Off-Topic Discussion for the day: Should jobs that provide full Health benefits have requirements?

[Pig Of The Hut]

This is not a troll question and I'm very serious about it and I wanna hear from all sides

Our country has enormous health issues, millions from the poorest to the wealthiest develop diabetes (develop not born with) and develop a numerous amount of health problems. I'll stop here w that and just ask the question

Should full time jobs that provide health insurance/benefits/Dental require the employee to provide evidence of an annual physical as well as evidence of attendance with a gym 3x minimum a week - one hour / or "XYZ" amounts per month barring any pre existing injury, handicapped properties in order to keep their companies health insurance and benefits provided for the employee ?

Think about the following:
Overall country health
Epidemic of diabetes developed (not born with)
Reduced cost for tax payers to pay for these issues
Etc

Just some thought today for a maybe interesting discussion

 

[juicepouch]

1 in 3 people in the US today have prediabetes and it's expected that 1 in 3 will have full blown diabetes by 2050.
I don't know if you can make your employees work out or eat healthy, but surely with the facts staring people in the face you'd think they would be more concerned with their health

 

[TarkatanDentist]

As someone from the UK, which has the very flawed yet absolutely necessary NHS, the fact that this question would even be asked is disgusting to me.

Everyone has the right to have their healthcare needs met regardless of their health and background. No ifs, ands or buts about it.

 

[Wemfs]

Forcing people to work out however many times per week for "x" amount of time in order to qualify for insurance benefits through their company which they already work full time for? Pretty aggressive way to get people to work out and lead a healthier life. I'm not sure how I feel about this idea.

 

[TKB]

I think everyone has the right to have their healthcare needs met without it completely ruining their lives financially, but there also HAS to be personal accountability. If you eat like trash and smoke a pack of cigarettes a day, who's fault is it really that you're having serious problems with your heart?

 

[Killphil]

The physical I agree with. The workout thing I don't.

 

[Tony at Home]

It's quite questionable to require a workout every day, or to dictate certain eating habits- as it's a very pro-active demand.

However, it's more reasonable to just place "no-smoker" requirements. As it's not dictating people need to do something to improve their health, as much as it's dictating they don't actively destroy it.

 

[mfkaoz]

So basically what you're implying is unhealthy people don't deserve benefits. This is so dumb lol come on Pig.

 

[Vagrant]

with a gym 3x minimum a week - one hour

Absolutely not.

1. Gym doesn't equal the only way to get healthy physical exercise.
2. Most of them aren't cheap
3. At this point, your kind of invading people's routines on a constant basis

I do agree with you that the world has a health problem. But denying help to those who struggle to help themselves isn't a concept I want to get behind.

 

[Tony at Home]

As someone from the UK, which has the very flawed yet absolutely necessary NHS, the fact that this question would even be asked is disgusting to me.

Everyone has the right to have their healthcare needs met regardless of their health and background. No ifs, ands or buts about it.

Well, in the UK because healthcare is nationalized, they also have quality incentives for doctors. When their patients do better and smoke less, they are rewarded. So they're actively encouraged to nudge patients in the right direction.

And that's basically a lighter version of what this is. As of now, doctors in the US have little incentive to care if their patients take their advice or not.

 

[xQUANTUMx]

I live in a country with a nationalized health care system. That being said, some insurance companies here will lower premiums and even in some cases eliminate deductibles not based on your working out etc but a simple blood panel where they can check your bio markers vs risk factors etc (ie thrombophlebitis, HDL/LDL/VLDL ratios etc)

 

[Faded Dreams V]

Seriously imagined an employer being like, "you want health insurance? Well drop and give me 50, maggot!!!!" lol

In all seriousness, I don't know about forcing people to work-out to receive these benefits, but annual physicals should be mandatory. Results from those alone may be enough incentive for some people to join a gym out of their own volition.

 

[ThaShiveGeek]

The physical yes... Well I wouldn't say yes, but I'm not against it either. The working out proof no. I get where you're going with it though. I think it's in the same realm of making people who get food stamps and welfare do drug test. Also the Obama Care situation. I can understand the need for it. As far as working out though... I tell people all the time. I'm fat. I'm happy being fat. I'm not insecure and I don't feel the need to change. I'm happy with my size. In my opinion I wouldn't like to have my employer tell me I can't receive benefits because I'm not working out. I work my full time job. As long as I can function what I do with my private time is up to me. I also think that people have this notion that EVERY over weight person has a problem with being over weight and that's not the case. (Maybe that's why we as a nation are obese?! lol) Good question though.

