jps wrote:
On Wed, 4 Feb 2009 11:38:26 -0800 (PST), Frogwatch
wrote:

My thoughts on the concept of health insurance:
I really do not think the health probs of my employees is my business
except I want them to get work done. I got no problem if thye get
sick and take weeks off as long as they make it up or work at night or
weekends or any other time. There are timetables for stuff that have
to be met though.
I do offer to pay the premium on an 80/20 policy ($1000 deductible)
from IEEE but only one guy takes me up on that, the rest get their
insurance through spouses.
Frankly, I do not think their health insurance is my business at all
because I cannot get a policy that will meet the needs of every
employee. They are more likely to get a policy that meets their needs
on their own, I also cannot get any better rate for them than they
can get themselves. Consequently, having me buy a standard policy for
them simply adds cost and gives them a policy that is less beneficial
than they could get for less on their own.

There is no way an individual policy could provide the coverage at the
same cost as a group policy, no matter the number of employees.

I've been tracking this for close to 20 years and have to deal with it
at the end of each year.

Your approach to your employees is short-sighted, akin to oxen tilling
your fields. You must have easily replaceable employees who you don't
care about personally.

Not a surprise given your political views.


Indeed. Workers are just chattel to "bosses" like froglegs.

Eisboch wrote:

"jps" wrote in message
...


Hey, if the employee is on his wife's policy, it's an easy way to pick
up savings and burden someone else's business. God forbid the wife
loses her job or the company makes her pay for her spouse and kids.
Froggie will find a new employee without health problems or one with a
sugar mama who comes with insurance.

Not giving a crap about your employees health isn't scummy like
failing to pay taxes or blow jobs.


Business (other than health insurance companies) should not be in the
health insurance business, either as a provider or an administrator of a
group plan. Period. They are forced to be under the current system in
order to be competitive in terms of benefits. I designed and built thin
film vacuum deposition systems for optics. What do I know about current
health insurance programs, or what is best for individuals and their
families? Very little, yet I was forced to choose and employ people
just to administer the program. I think people should be able to choose
their own plan and coverage, depending on their individual needs. The
cost of premiums for individual plans should be part of the employee's
compensation package.

Eisboch


But it isn't.

HK wrote:
Eisboch wrote:

"jps" wrote in message
...


Hey, if the employee is on his wife's policy, it's an easy way to pick
up savings and burden someone else's business. God forbid the wife
loses her job or the company makes her pay for her spouse and kids.
Froggie will find a new employee without health problems or one with a
sugar mama who comes with insurance.

Not giving a crap about your employees health isn't scummy like
failing to pay taxes or blow jobs.


Business (other than health insurance companies) should not be in the
health insurance business, either as a provider or an administrator of
a group plan. Period. They are forced to be under the current system
in order to be competitive in terms of benefits. I designed and built
thin film vacuum deposition systems for optics. What do I know about
current health insurance programs, or what is best for individuals and
their families? Very little, yet I was forced to choose and employ
people just to administer the program. I think people should be able
to choose their own plan and coverage, depending on their individual
needs. The cost of premiums for individual plans should be part of
the employee's compensation package.

Eisboch


But it isn't.

Why don't the unions provide health insurance for their members? And,
don't give me this crap about the different kinds of unions. You can't
be a half way advocate for the working man who carries a hammer and a
full advocate for the working man who carries a wrench.

The unions are just looking to siphon off as much money from the working
man as they can to make sure that the union bosses can live a nice
lavish lifestyle.

"HK" wrote in message
m...
Eisboch wrote:

"jps" wrote in message
...


Hey, if the employee is on his wife's policy, it's an easy way to pick
up savings and burden someone else's business. God forbid the wife
loses her job or the company makes her pay for her spouse and kids.
Froggie will find a new employee without health problems or one with a
sugar mama who comes with insurance.

Not giving a crap about your employees health isn't scummy like
failing to pay taxes or blow jobs.


