• #1
    BUT - it is a precursor to what is coming next. Lose weight or lose your job, stop smoking or lose your job, what next? Stop eating red meat or you lose your job and so on? With employers having to pay something like $65 a head to the government for each employee they insure, they have to cut costs of health insurance some way. This would be just the start of the new government endorsed Nanny State. Think Mayor Bloomberg on steroids.
  • #42
    There are a couple of things going on here: First, most would agree, the cost for poor health choices should be carried by the person who makes those choices. Second, this information is between the individual and the insurance company. HIPAA restricts the company from even inquiring into the health of a specific employee so issues regarding job loss due to health can get the employer into trouble.

    If these factors aren't considered, the non smoker pays extra to supplement the smokers insurance. The same goes for obesity and promiscuity. When these factors are considered, it has the added benefit of encouraging fat people like me to lose weight in order to save money.
  • #48
    @DerivePI Good reply, I seem to have a vague memory of discussion to ease the HIPPA rules, they are onerous for everyone concerned. They are well intentioned but the unintended consequences, as usual, are what's causing some problems. I'll have to do a little research, but I have a distinct memory of some changes being proposed. The insurance company, who will have the information, may make the decision to charge a bit more for Employee A due to a health concern, but the obverse is also something to think about, Employee B, in good shape etc., should get a reduction in the cost - funny though, that's never mentioned.
  • #61
    @Tralee - I will never understand why we would want our employers between us and our healthcare and insurance. When I go to get life insurance, it won't be through my employer. They will need me to do a physical and I will have to pay more for my attractiveness (gravity wise that is). The only way I will keep them honest is through competition. Why can't our health insurance be the same way? It would save a lot of trouble and increase transparency and simplicity immensely.

    Of course the answer to this and many other problems is government intrusion.
  • #69
    A few things. First, CVS claims this is voluntary but i don't see this as "voluntary" when they assess a MONETARY penalty to those who do not participate in the wellness program. That's FAR from voluntary.

    Second, barring the compulsory vibe, this is not a bad idea and here's how.
    Say you have two workers,HEALTHY GUY and UNHEALTHY GUY. HG med records show him within healthy body weight limits,non smoker,normal cholesterol and normal BP. But UHG is obese,smoker,high cholesterol and high BP.

    Should both workers pay the same rate of health ins costs??? The chances are low that HG will see a dr for any health issues related to SMOKING or OBESITY because he's outside the circle of risk related to those ailments.

    On the other hand UHG is well inside the risk circle for ALL of the above ailments so his chances are VERY high that he will see a dr for issues related to those same ailments.

    Why should HG and UHG pay the same rate when the probability of HG seeing a dr for the most COMMON risk factors associated with high BP and obesity are VERY LOW and UHGs probability is VERY HIGH???

    Also,this puts the employer at an advantage when it comes time to negotiate with the insurance company.

    If 40% of a companys workforce is within HEALTHY limits, this info can be used to bargain for a LOWER rate because that healthy group presents a LOWER RISK.

    CVS should have SOLD the idea to its workers instead of clubbing them over the head with it.
  • #24
    Get used to this intrusion. As private companies are forced to either dump their employees and their families into "CountyHospital" grade ObamaCare or keep them on private plans everything we have known in the past will change. ObamaCare was created by Orwellians who are as much about CONTROL our lives as Health. Tragic times ahead for all families except Bureaucrats, Unionistas, and their bought and paid for Hard Left Politicians.
  • #105
    @Waynestew this has everything to do with obamacare. Why do you think they are doing the screenings? Another maneuver to offset the costs of obamacare by demonstrating to their insurance carrier they have a percentage of employees participating in their health and wellness program. The more that participate the lower the expense or premium cost to the company. There is a minimum the company has to pay but generally rates are set by the company, like cvs, because they are self insured.
  • R Load more replies

  • #12
    I'm sorry, businesses and government have officially become WAAAYYYYY too many politicians are obese? Judges? Doctors? Business owners?

    I think I will start a business that caters to people like this and if they aren't keeping their weight or gaining and not eating at McDonald's at least once a week they get let go.....
  • #4
    @politixlisa. I turned this story into Politix several days ago. Mary is nice enough to give us credit when she uses a story we turn in.?????

    Anyhow what CVS is doing is the wave of the future. We cannot continue as a nation pretending obesity is not costing this nation unnecessarily. The AMA says Obesity and smoking are the two most preventable causes of death in the USA. Many businesses are already refusing to hire or charging more for smokers. Why should obesity be any different? I do think CVS is rushing them a bit much and should phase this in but I do support "wellness programs".

