Employers' Greatest Fears: PPACA & Compliance
Original post benefitspro.com
The last few years have put employers in the position of becoming compliance officers. The Department of Labor, Health and Human Services, and the Internal Revenue Service have actively been pursuing small- and mid-size businesses about various issues, from PPACA reporting to wage and hour miscalculations.
It is becoming a full-time job for manager HR representatives to keep up with the requirements of a compliant business.
The average employer cannot tell you what the affordability test is compared to the value test, but they know that it is now a requirement. Most important is the employer's concern for their employees to have the best health insurance available for the least expensive price. The employees are now looking for jobs that will provide them with health insurance in order to not be penalized at tax filing time. Employers are trying to understand what exactly they should be providing under health care reform in order to not pay additional fines for doing it incorrectly.
IRS fines are increasing in 2016 for employees to either $695 or 2.5 percent of adjusted family income per uninsured adult, whichever is greater. Employers will have to pay $2,160 per employee (after the first 30) if not providing health insurance or for an incorrect plan, and $3,240 for each employee getting a subsidy through the marketplace. Penalties for not filing certain documents in time, such as form 5500 or form 1094C, can add up to $1,100 per late day.
Insurance agents are becoming consultants in a very different world than we first began. Employers are asking accounting and legal questions which are requiring research and partnerships with other professionals.
Employers want to know the difference now in using a professional employer organization (PEO) versus outsourcing their HR and payroll departments. If the employer decides to do it themselves, questions they ask are:
- How long do I keep the necessary paperwork?
- Should I use the qualifying offer method or the 98 percent offer method?
- Which Safe Harbor would be best for my situation?
Insurance consultants will be the ones answering these questions with their employers as well as reviewing the documents and procedures.
Education and wisdom are the most important values for an insurance consultant’s job security. Just about the time you learn it, it will change.
Remote Workers Are Happier
Original post benefitspro.com
People who work remotely are happier, according to a new survey conducted by TinyPulse, an employee engagement firm.
The firm polled 509 U.S. workers who always work remotely about their job satisfaction and compared their responses to those of the roughly 200,000 U.S. employees the firm polls on a monthly basis.
On a scale of 1 to 10, remote workers report an average level of work happiness of 8.1, compared to 7.42 for other employees.
They may rarely see their colleagues and superiors, but remote workers also feel more valued by their employers. On that metric, they have an average score of 7.75, compared to 6.69 for other workers.
The one area in which remote employees come up short, unsurprisingly, is their relationships with colleagues. They rate their co-worker relationships at an average of 7.88, whereas conventional employees rate their ties to officemates 8.47.
The study by TinyPulse suggested strongly that the benefits of allowing employees to work outside of the office outweigh the risks.
Only 27 percent of the remote workers polled said they had experienced a problem due to not being in the same place as fellow employees. And 91 percent said they were more productive in their current arrangement than in an office context.
Another surprising finding: Those who work more days a week are the happiest.
In fact, remote employees who report working seven days a week, but shorter hours, were the most satisfied of all, with an average satisfaction rating of 8.49. The next happiest were those who worked sporadic hours throughout the week, with a rating of 8.12. Those who worked a typical, 9-5 schedule, came in third, at 7.88, just slightly ahead of those who worked consistent but unconventional schedules, such as nights or Sunday-Thursday.
Telecommuting and other flexible work arrangements are all the rage these days, particularly among Silicon Valley firms. Studies have suggested that employers who ease up on attendance and scheduling policies will have happier workers who are just as productive.
Many Employees Still Unaware of Free Preventive Care Benefits
Original post benefitspro.com
Even employees covered by an employer-sponsored health plan remain confused about the benefits that are free of charge to them under health care reform law. But employers say that they often don’t have the resources or effective communications tools to fully explain these benefits to the workforce.
This finding emerged from a small sample study by the Midwest Business Group on Health, which surveyed 53 workplaces, more than half of which had 5,000 or more employees in their plans.
The survey indicated that progress is being made: 62 percent said they were aware of all the free services, which include vaccinations, maternity and pregnancy related services, pediatric services and others. But another 36 percent admitted they weren’t aware of the full spectrum of these free benefits. (Just 2 percent pleaded complete ignorance of the benefits.)
The survey said that larger employers that often use participation incentives to increase benefits usage had higher rates of preventive service use compared to small- to mid-sized employers, with larger ones reporting about 60 percent participation and small-to-mid-sized around 50 percent. Overall, 53 percent said they offer such incentives.
