Comments on: The Granularity of Employer Provided Health Benefits http://www.healthpolcom.com/blog/2008/09/22/the-granularity-of-employer-provided-health-benefits/ A Forum for Discussing and Analyzing Healthcare Issues Fri, 12 Mar 2010 02:28:29 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.2 By: Alan http://www.healthpolcom.com/blog/2008/09/22/the-granularity-of-employer-provided-health-benefits/#comment-3054 Alan Tue, 23 Sep 2008 15:38:12 +0000 http://www.healthpolcom.com/blog/2008/09/22/the-granularity-of-employer-provided-health-benefits/#comment-3054 The findings, as you describe them, are not surprising to anyone familiar with health benefits. Companies who keep their employees are more willing to spend money on those employees as they believe they will get a payback of some kind over the long term. Companies with shorter-term employees (retail, food come to mind) spend less because they don't expect to see a payback. The situation becomes more complicated as the lower wage, shorter-term employee industries also frequently have higher premium and out of pocket costs than do longer-term employee industries. Is that related to wages? To the profit potential of the companies? Maybe the causes aren't separable. Again, not having read the actual research, I don't know how the research treated the presence or absence of Taft-Hartley Trusts as the actual provider of benefits rather than the company itself. In these cases, the companies pay a fixed amount per hour of work to the trust, which actually administers the benefits. This is also a common feature in the grocery industry (low wage/high turnover). In any approach to health reform, there will be those who will be better off and those who are worse off (or at least equal). Will the "haves" be willing to give something up for the greater good to fix a system that is breaking apart? The findings, as you describe them, are not surprising to anyone familiar with health benefits.

Companies who keep their employees are more willing to spend money on those employees as they believe they will get a payback of some kind over the long term. Companies with shorter-term employees (retail, food come to mind) spend less because they don’t expect to see a payback.

The situation becomes more complicated as the lower wage, shorter-term employee industries also frequently have higher premium and out of pocket costs than do longer-term employee industries. Is that related to wages? To the profit potential of the companies? Maybe the causes aren’t separable.

Again, not having read the actual research, I don’t know how the research treated the presence or absence of Taft-Hartley Trusts as the actual provider of benefits rather than the company itself. In these cases, the companies pay a fixed amount per hour of work to the trust, which actually administers the benefits. This is also a common feature in the grocery industry (low wage/high turnover).

In any approach to health reform, there will be those who will be better off and those who are worse off (or at least equal). Will the “haves” be willing to give something up for the greater good to fix a system that is breaking apart?

]]>