Business (other than health insurance companies) should not be in the
health insurance business, either as a provider or an administrator of a
group plan. Period. They are forced to be under the current system in
order to be competitive in terms of benefits. I designed and built thin
film vacuum deposition systems for optics. What do I know about current
health insurance programs, or what is best for individuals and their
families? Very little, yet I was forced to choose and employ people just
to administer the program. I think people should be able to choose their
own plan and coverage, depending on their individual needs. The cost of
premiums for individual plans should be part of the employee's
compensation package.

Eisboch


But it isn't.

Yes it is in some companies. There is a program whereby if private health
insurance is available and employees opt for it, the company includes in the
employee's compensation the amount that he/she would otherwise receive as a
company paid portion for participation in a group plan.

In MA, if the company is big enough to self-insure, this type of plan is
available and legal.
I may not be current with any changes made in the past couple of years, but
that's the way it was when I was working full time.

Eisboch

"HK" wrote in message
m...

Eisboch wrote:


Business (other than health insurance companies) should not be in the
health insurance business, either as a provider or an administrator of a
group plan. Period. They are forced to be under the current system in
order to be competitive in terms of benefits. I designed and built thin
film vacuum deposition systems for optics. What do I know about current
health insurance programs, or what is best for individuals and their
families? Very little, yet I was forced to choose and employ people just
to administer the program. I think people should be able to choose their
own plan and coverage, depending on their individual needs. The cost of
premiums for individual plans should be part of the employee's
compensation package.

Eisboch



But it isn't.

BTW, this is one of the reasons I am in favor of some sort of national
health care program or standard. I am not talking about a one-payer system
or having the government in charge of providing care.

The problem we have right now is that each state determines their own health
care requirements imposed on businesses. The result is that a company in
MA, for example, that has a comprehensive (and expensive) plan ends up
competing for a contract with a company in another state that does not
require employers to administer or offer health plans. Health insurance
premiums are a large cost of doing business, and getting more expensive
every year.

Having a national standard would level the playing field and eliminate the
cost as a factor when competing for projects.

Eisboch

On Thu, 05 Feb 2009 07:21:15 -0500, Eisboch wrote:


BTW, this is one of the reasons I am in favor of some sort of national
health care program or standard. I am not talking about a one-payer
system or having the government in charge of providing care.

The problem we have right now is that each state determines their own
health care requirements imposed on businesses. The result is that a
company in MA, for example, that has a comprehensive (and expensive)
plan ends up competing for a contract with a company in another state
that does not require employers to administer or offer health plans.
Health insurance premiums are a large cost of doing business, and
getting more expensive every year.

Having a national standard would level the playing field and eliminate
the cost as a factor when competing for projects.

The same is also true on a global scale. We spend @16% GDP on health
care, while countries with universal health care spend 10% GDP. As
business carries most of the cost of health care, that puts our
businesses at a serious disadvantage in the global marketplace.

On Thu, 5 Feb 2009 07:21:15 -0500, "Eisboch"
wrote:

Having a national standard would level the playing field and eliminate the
cost as a factor when competing for projects.

Now that I could buy into.

--

"I have tried to know absolutely nothing about a great
many things, and I have succeeded fairly well."

Robert Benchley

Eisboch wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
m...
Eisboch wrote:

"jps" wrote in message
...


Hey, if the employee is on his wife's policy, it's an easy way to pick
up savings and burden someone else's business. God forbid the wife
loses her job or the company makes her pay for her spouse and kids.
Froggie will find a new employee without health problems or one with a
sugar mama who comes with insurance.

Not giving a crap about your employees health isn't scummy like
failing to pay taxes or blow jobs.


Business (other than health insurance companies) should not be in
the health insurance business, either as a provider or an
administrator of a group plan. Period. They are forced to be under
the current system in order to be competitive in terms of benefits.
I designed and built thin film vacuum deposition systems for optics.
What do I know about current health insurance programs, or what is
best for individuals and their families? Very little, yet I was
forced to choose and employ people just to administer the program. I
think people should be able to choose their own plan and coverage,
depending on their individual needs. The cost of premiums for
individual plans should be part of the employee's compensation package.

Eisboch


But it isn't.