“In addition,” the report said, “outside of the flu vaccination, survey respondents indicated they are not promoting important adult vaccinations, and for those that do, employee use is low.”
Digging deeper into the benefits available to workers, the study found that 58 percent of respondents offered vaccines only to those covered and their dependents. A small number — 42 percent — included retirees in the coverage.
The flu vaccine was far and away the most prevalent benefit for employers with onsite or near-site clinics, offered by 70 percent. Vaccinations for hepatitis B were the second most common, at 41 percent, with hepatitis A found in 39 percent of plans. Vaccinations for diseases such as HPV, shingles, pneumonia, measles and others were in the 27 percent to 37 percent range. Nearly half of plans (43 percent) covered all vaccinations costs.
Increasingly, larger employers, and even some with fewer employees, are turning to onsite service centers to encourage greater use of free preventive benefits. Nearly half reported having an onsite clinic, 21 percent said they use a near-site clinic, and 7 percent reported using a mobile van.
While overall, employers felt their benefits communications strategies were working fairly well, a major area where they are not finding success is in encouraging employees to choose a specific location to receive vaccines. This indicates that the employer-led national effort to attempt to steer workers to centers of excellence, or at least of cost efficiency, is not yet working well.
The MBGH has created a preventive benefits “toolkit” designed to help employers spread the word about free benefits and increase participation in them.
“Employers are the primary purchasers of health care for employees and families, so it’s important that these benefits are effectively understood and appropriately used,” said Larry Boress, MBGH president and CEO. “Otherwise, consumer engagement levels suffer, resulting in millions of benefit dollars being wasted each year. Many employers don’t know where to start or how to effectively communicate available preventive care benefits to their covered population. That’s why we’re launching an employer toolkit to help employers do a more effective job.”
Counting Employees Doesn't Always Add Up
Original post benefitspro.com
Employee counts are used to determine what laws, rules, fees and penalties apply to a health plan and/or the employer sponsor. But the methods for counting employees are as varied as the laws that affect them. This creates confusion and frustration among employers and can significantly hinder their compliance efforts. To make sense out of all this, we have put together a synopsis of 12 counting methods that employers must utilize to properly administer their health plans. Read on to find out how to stay compliant as you move forward.
Employers with at least 15 employees
Law or compliance requirement applied:
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, as amended by the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA): Employers may not consider a person's race, color, sex (including sexual orientation), national origin, religion, or pregnancy in determining eligibility for, amount of, or charges for employee benefits. Denying coverage for a condition or treatment that disproportionately affects members of a protected group is also considered a violation of Title VII.
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA): An employer may not deny an individual with a disability equal access to insurance, or require such an individual to have terms and conditions of insurance different than those of employees without disabilities. The ADA also applies to wellness and disease management programs.
Who to count: Employees working 20 or more calendar weeks in the current or preceding calendar year.
How to count: Count each full-time and part-time employee as one.
Consequences of noncompliance: The EEOC may bring an action in court, and individuals may file private lawsuits to correct violations and obtain appropriate legal or equitable relief (including attorney’s fees and other costs).
Employers with at least 20 employees
Law or compliance requriement applied:
Genetic Information Nondisclosure Act (GINA): Group health plans may not discriminate against individuals based on genetic information and may not use this information in underwriting or determining premiums or contributions. It also restricts questions that can be asked on a Health Risk Assessment (HRA) if an incentive is offered for its completion.
Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA): Benefits provided to older workers (40 years and older) must be the same as those provided to younger workers in all respects, including payment options, types of benefits and amount of benefits (although certain exceptions may apply).
Who to count: Employees working 20 or more calendar weeks in the current or preceding calendar year.
How to count: Count each full-time and part-time employee as one.
Consequences of noncompliance: The DOL may assess special penalties and the EEOC may bring an action in court against a plan sponsor for violations. Individuals may file private lawsuits to correct violations and obtain appropriate legal or equitable relief (including attorney’s fees and other costs).
Employers with at least 20 employees
Law or compliance requriement applied:
COBRA: COBRA provides certain former employees, retirees, spouses, former spouses, and dependent children the right to temporary continuation of health coverage at group rates.
Who to count: Employees (in all commonly-owned businesses) on more than 50 percent of the typical business days in the previous calendar year.
How to count: Count each full-time employee as one. Each part-time employee counts as a fraction, with the numerator equal to the number of hours worked by that employee and the denominator equal to the number of hours that must be worked on a typical business day in order to be considered full-time.
