Economist Arnold Kling, author of the forthcoming health care book, Crisis of Abundance, has looked into how employees view health coverage. In a December 15, 2005 Tech Central Station column he concluded that comprehensive, employer-sponsored insurance is more popular than it otherwise would be only because many workers assume it costs them nothing. They erroneously believe their employer is paying for it.
Once workers realize they are footing the bill, Kling believes, many of them simply no longer want catastrophic health coverage. Speaking with Health Care News, Kling explained further: "A useful way to think about health insurance is not as something that employers provide but as something that employers sell to their employees." Given a choice, Kling said, "some people would prefer to have more take-home pay rather than employer-provided health insurance."
Robert Hopper, a California insurance agent and author of the continuing-education text HSA Strategy: The Future of Health Insurance in America, agrees. "Workers often do not realize that the cost of their health insurance impacts their take-home pay," said Hopper. "When employers are straight with employees, it's a big eye-opener." Thus, Hopper said, "When [workers] discover they are paying 100 percent of their health benefits, they no longer want to pay such large amounts for health insurance."
As a result, there appears to be a trend toward workers selecting limited benefit plans. For instance, in 2003 Wal-Mart reported its fastest-growing employee health option was a low-cost, limited benefit plan with only $1,000 in annual benefits. |