 

[Mr. Mileena]

lol the govt loves unhealthy people

forcing them to work out would ruin the $$$$$ in medical field

 

[RelentlessOhio]

I'm going to sound liberal and ignorant, but this is just my opinion. I'll use my mom's job as an example.

My mother has worked for Siemens E&A for 10 years now. Her branch produces electric induction motors. Anything from a tiny 100 HP, all the way to 10,000 HP. Usually they are produced for large warehouses and oil rigs.

Anyways, I worked there as well for about 6 months. What I've noticed is that each year, the health insurance premiums increase, while the coverage decreases. There's really never logical explanation, other than they want to save even more. And Siemens is a multi-billion dollar company - they can more than afford to treat their employees to great benefits.

However this isn't the case. The dental and medical co-pays increase every year, and it seems like the list of whats covered gets smaller and smaller. I used to only have to pay $15 at the doctors office for a co-pay per visit, same with the dentist. Now it's damn near $35. And that's just over the span of a couple years.

Do I believe that physical assessments and reports should be sent to the employers? Yes I do. But only medical diagnoses that can be mitigated by the person. Examples are smoking and drinking. You make a conscious choice to destroy your body by doing those things - aka you should have to pay a higher premium and spend more for the same coverage than a person with say diabetes. Diabetes isn't something you elect to have or not have.

What I basically mean is the people who knowingly cost the companies money based on their own selfish habits should have to pay more. You don't get emphysema or a shot liver just through chance, you do it because you chose to smoke 20 cigarettes a day and drink a 12 case a night. Those with serious, non-elected medical conditions shouldn't have to pay the price. Obviously some people would see what's elective and non-elective conditions differently.

I just feel like it's only fair.

 

[Pig Of The Hut]

So basically what you're implying is unhealthy people don't deserve benefits. This is so dumb lol come on Pig.

I'm saying irresponsible people don't

I was brainstorming briefly w some people I work with yesterday because they mentioned how many people on staff have severe health problems since working there due to not taking care of themselves in any way (terrible eating, smoking, etc etc ) but have benefits from the company where as some part time employees there working 2-3 jobs find time to take care of themselves but need benefits for their families so the conversation arose

After thinking about I do feel you should earn benefits by what you do professionally but earn the right to keep those benefits (health, dental, etc) by doing your part as well

The trick thing is discussing what and how much

I'm sorry for any offended for this that I like good health, promote it, believe in it and want to see myself and others healthy and living

 

[HellblazerHawkman]

I'd prefer a mandatory physical to the situation a lot of people like me got stuck in. I work for Sears (have for 3 years, ever wanted to feel like a bigger loser in life, go with them) and before the Healthcare act, I could work 40 hours a week (39.99 technically) no problem. After, I'm struggling to get even 30 (for those unaware, 30 hours is the new federal guideline for when you have to give someone healthcare as I understand it). Now I'm making less money on top of not being able to go to a doctor (beyond an emergency room visit, never fucking doing that again). Ain't some Fox news bullshit, this was a mandate by Sears to all of the stores (worked for 2 in this period). I'm with Republicans on things got fucked in this law (for SOME not ALL), hoping we get some work done on it come midterms (not a total appeal).

Side note, our European brothers can back me up or correct me, but overseas they can't get away with charging you out the ass for care. Heard a story on this, to give an example, here you need a kidney removed, they charge you for the operating table, hospital room, tools the doctor used, food, etc. Overseas, by law, they can't itemize your hospital bill like that. We cut that shit down, costs will come down and care becomes more affordable (and as @LtLuthor pointed out, doctors won't have an incentive to keep you coming back).

Another side note, implants and medication are WAY overpriced. Might have been the same story, I think it was something like a $1000 joint replacement gets sold to a hospital for $10000, who in turns charges you (sketchy on this number) $30000 for the operation to put it in.

Anyone correct me on any info I got wrong, I don't like spewing incorrect info

Edit, Sorry for the tangent realized I didn't address the question. I say yes as long as it's not enforced in a fascist sense. Keep in mind, it's fucking expensive to eat healthy (Gym too). Maybe do it like Car insurance companies do and incentivize safe habits (Progressive sees how I drive because I let them with a little device and my rates go down because I drive safe)

 

[Pig Of The Hut]

Absolutely not.

1. Gym doesn't equal the only way to get healthy physical exercise.
2. Most of them aren't cheap
3. At this point, your kind of invading people's routines on a constant basis

I do agree with you that the world has a health problem. But denying help to those who struggle to help themselves isn't a concept I want to get behind.