Consequences of noncompliance: COBRA compliance failures can result in excise taxes and statutory penalties. Qualified beneficiaries may also file private lawsuits to correct violations and obtain appropriate legal or equitable relief (including attorney’s fees and other costs).
Employers with 20 or more employees
Law or compliance requriement applied:
Medicare Secondary Payer (MSP) rules based on age: A group health plan is the primary payer and Medicare is the secondary payer for individuals age 65 or over if their group health coverage is by virtue of the individual's (or his/her spouse’s) current employment status.
Who to count: Employees on each working day in at least 20 weeks in either the current or the preceding calendar year. The 20-employee test must be run at the time the individual receives the services for which Medicare benefits are claimed.
How to count: Count each full-time and part-time employee as one.
Consequences of noncompliance: Medicare can collect any incorrect claim payments directly from the employer, regardless of whether the employer's plan is fully insured or self-insured.
Employers with at least 50 employees
Law or compliance requriement applied:
Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA): FMLA requires employers that sponsor group health plans to provide group health plan benefits to employees on an FMLA leave. Please note that public agencies and public and private schools are covered regardless of the number of employees.
Who to count: Employees working 20 or more weeks in the current or preceding calendar year within a 75 mile radius of the applicable work location.
How to count: Count each full-time and part-time employee as one.
Consequences of noncompliance: The EEOC may bring an action in court and individuals may file private lawsuits to correct violations and obtain appropriate legal or equitable relief (including attorney’s fees and other costs).
Applicable Large Employers (ALEs)
Law or compliance requriement applied:
Shared responsibility provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA): ALEs must offer minimum essential coverage that is “affordable” and that provides “minimum value” to their full-time employees, must report to the IRS information about the health care coverage, if any, they offered to full-time employees, and must provide a statement to employees.
Who to count: Full-time employees and full-time equivalent (FTE) employees in each month of the preceding year. Divide this number by 12, and if the result is 50 or greater, the employer is an ALE for the current year.
How to count: Count full-time (30 or more hours per week determined on a monthly basis) and FTE employees as one. Aggregate part-time hours (no more than 120 hours per employee) and divide by 120 to determine FTEs. Special counting rules apply with respect to special situations, such as teachers, seasonal workers, etc.
Consequences of noncompliance: ALEs are subject to a penalty if one or more full-time employees are certified to the employer as having received an applicable premium tax credit or cost-sharing reduction, and either: 1) the employer fails to offer to its full-time employees (and their dependents) minimum essential coverage; or, 2) the employer's coverage is deemed to be unaffordable or does not provide minimum value (as defined by the ACA). Failure to file a return with the IRS or furnish a statement to employees can result in penalties up to $250 per return/statement, with a maximum penalty of $3 million.
Law or compliance requriement applied:
Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act (MHPAEA):Group health plans that provide mental health coverage must provide parity between medical/surgical benefits and mental health/substance use disorder benefits.
Who to count: Employees on business days during the preceding calendar year.
How to count: Count each full-time and part-time employee as one.
Consequences of noncompliance: Individuals and the DOL may use ERISA's civil enforcement provisions to file lawsuits to enforce the MHPAEA's requirements. In addition, noncompliance with the MHPAEA can trigger an IRS excise tax.
Employers with 100 or more employees
Law or compliance requirement applied:
Medicare Secondary Payer (MSP) rules based on disability:A group health plan is the primary payer, and Medicare is the secondary payer for individuals under age 65 entitled to Medicare on the basis of a disability, if their group health coverage is by virtue of the individual's (or his/her spouse’s) current employment status.
Who to count: Employees on at least 50 percent of regular business days during the previous calendar year.
How to count: Count each full-time and part-time employee as one.
Consequences of noncompliance: Medicare can collect any incorrect claim payments directly from the employer, regardless of whether the employer's plan is fully insured or self-insured.
Welfare plans that cover at least 100 employees
Law or compliance requirement applied:
Form 5500: Employee benefit plans must file the Form 5500 reporting and disclosure document on an annual basis with the Department of Labor (DOL). Please note that the Form 5500 requirement applies to ERISA plans only.
Who to count: Employees enrolled in the plan at the beginning of the plan year.
How to count: Count each full-time and part-time employee as one.
Consequences of noncompliance: The penalty for failing to file a Form 5500 is $1,100 per day, which is cumulative from the filing deadline. Lesser penalties may be assessed for incomplete or otherwise deficient Form 5500s.
