Basic health fitness for continued Employment

[lx43]

As an employer my healthcare cost for my employees are going throw the ruff. I have been informed that my health insurer provider is raising premiums by 18% this year alone, and no telling what it will be next year with the Obamacare. I believe the majority of healthcare cost comes from the govt insane policies and welfare programs, but I also believe a significant portion of healthcare cost arise simply because people do not take care of themselves. It seems to me the employees who have good health habits are subsidizing the lazy asses and smokers. i estimate more than 20% of my staff smoke (I see them all day chain smoking outside on breaks), I have a good number of people who are morbidly obese (some weight over 300 ibs, etc

Therefore, I have been seriously debating about creating a basic level of fitness for my employees to continue their employment with me. I know--it bothers the hell of me interfering in their personal lives but I can't continue supporting people with bad habits.

Here are my ideas:

1. I will give employees who smoke, chew tobacco, or take nicotine supplements 1 year to stop smoking or lose employment. In this one year, I will providing coaching to those people who want to stop at my expense.

2. Overweight individuals must begin to lose weight until they reach what current medical guidelines say is a good overall body weight. Again will lose employment if I don't see progress in reducing the weight of those significantly overweight.


I would like to hear your opinions on what I am thinking about doing, so let me have it.

[squarepusher]

its bullshit, my premiums get raised like 25% a year!

[emazur]

I know--it bothers the hell of me interfering in their personal lives but I can't continue supporting people with bad habits.


If it makes you feel any better, I'm sure it doesn't bother the hell out of most of your employees that the government has adjusted the tax structure that practically forces you to provide them with health insurance.

[heavenlyboy34]

Just make sure to explain why you're adding the new requirements so they don't get mad at you, OP. JMHO.

[Anti Federalist]

Therefore, I have been seriously debating about creating a basic level of fitness for my employees to continue their employment with me. I know--it bothers the hell of me interfering in their personal lives but I can't continue supporting people with bad habits.

You planning on setting up home surveillance to make sure they are not engaging in what you consider to be bad habits?

[bkreigh]

You could do that or you can let the folks live their own life. If they want to smoke so be it. If they want to be overweight and look like crap then so be it. If you were my boss and i heard you talking about this i would tell you to Fuck off and walk out the door to be honest with you. You are the boss not their parents.

How bout you go another route and ask them what their political views are and tell them if they dont change them to your liking before the next election they will get the axe. Seems just as logical.

Whats up with this as well?



1. I will give employees who smoke, chew tobacco, or take nicotine supplements 1 year to stop smoking or lose employment. In this one year, I will providing coaching to those people who want to stop at my expense.


Those that chew or use nicotine supplements dont smoke so...?

[squarepusher]

also, im not sure if these requirements would be considered illegal/discrimination or not.


what type of business is it?

[slothman]

First, quiting smoking is really hard, I mean really hard.
A year may not be enough.
Second, what weight are you talking about, 150 pounds?
I could go to a dozen different doctors and get half-a-dozen different weight values.

For the fired ones, it would be interesting to see what jobs they get.
I wonder if they pay less or are underemployed.

[DamianTV]

Youre gonna do this why? So you can save the INSURANCE COMPANY money?

They are gonna charge you what ever they want and there is not a damn thing you can do about it, short of going to another company... Sounds to me like you are just giving in to their idea of make your employees healthy because its costs us money. Youre trying to mop up the oil spill but leaving the leak in your oil pan. Address the REAL problem. The real problem is they all want more money so they can get more laws passed so they can make more money. Replace Money with Crack and it will remind you a bit of the ABC Weekend Specials. The people that educate doctors want the people they teach to know how to make people sicker and more dependant on the drugs they produce. Insuance wants you to be unhealthy so you will need to buy insurance. Hospitals want people to come in so they can charge you a thousand dollars to wash your hands. They dont give a fat flying FUCK about you, your health, the health of your employees, in fact, they all want everyone to be as sick as possible so they can make more money. Healthy people dont make any of these companies any money.

[MelissaWV]

I'm generally a fan of a company being able to hire and fire for whatever reasons it wants to.

