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. |