What if the company provided
Monthly memberships to gyms and health clubs

Everyone wins

 

[dribirut]

This is not a troll question and I'm very serious about it and I wanna hear from all sides

Our country has enormous health issues, millions from the poorest to the wealthiest develop diabetes (develop not born with) and develop a numerous amount of health problems. I'll stop here w that and just ask the question

Should full time jobs that provide health insurance/benefits/Dental require the employee to provide evidence of an annual physical as well as evidence of attendance with a gym 3x minimum a week - one hour / or "XYZ" amounts per month barring any pre existing injury, handicapped properties in order to keep their companies health insurance and benefits provided for the employee ?

Think about the following:
Overall country health
Epidemic of diabetes developed (not born with)
Reduced cost for tax payers to pay for these issues
Etc

Just some thought today for a maybe interesting discussion

IMO definitely yes.. There should be some requirement.. Or maybe give incentives to exercise more and eat better

 

[mfkaoz]

I'm saying irresponsible people don't

I was brainstorming briefly w some people I work with yesterday because they mentioned how many people on staff have severe health problems since working there due to not taking care of themselves in any way (terrible eating, smoking, etc etc ) but have benefits from the company where as some part time employees there working 2-3 jobs find time to take care of themselves but need benefits for their families so the conversation arose

After thinking about I do feel you should earn benefits by what you do professionally but earn the right to keep those benefits (health, dental, etc) by doing your part as well

The trick thing is discussing what and how much

I'm sorry for any offended for this that I like good health, promote it, believe in it and want to see myself and others healthy and living

You're not taking into account that what people do in personal lives does not directly affect the company. If they choose to provide health insurance it would not only be hypocritical but also just completely fucked if they denied a few people insurance because they're unhealthy. The company doesn't care about whether or not a person is healthy as long as they're coming in and getting the job done, that's the insurance company's problem.

I'm not offended at all, but this entire concept is a little ridiculous. People can go out and get insurance on their own but they know they can't get good coverage if they're unhealthy so they take whatever the company they work for is offering. At the end of the day, you have good intentions. I see that you want people to lead a healthy lifestyle and I respect that. Cutting off someone's health benefits due to them being unhealthy is not the answer though.

 

[ThaShiveGeek]

As much as I'm about Obama the health care act only... hinders me in my opinion. I can't work my full 40 anymore and I'm penalized for not participating in the program. It's a lose lose.

 

[Pig Of The Hut]

You're not taking into account that what people do in personal lives does not directly affect the company. If they choose to provide health insurance it would not only be hypocritical but also just completely fucked if they denied a few people insurance because they're unhealthy. The company doesn't care about whether or not a person is healthy as long as they're coming in and getting the job done, that's the insurance company's problem.

I'm not offended at all, but this entire concept is a little ridiculous. People can go out and get insurance on their own but they know they can't get good coverage if they're unhealthy so they take whatever the company they work for is offering. At the end of the day, you have good intentions. I see that you want people to lead a healthy lifestyle and I respect that. Cutting off someone's health benefits due to them being unhealthy is not the answer though.

Hold on

You can get benefits if you're unhealthy or in bad shape

What I'm proposing is when you do get them you are then required to take advantage of it and are required to live a healthier life style

Companies are connected

Health insurance, taxes, employees longevity, are all connected

If anything I could be completely open to this not being a requirement but can be made a requirement company by company and the companies that choose to do this get tax breaks because they're overall helping the entire country

 

[Pig Of The Hut]

Guys I ask everyone keep an open mind and not get offended or upset

Let's just have a good discussion

 

[Qwark28]

Reward people who help themselves, don't offer shit to the fat fuck who will just kill himself 10 burgers at a time.

 

[deathblooms2k4]

Reduced cost for tax payers to pay for these issues

Just some thought today for a maybe interesting discussion

The largest cost to the tax payers are the people who do not have health care not the people who do. A hospital does not deny a patient in need. And I don't think there is a correlation between people who have employer provided health care and people who are reckless with their health. The people guzzling mountain dew and sitting on the couch all day are doing to have the lifestyle with or without healthcare.

The healthcare system is completely fucked at every level, from the hospitals, Insurance companies, Medical suppliers etc. To put this in perspective Insurance companies privately negotiate the cost of procedures with each hospital individually. The cost of an MRI procedure at one hospital can be completely different compared to the cost of the same exact procedure at another hospital. To make matters worse these negotiations and prices are kept private so that the competing insurance companies and hospitals don't know what the others are paying. It's ridiculous how anti-consumer the entire system is.

Requirements are not the solution. I will say however, that I think insurance companies that provide incentive based benefits are taking a step in the right direction. I have Harvard Pilgrim and I get a reduction in my deductible for having an annual physical as well as a 150$ fitness reimbursement that can go towards my gym membership provided that I can show proof of cost/membership. Health and Wellness Incentives are a win win.