employees just to enrich the CEO and top management and increase profits and thereby increasing the workload and stress on remaining employees? How about allowing employees to actually use their fucking sick days without threatening them with discipline for doing so? How about allowing employees some decent vacation time and not making them feel guilty for using it? How about allowing some flexibility when they need to deal with a sick child or other family emergency? How about not threatening to fire them if they take off time for treatment of serious illness, such as cancer, for themselves or a family member? How about not giving them bosses that never give them credit for anything and who threaten to fire them for every little thing? How about KEEPING THEIR NOSES OUT OF EMPLOYEES LIVES OUTSIDE OF THE WORKPLACE? I could go on and on, but you get the picture.

[Conservativesux]

2. You put it better then I could. Whats next, will they ask if we use birth

control ??

This has to end now before it gets worse.

[liberalhistorian]

6. I have been asked that very question

in job interviews, believe it or not, along with "are you ever going to marry?" (I'm a single parent), "do you plan on having more children?", etc., etc. You would NOT believe the shit employers try to get away with nowadays. I just very calmly tell them that I'm aware that such questions aren't legal, and that I'm sure that it was just an oversight on their part and that they didn't realize that.

[Liberty Belle]

4. See my post above. These are actually good, not bad.

[liberalhistorian]

7. Actually, no they aren't

and see my post# 5 for the explanation.

[Liberty Belle]

3. I just wrote an article about this.

Actually, these programs have worked out well for both employees and employers. There is no coercion involved. Participation is voluntary. Those who succeed in meeting goals (losing weight, quitting smoking, etc) get substantial cash rewards, usually $500, plus they are presumably healthier. Makes me wish I were fat, so I could earn some extra money! ;-)

Employers, meanwhile, have been proven through multiple studies to save money in the long run through reduced health insurance claims.
Health insurance costs for employers are rising at 11-14% a year. Saving money this way is better than cutting benefits, the only other option for an employer who can't or won't pay more.

Obesity is epidemic in the U.S. New studies show that not only does obesity cause diabetes and high blood pressure, but also some forms of cancer (stomach, intestinal, etc)!

While I would oppose any mandatory programs like this, or any discrimination in employment against overweight people, I see nothing wrong in offering positive incentives to help people shape up and live longer.

Some companies "wellness programs" also include other benefits you might like. One company has a massage therapist come to the office weekly and offers $5 massages! Some have free or discount consultations with certain practitioners, ie naturopaths or chiropractors. There is mind-body medicine to help people reduce stress, since many illness are stress-related. One company gives its employees a $250 PER MONTH allowance to buy vitamins, minerals, and other supplements! Though this is a lot for the company to shell out, they've found it reduces costs long term by keeping people healthy and preventing illness, instead of causing it.

Editor,
Nutrition Business Journal

[liberalhistorian]

5. It's not a very long

jump from this to demanding that employees lose weight/lower blood pressure, etc., etc., or they'll be fired, or refusing to hire people with any kind of health issue at all (overweight, hypertension, etc.).

Look at what's happened with smoking. Employers had the same kind of "stop smoking" programs as the program described above for weight loss. Now, however, it's becoming "quit totally, and not just at work, or you're fired", and an outright ban on hiring smokers. The stop smoking programs were also at first described as "benevolent, we want to help you" programs, which was really bullshit. Employers should have NO CONTROL over our lives OTHER THAN WHEN WE'RE AT WORK. PERIOD. End of discussion.

Sure, we can "choose" to not work for that particular employer, but more and more of them are doing it and people need jobs in order to live and to feed themselves and their families. This "do what we say in your personal life or you're fired" bullshit is nothing less than corporate totalitarianism. It's the modern-day company town; as I said, we've come full circle.

[Liberty Belle]

8. I agree that discrimination shouldn't be tolerated.

It is a fine line, but that would be crossing over it.

[liberalhistorian]

9. But don't you see how easily

these types of programs can, and actually have in many cases, crossed that line? And once it's crossed, it's very hard to go back.

[Liberty Belle]

10. So your answer is don't let employers help employees

with programs aimed at making people healthier? Sorry, I don't agree with that. Actually many of the first companies to do this were very progressive businesses. They are now being emulated by larger corporations.

The answer may be to enact laws to prohibit the abuses that you fear, not to outlaw programs that are helpful to many people.

[Conservativesux]

11. Are they making people healthier? Or just intruding on more privacy?

[Liberty Belle]

13. Weight loss and fewer medical bills overall

would seem to indicate that the programs have made people healthier.

Some lost 50 pounds or more, reducing their risk factors for serious illnesses. Speaking as someone who had a friend nearly die from gastric bypass surgery, this seems like a much more sensible approach.

[Conservativesux]

14. And where will it stop? Genetic testing for future illness?

[liberalhistorian]

16. It is NOT THE JOB of employers

to monitor the health of their employees and get them to change habits the employers may not like. Don't you see anything at all disturbing about having to report certain activities to your employer, even if it is just supposed to be "beneficial" to you? I give my employer enough of my time and life, I don't need them monitoring my non-work life as well. Give them an inch, they'll take ten miles.

[Conservativesux]

12. Indeed so. And the fat cats at the top will do whatever they please..

..IRT to thier own "unhealthy behaviors", whatever those might be, while the workers have to tow the company line, or else be fired.

[liberalhistorian]

15. EXACTLY!

That is, indeed, exactly what will happen.