Beware. First it's smokers ... when will they decide it's fat people? For some reason, even though I've been smoke free for two years yesterday, I found this article disturbing for what "could" be. Am I being paranoid?
=====================================================
Paying the price to puff: Health care surcharges latest attack on smoking
Smokers face increasing workplace bans, higher cigarette taxes and added insurance costs
By Kathleen Lavey
Lansing State Journal
The cost of smoking - boosted in July 2004 by a controversial 75 cent-per- pack Michigan tax increase - could go up again.
But this time it's insurers, not the government, who could levy extra charges.
Across the country, companies are tacking surcharges onto employees' insurance premiums to try to manage rising health care costs.
A few examples throughout the nation:
• Tennessee Blue Cross Blue Shield employees who smoke pay an additional $7 a pay period for their insurance.
• Georgia state employees pay $40 a month extra. The surcharge is $15 for state employees in West Virginia, $20 in Alabama and $15 to $30 a month in Kentucky.
• Beginning Jan. 1, Gannett Co., which owns newspapers and television stations in 41 states, including the Lansing State Journal, will charge smokers an additional $50 a month for health care insurance.
"I can't really blame them," said Jolila Pullins, 30, of Lansing, a nursing student who smokes about 10 cigarettes a day, down from a whole pack. "Not with the bronchitis and colds that smokers get. Not with the other diseases."
Smoking-related health care costs run $75.5 billion every year, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The price tag for lost productivity is an additional $92 billion a year, for a total of more than $167 billion.
"You're really costing your organization more in health care," said Amy Moore, health educator for the Ingham County Health Department.
"One case of lung cancer costs $60,000."
Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan is the state's largest insurer, with 4.7 million enrollees statewide.
"We do not impose surcharges on our employees" who smoke, said Helen Stojic, company spokeswoman. Blue Cross Blue Shield doesn't track whether other businesses do so in Michigan, but Stojic said she hasn't heard of many that do - yet.
"There's no question that the health care industry is looking into how to reward healthy behaviors," she said.
Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan offers its members a free stop-smoking plan that includes phone consultations with a nurse, Stojic said. It also offers members a program that encourages physical fitness and an online health assessment survey.
Surcharges on rise
Tennessee Blue Cross Blue Shield spokeswoman Mary Thompson said her company doesn't keep statistics on plans with employee surcharges, but she said their popularity appears to be on the rise. "I see employers trying to take advantage of every opportunity that they can to help improve the health status of their employees," she said.
Although nothing is inherently wrong with making people accept financial responsibility for their choices, surcharges raise troubling issues, said Lewis Maltby, president of the National Workrights Institute, a nonprofit advocacy group in Princeton, N.J.
What's next?
"Surcharges are the first step down a road that America may not want to travel," Maltby said. "Surcharges sound nice when you talk about smokers because everyone hates smokers. But what about all the other bad habits that people have?"
Treatments for obesity-related and sexually transmitted diseases are costly. Too many beers after work? Not enough time at the gym? Surcharges conceivably could be levied for those behaviors, too.
In January, Weyco Inc., a health benefits management company based in Okemos, began testing employees for smoking, whether they're on or off the job. Four of the company's 200 employees quit rather than submit to the no-smoking policy.
The workers had a year's prior notice on the policy and could enroll in a company-sponsored smoking cessation class.
The policy is legal in Michigan, which doesn't have a law barring employers from firing employees for legal activities they engage in outside of work hours. A bill was introduced in the Senate in April to prohibit companies from controlling employees' legal behavior outside of work; it was referred to committee.
Maltby said that while surcharges are problematic but not inherently wrong, firing someone for smoking is clearly wrong.
"The only legitimate objection to an employee smoking is that it increases the company's medical costs," he said. "So the most that an employer is ethically entitled to do is have a surcharge."
=====================================================
Paying the price to puff: Health care surcharges latest attack on smoking
Smokers face increasing workplace bans, higher cigarette taxes and added insurance costs
By Kathleen Lavey
Lansing State Journal
The cost of smoking - boosted in July 2004 by a controversial 75 cent-per- pack Michigan tax increase - could go up again.
But this time it's insurers, not the government, who could levy extra charges.
Across the country, companies are tacking surcharges onto employees' insurance premiums to try to manage rising health care costs.
A few examples throughout the nation:
• Tennessee Blue Cross Blue Shield employees who smoke pay an additional $7 a pay period for their insurance.
• Georgia state employees pay $40 a month extra. The surcharge is $15 for state employees in West Virginia, $20 in Alabama and $15 to $30 a month in Kentucky.
• Beginning Jan. 1, Gannett Co., which owns newspapers and television stations in 41 states, including the Lansing State Journal, will charge smokers an additional $50 a month for health care insurance.
"I can't really blame them," said Jolila Pullins, 30, of Lansing, a nursing student who smokes about 10 cigarettes a day, down from a whole pack. "Not with the bronchitis and colds that smokers get. Not with the other diseases."
Smoking-related health care costs run $75.5 billion every year, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The price tag for lost productivity is an additional $92 billion a year, for a total of more than $167 billion.
"You're really costing your organization more in health care," said Amy Moore, health educator for the Ingham County Health Department.
"One case of lung cancer costs $60,000."
Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan is the state's largest insurer, with 4.7 million enrollees statewide.
"We do not impose surcharges on our employees" who smoke, said Helen Stojic, company spokeswoman. Blue Cross Blue Shield doesn't track whether other businesses do so in Michigan, but Stojic said she hasn't heard of many that do - yet.
"There's no question that the health care industry is looking into how to reward healthy behaviors," she said.
Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan offers its members a free stop-smoking plan that includes phone consultations with a nurse, Stojic said. It also offers members a program that encourages physical fitness and an online health assessment survey.
Surcharges on rise
Tennessee Blue Cross Blue Shield spokeswoman Mary Thompson said her company doesn't keep statistics on plans with employee surcharges, but she said their popularity appears to be on the rise. "I see employers trying to take advantage of every opportunity that they can to help improve the health status of their employees," she said.
Although nothing is inherently wrong with making people accept financial responsibility for their choices, surcharges raise troubling issues, said Lewis Maltby, president of the National Workrights Institute, a nonprofit advocacy group in Princeton, N.J.
What's next?
"Surcharges are the first step down a road that America may not want to travel," Maltby said. "Surcharges sound nice when you talk about smokers because everyone hates smokers. But what about all the other bad habits that people have?"
Treatments for obesity-related and sexually transmitted diseases are costly. Too many beers after work? Not enough time at the gym? Surcharges conceivably could be levied for those behaviors, too.
In January, Weyco Inc., a health benefits management company based in Okemos, began testing employees for smoking, whether they're on or off the job. Four of the company's 200 employees quit rather than submit to the no-smoking policy.
The workers had a year's prior notice on the policy and could enroll in a company-sponsored smoking cessation class.
The policy is legal in Michigan, which doesn't have a law barring employers from firing employees for legal activities they engage in outside of work hours. A bill was introduced in the Senate in April to prohibit companies from controlling employees' legal behavior outside of work; it was referred to committee.
Maltby said that while surcharges are problematic but not inherently wrong, firing someone for smoking is clearly wrong.
"The only legitimate objection to an employee smoking is that it increases the company's medical costs," he said. "So the most that an employer is ethically entitled to do is have a surcharge."