I would point out, though, you've just picked two "bad habits" out of at least dozens that would impact not only premiums, but work habits. You are going to make people quit smoking, but not drinking? Why/why not? Do any of your employees eat poorly? It's likely the 300-pound people don't have the best eating habits, but the 120-pound ones might not, either. Depending on their family history and what they're ingesting, they may be just as likely to cost an arm and a leg at the doctor's office. Pregnancy costs a great deal of money... will you offer incentives for your female personnel to stay on birth control, and for your male employees to use condoms? This would save you a bundle on maternity coverage. Do your employees have other pre-existing conditions?

On the flipside, are you sure it's not so stressful working with you that people rush out to "smoke" in order to get a break? I don't smoke, but I go out for smoke breaks with fellow employees just to get the hell out of here. Are you absolutely certain that the 300-pound employee doesn't have other issues? Lastly, are these people good employees?

You could solve the problem by sitting down with them individually and talking about what their premiums are going to do. You can then tell them that they have a year to lose the weight/quit smoking, or they will see a larger amount of money coming out of their check to cover the difference in insurance. If your real objection is the subsidizing, it is perfectly within your power to ensure that those people with higher premiums pay more out of their checks. That will end the "subsidizing."

Or you could fire perfectly good employees who happen to be overweight.

It's entirely your choice, but I caution you that you might end up with a business populated by skinny, cranky, inefficient people for which you will still have to provide insurance, and who may still engage in habits that cost you money.

[Lovecraftian4Paul]

Bad enough having government reaching into our lives, no need to have businesses doing it too.

[moostraks]

If you were my boss and i heard you talking about this i would tell you to Fuck off and walk out the door to be honest with you. You are the boss not their parents.



lol...I thought something pretty similar when I read this. You generally don't garner cooperation from employees by acting like a tyrant. I understand the frustration, but you catch more bees with honey than with vinegar.

[roho76]

Why don't you switch everybody over to a 1099 and then explain to them why. Make them pay the insurance and taxes. They'll realize quickly who the enemy is and you won't have to keep up increasing cost of health care they will.

Somebody mentioned eliminating payroll tax deductions on these forums. Why not do this instead?

[Krugerrand]

Youre gonna do this why? So you can save the INSURANCE COMPANY money?

This sums it up for me. I doubt any insurance company would reduce your premiums because of the policy.

[JenaS62]

ok so you are targeting smokers and the obese. What about people who drink or people who partake in risky sports?

Yeah, I would tell you to fuck off too.

[fisharmor]

I would like to hear your opinions on what I am thinking about doing, so let me have it.

Ok.... You're insane. This is the type of decision that torpedos a company.

Smokers aren't going to quit smoking because their boss told them to. I say this as a man who smoked for 17 years before quitting. My wife can't stand the smell of smoke, so I spent six years not getting laid on a regular basis because I wouldn't quit.

You don't make someone quit. Smokers need a compelling reason to quit. For some it's the funny cough that they didn't have before. For me, it was a choice between smoking and a hobby I had dreamed about taking up for over a decade. Take an empirical survey, and NOT ONE PERSON is going to check the "because my boss said so" box.

And all I had to do was go through 24 hours of withdrawal and a little mental reconditioning. Fat people? Forget it. I also took up more regular exercise after quitting smoking, and even though I was still a pretty fit smoker, it still sucked, sucked, sucked. I can't imagine what it would be like to go from stationary to trying to lose 100 lbs.

What would really happen is that these people would no longer have an incentive to perform for you. They would know that you're axing them, so they'd come in to work and fuck around for 8 hours a day, and probably be looking for other jobs on your dime. If they got fired for screwing around they get to collect unemployment, and tell the unemployment office and their next employer that they were threatened with termination for smoking and then claim they got fast tracked or something like that.

[Cowlesy]

I think a negative policy ultimately is going to hurt employee performance, lx43.

To me, it seems more like you are trying to make a point about public policy through well-intentioned yet punitive actions against your employees. This will hit performance and could lead to turn-over.

Instead, you could hold a company meeting about the impact the healthcare legislation will have to your firm's bottom line. It will take some arithmetic, but you could institute a wellness program that provides incentives (cash or time off) for employees to improve habits. This way you can demonstrate how poor health is going to hurt the company, but at the same offer the employees a way to reward themselves by making better decisions that will also help with your insurance premium costs.