Yes it is in some companies. There is a program whereby if private
health insurance is available and employees opt for it, the company
includes in the employee's compensation the amount that he/she would
otherwise receive as a company paid portion for participation in a group
plan.

In MA, if the company is big enough to self-insure, this type of plan is
available and legal.
I may not be current with any changes made in the past couple of years,
but that's the way it was when I was working full time.

My wife's former company, a federally chartered communications
corporation, was self insured. They did hire a management company to
administer the health "plan".

"BAR" wrote in message
...

My wife's former company, a federally chartered communications
corporation, was self insured. They did hire a management company to
administer the health "plan".

I worked briefly for a fairly large company here in MA that offered
self-insured plans. They also had a professional health management company
that managed it.

I opted for the Major Medical plan. It was reasonably inexpensive, we were
covered for any serious problems and the deductable was $2000 per year. Of
course, we had to pay for routine doctor visits for non-catastrophic issues
(up to the deductable).

It happened to turn out that Mrs.E. had a bout with breast cancer during my
employ at this company. All the tests, surgery and six months of chemo were
covered, along with almost weekly doctor visits. Our cost: $2000.

Eisboch

On Thu, 5 Feb 2009 04:19:44 -0500, "Eisboch"
wrote:


"D K" wrote in message
m...
Frogwatch wrote:
My thoughts on the concept of health insurance:
I really do not think the health probs of my employees is my business
except I want them to get work done. I got no problem if thye get
sick and take weeks off as long as they make it up or work at night or
weekends or any other time. There are timetables for stuff that have
to be met though.
I do offer to pay the premium on an 80/20 policy ($1000 deductible)
from IEEE but only one guy takes me up on that, the rest get their
insurance through spouses.
Frankly, I do not think their health insurance is my business at all
because I cannot get a policy that will meet the needs of every
employee. They are more likely to get a policy that meets their needs
on their own, I also cannot get any better rate for them than they
can get themselves. Consequently, having me buy a standard policy for
them simply adds cost and gives them a policy that is less beneficial
than they could get for less on their own.


I offer two plans through Aetna. The standard plan that most people have
and a "catastrophic" plan that has a $10,000 deductible. Only two are on
Plan B. The rest opt for the standard plan. I pay 50% of their premium
in either case. 100% dental, LTD, and a $15K life insurance policy. Not
bad for a small company.

Premiums will be up nearly 15% this year.

I haven't stayed current with the insurance programs here in MA, but when I
was active in the company we couldn't have split plans. As a small business,
we couldn't have a major medical (catastrophic) plan *and* a HMO type plan.
In fact, we couldn't have more than one health insurance provider. MA law
allowed the insurance companies to require 100% employee participation in a
single plan, (Harvard, Tuffs, Blue Cross, etc.) and the only exception was
for employees that were covered by their spouses plan.

This was (and maybe still is) a significant problem for a small business,
and often made the health insurance provider a major consideration for a
potential new employee, rather than the job responsibilities, pay and
benefits. Their current family doctor may not have been a participant in
the particular program the company was enrolled in and therefore would have
to change doctors in order to accept employment. This is my biggest beef
with having a business also being a health care administrator.

My other beef is the demise of major medical, catastrophic coverage. I
don't think it is available in MA unless the company is large enough to
self-insure. The popularity of HMOs and PTOs whereby a small co-pay is all
that is required for a doctor office visit is a contributing cause of the
health care crisis we have and the blame for that is squarely on us, the
consumer. We want cheap, and we got expensive. It would be far better to
have insurance for a major illness or injury and have to pay for a doctor's
visit to confirm that little Johnny indeed, has a cold.

I've written about this before. My company paid 75% of each employee's
health insurance premium under a Blue Cross HMO plan. At one point I did
an analysis that indicated it would be less expensive to pay 100% of the
cost for a Major Medical type plan, then reimburse every employee for their
non-emergency, regular doctor visits for them and their kids for check-ups
and colds. Of course, this was not allowed.

Eisboch

Exactly as I'd pursue it, but the same is true in Washington. Can't
do it.