Nosy employers due to health insurance
Topics: Regulation
16 Jul 2006
From: Ervan Darnell
A "60 Minutes" piece rebroadcast today [1] (7/16/06) investigated how people were being fired for their personal behavior, especially their health related habits. The primary example was how Weyco fired employees that smoked, not just on the job, but any time whatsoever. "60 Minutes" spun this as "workers having no rights". Sure they do: they can work for whomever they want. The alternative is having the government decide piecemeal what personal habits can and cannot be used as reasons to fire someone. That's better? We're already perilously close to the government requiring all employers to drug test. Let's not have any more of that nonsense.
But the thing that really bugged me about this is how most (though not all) of these heavy handed tactics are tied to the cost of health insurance. Businesses do have some interest in lowering the cost of health insurance. "60 Minutes" never discussed this as the underlying problem. If you really want to fix this privacy problem, fix the law that lets employers deduct health insurance, but not employees (both or neither would work, but don't split the difference). Or, if you want to play regulatory games, simply ban employer provided insurance. Or, possibly permit (require?) the employer to subsidize health care the same amount for each employee, and let the employee pick up any excess cost due to particular health risks (this is only a partial fix because employees with unexpected health care needs still raise the company's insurance costs next year).
The idea that health care is a freebie, not coming out of salary, is just free lunch liberalism (i.e. the people most concerned about privacy when it comes to new regulations are the ones who created regulation that is destroying it). Another hypocrisy is that liberals are usually in favor of outlawing tobacco, requiring motorcycle helmets, etc. on the theory that is saves Medicare funds, but then they are appalled when private business does the same (regulating personal behavior to save on health costs). At least private business doing so gives some possible alternatives, unlike regulation.
[1] http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/28/60minutes/main990617.shtml
====================================================
Ervan Darnell
ervan@kelvinist.com http://www.kelvinist.com
_______________________________________________
Ragnar mailing list
Ragnar@ragnar.kelvinist.com
http://ragnar.kelvinist.com/mailman/listinfo/ragnar
Home