Employer Provided Health Care

PipeGuy

OK - I'd be interested in knowing how many of you guys that are so want to have government play a larger role in your lives, vis--vis the the health care racket, are currently or otherwise plannning to provide group health care to employees. Let's hear from you, huh?

More bloviating on the health care racket to come...

PipeGuy

For those of you who consider our American health care "system" extremely problematic, consider this: in the "group health care system" that we have, the direct recipent of the health care benefit (the patient) is typically the least influencial in both selecting the provider and determining the value of the service provided. After all...
An employer decides which insurance company to hire. In turn the insurance company decides which service providers will be offered to 'the group'. The patient is twice removed from the process of selecting the provider.
Likewise, an employer decides which rate plan to pay to an insurance company. Again, in turn, the insurance company decides how much to pay the provider. And again, the patient is twice removed from the process, this time, of determining the value of the service provided.
With so little influence in the process, is it any wonder that the recipients' interests might be afforded the least consideration? How do you think this this scenario might be changed for the benefit of the recipient?

rikanit

I don't provide a group policy for my guys simply because its way too expensive. I do reimburse any employee up to 100.00 per month who chooses to carry a personal policy. With only 5 full time people group insurance is just out of my league.

__________________
Rick Hayden
www.haydenlandscaping.com

PipeGuy

Rick, thanks for chiming in. The idea that it's "too expensive" for employers to provide is another concept I'm trying to get my brain around. I want to figure out if "too expensive" means the same thing to all employers or if it's a relative concern based upon varying circumstances. I guess I'd like to get to the heart of why the cost of health insurance is any more prohibitive to the success of a business than the cost of backhoes, lawnmowers, nail guns, ladders pick-up trucks, etc.

At first blush I'm inclined to think I don't care how much group coverage costs provided none of my competitors have some unique, 'artificial' access to less costly coverage. I haven't quite thought it all through but I think I'm going to wind up at that conclusion.
By the way, how do you go about confirming that any given employee carries his own insurance and what do the other guys (who don't carry it) have to say about the $100 a month raise they don't get?

rikanit

With only 5 employees they all carry it for now. 3 of them are mid twenties so the 100 pretty well covers all of it for them. The other 2 in their thirties it winds up costing them about 20-30 dollars additional. The younger ones simply bring in their premium notices and I pay it. The older ones do the same and I hold out the additional expense as a payroll deduction. I would have to check with our accountant but I think the part that I pay tracks back to these employees as income. I believe the deductible is currently 1,000 on all their policies.

A group policy was going to run me approx 3 times what I pay out now per employee per month. This was a lower deductible policy with some extra bells and whistles.

The individual policies only raised my labor burden by 3.14%. And we only average around 42 weeks per year being in a seasonal business.

I suppose the reason most small employers don't offer health insurance is the over all uncertainty of the whole thing. Vehicles and equipment can be budgeted for pretty well down to the penny once you determine the cost per hour. Same with your fixed overhead etc. With health insurance you know its going to go up you just never know how much and you know its never going to stop going up.

Its worked out well for us so far and the guys seem to appreciate it.

__________________
Rick Hayden
www.haydenlandscaping.com