GOP pushing bill that would let employers demand workers' genetic test results

[JudoThrowFiasco]

I don't have an issue with that because its not giving health information to the employer. Insurer yes employer no.

Then, say no to your employer and pay more out of your own pocket. You would be free to do that.

If you're paying for something, would you not want to know the risks?

 

[HIMBOB]

Then, say no to your employer and pay more out of your own pocket. You would be free to do that.

If you're paying for something, would you not want to know the risks?

What are the risks the employer takes?

And what should the employer do once they know these risks? I presume not employ them thus if you get sick you cant get insurance or a job. What sort of shit system is that?

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

What are the risks the employer takes?

paying higher costs and assessing their wellness programs.

Many companies already have questionnaires they used to help determine such assessments. This is just another level of scrutiny to keep cost low. Same thing you would do if you were investing in a risk.

http://time.com/money/3579354/health-risk-assessment-questionnaire/

 

[dza76wutang]

Employer should just pay the premium right?
What's their risk?

Look i dont know how the current us system is supposed to work. But what i do know is this: your employer should not be able to ask for your medical history (unless lives in danger ie pilot) and deny you things for not providing it.

Its private information aren't the US supposed to be all about freedom and shit.

Lots of large employers are self insured, in that they pay the claims. So the risk there is anything beyond the out of pocket maximum, e.g., a heart attack pierces the OOPM and then runs up another $50K-$250K easily, depending on complexity.

Even if they are not self insured, most aim for an 80/20 or 70/30 split in total cost (where employer covers the larger portion). Given the potential total cost being allocated, is it a surprise employers are screening for health risks to help affect change?

Think of this too, the employer has employees for roughly 40% of their awake time. From a public health / population health perspective they are best positioned to positively impact health too.

Source: work in health insurance, population health. I have hands on experience with these types of programs.

 

[HIMBOB]

paying higher costs and assessing their wellness programs.

Many companies already have questionnaires they used to help determine such assessments. This is just another level of scrutiny to keep cost low. Same thing you would do if you were investing in a risk.

http://time.com/money/3579354/health-risk-assessment-questionnaire/

What a truly awful system.

Who needs any privacy if they have nothing to hide.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

What a truly awful system.

Who needs any privacy if they have nothing to hide.

They can have privacy -- they just pay a higher cost. Just like if they went through private insurance.

 

[HIMBOB]

Lots of large employers are self insured, in that they pay the claims. So the risk there is anything beyond the out of pocket maximum, e.g., a heart attack pierces the OOPM and then runs up another $50K-$250K easily, depending on complexity.

Even if they are not self insured, most aim for an 80/20 or 70/30 split in total cost (where employer covers the larger portion). Given the potential total cost being allocated, is it a surprise employers are screening for health risks to help affect change?

Think of this too, the employer has employees for roughly 40% of their awake time. From a public health / population health perspective they are best positioned to positively impact health too.

Source: work in health insurance, population health. I have hands on experience with these types of programs.

So what does the employer do when finding out you are unhealthy?

 

[Fawlty]

Cool, and you can ask for that -- and if they dont give it to you, you can say no to working for them. Possible crazy boss and risk of non -payment are valid reasons not to invest your time into a company; just like refusal to provide thorough examination of one's health is a valid reason not to pay for their insurance. Just like refusing a home inspection is a valid reason not to buy a house. Just like refusing to provide a maintenance history of a car is a valid reason not to buy that automobile.

This is exactly where I'm going with this- the further we go down this libertarian road, the more absurd things get, and the more the imbalance in the power relationship between capital and labor is exposed. People aren't "free" to bend over every single time employers want something when the other option is poverty. Ideally, workers would just say no and that would be that. But that isn't how things work in a real world, unfortunately.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

This is exactly where I'm going with this- the further we go down this libertarian road, the more absurd things get, and the more the imbalance in the power relationship between capital and labor is exposed. People aren't "free" to bend over every single time employers want something when the other option is poverty. Ideally, workers would just say no and that would be that. But that isn't how things work in a real world, unfortunately.

But you can say no! It just has a consequence, same with everything else. if someone is paying for something, they have a right to inquire about the risk and measure whether or not

I just dont get when people criticize businesses for doing what private citizens do. Every purchase / investment you make, you are going to want as much information about that cost as you can get. If im buying a used car, im asking if the previous driver was female along with a myriad of other questions to assess the risk. If im hiring a nanny to watch a kid, i want to know exactly what toxins are running in her bloodstream.

Now, if employers were asking for health records without providing insurance, i would question that. But, since this is related to their costs, it stands to reason they should know what risks are involved. If you want that level of privacy, while still getting some payments for insurance, that will simply cost you more.

Do you freak out when you hand in your insurance claims to HR?

 

[dza76wutang]

So what does the employer do when finding out you are unhealthy?

It provides justification for targeted mitigation programs or at least justifies shifting fixed money pools to where they may do more to help.

For example, above average smoking risk -> double down on smoking cessation or surcharge for totally avoidable risks like a smoker penalty.

 

[edirp]

There is nothing wrong with this genetic test requirement. After all, it is the only way to make sure that Americans get employment.

 

[ultramanhyata]

The great irony is how many of today's republicans think this guy was a stone cold, big government tyrant.