    Many years ago this nation decided that "big is beautiful" and that it hurt the self esteem of the obese to take notice of it and we were to shut our mouths and it was none of our business. The end result of that philosophy has been an epidemic of obesity and we are now the fattest nation on earth. Our approach to obesity has to change. Nobody likes being told they are wrong about anything but we cannot become the productive, leader nation once again if we don't make changes. I weight the same as I did when I was in college more than 40 years ago. My body doesn't look the same to be certain and I had to lose 40 lbs to do it. But we can do it and we have to do it.
  • #8
    Thanks,@jessejaymes! I didn't realize you had sent this idea in. I will give you a hat tip in the story. We appreciate the story tips.:)
  • #19
    @PolitixLisa I do appreciate it. I send in about 3-4 a day. I don't mean to be argumentative but if nobody is reading the suggestions would it just be better if I stopped? I know several others who do the same sending them in. It makes us feel like we've contributed but if it's really not something that is needed I can back off.
  • R Load more replies

  • #114
    This is crass and materialist to regiment and control everyone's lives for the sake of money. Rules in business should pertain to the business applying during business hours and the rest of the time should be yours.
    Health insurance itself is the problem here. Studies have shown that in the long run health care costs for the actual service not the insurance are lower for obese people because of dying at younger ages. But the insurance companies don't care about logic or statistics and will whimsically pick what ever characteristics they can get away with to raise rates.
    Down with insurance! They create inflation, making procedures affordable without insurance unaffordable without insurance, pulling everyone in, and making the inflation in the cost of health care services (again not insurance, the actual service) keep going up.
    Insurance is a gambling racket that prays off people's fears and sucks money away from the production of actual tangible goods and services while making tangible goods and services more expensive. Insurance should be illegal. People should just pay for things and if they have legitimate financial hardships or can't afford it then the government should help them, if possible requiring a pay back program.
    If we don't abolish the insurance industry it will continue to exploit the American consumer and it will continue to chip away at people's liberties as our lives become increasingly regimented by employers and the government.
  • #93
    I don't agree with a punishment if you live a "bad" lifestyle. However a reward if you live a good 1 might not be a bad idea.
  • #108
    We punish people for breaking the rules or laws. Why shouldn't people be punished or ridiculed for a "bad" lifestyle. My company does not reward employees for failure. Not sure why this is any different.
  • #88
    Well then , shouldn't BO resign as president because he' a smoker ? Or any congressman that uses alcohol , smokes or is overweight ? After all , we pay for their gold club medical benefit package & retirement ? Start at the top & lead by example for once before dictating how others should live .
  • #87
    Sounds like more Obamacare scamming.$600? That's about what a doctors visit and checkup would cost those w/o insurance, so sounds like a push, and just a way for either the company or doctors to make more money. Find another job.
  • #83
    All four responses are correct, although one is preventable.

    And you should get used to it, because the more of us there are, and the more the middle class is sold out to the plutocracy, the less freedom of choice we will have.

    You will all be in a system that is the equivalent of a medical factory, where you get standardized care for minimum cost.

    Since your behavior affects the costs of care, your behavior will be encouraged to conform with recommended norms.

    Your medical records will be available to anyone who has a stake in your health as it relates to the cost of your health maintenence.

    As a result, your health score will become as important as your credit score.

    Whether or not that data is used to discriminate, will be up to rules passed by elected officials.
  • #71
    Even though I believe it violates the employees privacy and will eventually lead to discrimination in hiring and promoting individial workers, this is truly something which will come to fruition with a number of emplyers in the future. Remember, these companies are likely footing over half of the premium for the employee...this is NOT a is a benefit...many insurance companies now provide a wellness program to plan participants...FREE OF CHARGE...I know I have taken advantage of it and working on eating healthier and losing weight...even though I am not an overly big person...however, they need to be careful on how the category weight, as they will need to take into consideration the height and overall build of the person...
  • #73
    First of all congratulations on taking advantage of a wellness program. I would like to know how you figure this is an invasion of employees privacy?
  • #74

    Actual weight is...but I could go through any given CVS and say, "Yep, he is fat...yep, she is okay...yep, she is fat..." and then proceed to make them pay more...
  • #76
    @jaybebo84 I'm sure corporations would like to do that but I don't think they can get it past the courts without some pretty definitive standards.
  • #77

    You are probably right...but maybe they will find something in the ACA which will enable them to do it...since the law is constitutional.
  • R Load more comments...