[roho76]

I think a negative policy ultimately is going to hurt employee performance, lx43.

To me, it seems more like you are trying to make a point about public policy through well-intentioned yet punitive actions against your employees. This will hit performance and could lead to turn-over.

Instead, you could hold a company meeting about the impact the healthcare legislation will have to your firm's bottom line. It will take some arithmetic, but you could institute a wellness program that provides incentives (cash or time off) for employees to improve habits. This way you can demonstrate how poor health is going to hurt the company, but at the same offer the employees a way to reward themselves by making better decisions that will also help with your insurance premium costs.

+1

Or my 1099 idea. I don't understand why everyone's not a contractor? Seems to me the best way to beat this health insurance scam. Put the costs in their hands.

"Here's your paycheck. You pay taxes and social security and FICA and insurance." People will get the point.

Can you do this or is there some rule for businesses against this? I am mostly freelance and my company only had a couple people do work for me so I could get away with it. But since a lot of companies have contractors that do work for them why not make them all contractors?

[fisharmor]

I don't understand why everyone's not a contractor?

If they were then IRS would explode.
My wife got a 1099MISC this year and for the first time in the decade I've been using it, Turbo Tax couldn't figure out what to do.

If everyone got one, the first thing that would happen is that so many people just wouldn't pay that the system would collapse. That's the type of revolt we'd have.

[MelissaWV]

The IRS is scrutinizing 1099s more than ever, I believe, so be extra-cautious when paying your extortion fees this year.

[roho76]

If they were then IRS would explode.

Great. Where do we start?


If everyone got one, the first thing that would happen is that so many people just wouldn't pay that the system would collapse. That's the type of revolt we'd have.

Great. where do we start?

And I'm not sure the system would collapse but it would definitely be a revolt and it would probably force the government to be nicer to us.;)

[LibertyEagle]

See, this is one of the many problems with putting up with government forcing anyone, much less private businesses, to insure their employees. They start thinking it is their business to stick their noses into their employees' private affairs.


Therefore, I have been seriously debating about creating a basic level of fitness for my employees to continue their employment with me. I know--it bothers the hell of me interfering in their personal lives but I can't continue supporting people with bad habits.

You should have stopped with what is bolded. If their personal lives are not interfering with their job performance, you should keep your nose out of their personal affairs. If you choose not to, then you are adding to the problem of the surveillance state that is going up all around us.

Read what Cowlesy wrote. Many companies have done this and it works. Offer programs and incentives for positive reinforcement.

[Elwar]

Stop providing health insurance.

Pay the fine.

[Bossobass]

Just lobby the government to mandate that every American buy whatever it is your company provides and you'll be able to pay for the increased HC costs and buy an island.

Bosso

[jake]

Stop providing health insurance.

Pay the fine.

interesting idea.. and pay the employees any difference to put towards their own private health insurance!

[Mike4Freedom]

As an employer my healthcare cost for my employees are going throw the ruff. I have been informed that my health insurer provider is raising premiums by 18% this year alone, and no telling what it will be next year with the Obamacare. I believe the majority of healthcare cost comes from the govt insane policies and welfare programs, but I also believe a significant portion of healthcare cost arise simply because people do not take care of themselves. It seems to me the employees who have good health habits are subsidizing the lazy asses and smokers. i estimate more than 20% of my staff smoke (I see them all day chain smoking outside on breaks), I have a good number of people who are morbidly obese (some weight over 300 ibs, etc

Therefore, I have been seriously debating about creating a basic level of fitness for my employees to continue their employment with me. I know--it bothers the hell of me interfering in their personal lives but I can't continue supporting people with bad habits.

Here are my ideas:

1. I will give employees who smoke, chew tobacco, or take nicotine supplements 1 year to stop smoking or lose employment. In this one year, I will providing coaching to those people who want to stop at my expense.

2. Overweight individuals must begin to lose weight until they reach what current medical guidelines say is a good overall body weight. Again will lose employment if I don't see progress in reducing the weight of those significantly overweight.


I would like to hear your opinions on what I am thinking about doing, so let me have it.

