Employer Wellness

Wellness programs at the corporate level are beneficial, right? Wellness statistics obviously show that such wellness programs are not only cost-effective to the organization but can assist the staff member in developing a healthier lifestyle.

With the rising cost of healthcare, wellness programs simply make sense. So where does the problem come in? Let’s examine the topic from both perspectives.

Wellness Programs –  the Good

• A sampling of corporate returns on investment for wellness programs –  Bank of America –  600%; General Motors – 370%; Pepsico –  300%; Citibank –  465%; and the Washoe County School District leading the pack at a whopping 1,560%. (Campbell,J., Wellness Improvement Experts, www.wellnessimprovementprofessionals.com, Albuquerque, New Mexico.)

• Businesses with wellness programs have realized a 28% reduction in sick leave, a 26% reduction in adjunctive health care costs and a 30% reduction in disability and staff members compensation costs. (Health Affairs, Volume 21, No.2, March, 2002.)

• the Washoe county School District in Northern Nevada realized a $15.60 return on investment for every dollar spent due to a 20 percent reduction in absenteeism. (Hardy,A. (2005). at the Top of the Class. WELCOA’s Absolute Advantage Magazine, 5(1), 14-20.)

• Wellness programs provide the structure, encouragement, incentives and ongoing support that many person need in order to make lifestyle changes.

• Workers also realize returns on their efforts. FiServ, a financial services technology business, gave employees who filled out a health risk (assessment|appraisal} a meaningful discount on their health insurance premium. (Holland, Kelley, the New York Times, July 22, 2007.)

Wellness Programs –  the Bad

The flip side of the argument centers on basic human rights. Do we want/need our employer to tell us to eat our veggies or lose 30 pounds? Some corporations are doing just that and at least one lawsuit has resulted because of it.

• Three hundred corporations have requested assistance from a national employment and labor law firm to institute more aggressive wellness programs.(Cornwell, Lisa, Associated Press, Albuquerque Journal, September 10,2007.)

• Clarian Health, based in Indianapolis, Will begin lowering worker paychecks by $10.00 for every worker who’s a BMI  of greater than 29.9 because not enough employees were utilizing their wellness services.(Cornwell, Lisa, Associated Press, Albuquerque Journal, September 10,2007.)

• Scott Rodrigues filed a suit against his prospective employer, Scotts Miracle-Gro, because he believed the corporation’s antitobacco use policy violated his civil rights. the company has a policy against hiring staff members who smoke and Mr. Rodrigues’drug screen was positive for nicotine.(Holland, Kelley, the New York Times,July 22,2007.)

• Worker advocates are concerned that health discrimination might not be covered below the Americans with Disabilities Act.(Cornwell, Lisa, Associated Press, Albuquerque Journal, September 10,2007.)

Penalizing staff members by hitting them hardest where it hurts the most,their pocketbook, doesn’t appear to be a favorable approach to molding human behavior.

Such tactics may result in increased resentments and retaliation, primarily in the form of absenteeism and presenteeism (decreased productivity on the job.) Voluntary, incentive-based programs, like the one in the Washoe County School District, can and do produce results.

A positive attitude by management along with an opportunity for staff members to have a stake in the decision-making may yield the greatest dividends to both employer and worker.

The motivation and resolve needed to change unhealthful lifestyle habits can best be derived from the basic tenets of encouragement, respect and support.