You have a privately owned company owned by yourself. You can do what you want, unless you have some sort of contract with them. If they dont like it, they can leave.

It is a good thing that this is being done within the private sector. I applaud you for your efforts.

If the government was telling you things like this, you would be screwed because they like to enofrce things at the barrel of a gun.

In this case they can find another job or risk some capital or take out a business loan and start thier own company.

[Icymudpuppy]

I simply don't hire people that are out of shape to begin with. Of course, my business is physically demanding, so the fat people, and heavy smokers usually can't pass the physical performance part of the interview where I make them crawl under a house, carry and climb a ladder, hoist bricks on and off a roof, hike through thick brush and up and down steep slopes, and walk across a beaver dam.

Up to now, I never provided health insurance, but I have been giving employees $1000 a year to go toward health maintenance. They can use it for a fitness club membership, entrance fees for community athletics, checkups, prescriptions, private insurance, etc.

I'm not sure what I'll do now.

[MelissaWV]

I simply don't hire people that are out of shape to begin with. Of course, my business is physically demanding, so the fat people, and heavy smokers usually can't pass the physical performance part of the interview where I make them crawl under a house, carry and climb a ladder, hoist bricks on and off a roof, hike through thick brush and up and down steep slopes, and walk across a beaver dam.

Up to now, I never provided health insurance, but I have been giving employees $1000 a year to go toward health maintenance. They can use it for a fitness club membership, entrance fees for community athletics, checkups, prescriptions, private insurance, etc.

I'm not sure what I'll do now.

Dock their share of the "fine" out of that $1000 and encourage them to write Uncle Sam and let them know how much "better" things are now?

[Brian4Liberty]

Stop providing health insurance.

Pay the fine.


interesting idea.. and pay the employees any difference to put towards their own private health insurance!

The correct free-market answer. Does my employer have to pay my auto insurance? Home owners insurance? Forcing employers to pay anything other than wages is an outrage. Employer paid health insurance was the end of the competitive market in heath insurance and health care.

Pay them all hourly, increase their pay if you eliminate insurance.

[MelissaWV]

The correct free-market answer. Does my employer have to pay my auto insurance? Home owners insurance? Forcing employers to pay anything other than wages is an outrage. Employer paid health insurance was the end of the competitive market in heath insurance and health care.

Pay them all hourly, increase their pay if you eliminate insurance.

Hell, most occupations shouldn't even be an "hourly wage," but it's what we're used to. I wish we got paid by output at my main job. I think people are frightened of that, though, because a large number of workers (especially the higher up the foodchain you go) don't have much or any output ;) "Hourly wage" whether you're working a lot, a little, or not at all... bleh. That's why I like my freelance stuff. I look at what you want me to do, I tell you how long it'll take me and how much money I want for it.

[Brian4Liberty]

Hell, most occupations shouldn't even be an "hourly wage," but it's what we're used to. I wish we got paid by output at my main job. I think people are frightened of that, though, because a large number of workers (especially the higher up the foodchain you go) don't have much or any output ;) "Hourly wage" whether you're working a lot, a little, or not at all... bleh. That's why I like my freelance stuff. I look at what you want me to do, I tell you how long it'll take me and how much money I want for it.

I tend to like hourly wage the best. It prevents abuse. In today's labor market, "salaried" equates to indentured servant. "You will work as much as we tell you to work!" Forty hour weeks disappeared long ago for private sector salaried employees.

Pay per output is good, as long as it's something that can be fairly and accurately measured (a subset of all jobs out there). For some reason, I find the game of "estimates", "change orders", and overly detailed contracts and project scopes distasteful. Nice in theory, but in practice, it sucks. Constant arguments over what is included or not, with both parties often unhappy with the results.

Many jobs simply pay for your physical presence, which is more suited for hourly pay.

[Icymudpuppy]

I pay a percentage of each job completed. Often known as "Piece Rate"

My average job is about $750. 10% office expense, 15% automotive expense, 25% materials expense, 7% administrative overhead, 20-45% employee pay depending on experience, 3-28% profit.

Hourly workers are slow. Piece rate workers get paid more when they work harder. It rewards efficiency.

[lx43]

Thanks for the feedback everyone.