Employers that filed 250 or more W-2s
Law or compliance requirement applied:
Reporting the cost of health benefits on W-2: The Affordable Care Act (ACA) requires employers to report the total cost of employer-provided health coverage on Form W-2.
What to count: W-2s filed with the IRS in the preceding calendar year.
How to count: W-2s for full-time and part-time employees count as one.
Consequences of noncompliance: Penalties for compliance failures range from $30 to $250 per form.
All self-insured medical plans
Law or compliance requirement applied:
Transitional reinsurance program fee: The ACA requires self-insured group health plans to make contributions to help stabilize premiums for coverage in the individual market during the years 2014 through 2016.
Who to count: Covered lives, which includes both employee and dependent lives.
How to count: The fee is calculated based on the average number of covered lives, which can be determined using one of the following four methods:
- Actual Count: Add the total number of lives covered for each day of the first nine months of the calendar year and divide that total by the number of days in the first nine months.
- Snapshot Count: Add the total number of lives covered on any date during the same corresponding month in each of the first three quarters of the calendar year, and divide that total by the number of dates on which a count was made.
- Snapshot Factor: Use the Snapshot Count method, except the number of lives covered on a given date is calculated by adding the number of participants with self-only coverage to the product of the number of participants with coverage other than self-only coverage and a factor of 2.35. This method can be used to estimate the number of total lives included in coverage that is not self-only coverage.
- Form 5500 Method: The number of participants as of the beginning and end of the plan year as reported on Form 5500 for the last applicable time period.
Consequences of noncompliance: As with any amount owed to the federal government, an unpaid/underpaid Reinsurance Program Fee will be subject to federal debt collection rules.
All self-insured medical plans
Law or compliance requirement applied:
Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) fee:The PCORI fee supports the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Trust Fund and will be imposed for each policy year ending on or after October 1, 2012 and before October 1, 2019.
Who to count: Covered lives, which includes both employee and dependent lives.
How to count: The fee is calculated based on the average number of covered lives, which can be determined using one of the following three methods:
- Actual Count Method: Add the total lives covered for each day of the plan year and divide that total by the total number of days in the plan year.
- Snapshot Method: Add the total number of lives covered on one date during the first, second or third month of each quarter, and divide that total by the number of dates on which a count was made.
- Form 5500 Method: The number of participants as of the beginning and end of the plan year as reported on Form 5500 for the last applicable time period.
Consequences of noncompliance: As with any amount owed to the federal government, an unpaid/underpaid PCORI Fee will be subject to federal debt collection rules.
6 Tips for Moving Wellness Beyond Biometrics
Original post benefitsnews.com
Employers are increasingly moving from traditional wellness programs to a more comprehensive, total well-being approach.
While this might seem to be unique, it is part of a greater trend — a growing list of employers are moving beyond the standard “one-size-fits all” approach to wellness and toward a more holistic view of total well-being.
In this post-ACA era, employers are facing the reality of ever-increasing medical costs and the need to engage their employees in their personal healthcare decisions. To achieve these goals, more and more are turning to wellness strategies, with over two-thirds of U.S. employers now offering some type of wellness program.
In the past, many implemented turnkey programs that focused purely on physical health. Who among us hasn’t heard about a company that did a 10,000 steps challenge or “Biggest Loser” competition?
Although these programs were a strong first step in the right direction — accepting the critical role that employers can play in improving the health of their employees — the current understanding is that physical health is only one small component of total well-being.
In our drive to promote employee engagement, we are likely missing the mark if we don’t realize that many employees have more urgent needs that divert their attention from focusing on physical health. An employee may have the desire and intent to attend the onsite biometric screening, but it ends up taking a backseat to more urgent needs — financial stress, an aging parent who needs to be cared for, or exhaustion from late nights caring for a sick child.
If our goal is to really move the needle — to increase productivity, enhance engagement, reduce healthcare costs, and position ourselves as employers-of-choice — we must take a more holistic approach to well-being. It is time to move beyond the singular focus on physical health, and begin to address the financial, emotional, spiritual, and social aspects of total well-being.
Luckily, with recent advancements in technology tools, and our greater understanding of employees’ needs, today more than ever employers have the ability to do just that.
Sleep, or lack thereof, has been identified as a major issue for its employees, and organizations are starting to offer sleep programs as an investment in its people. It is believed that this will lead to more productive and mindful employees, and eventually, a better bottom line for the company.
Similarly, companies across the country are implementing other all-encompassing “well-being” programs — such as financial education, yoga and meditation classes, volunteer opportunities, and flex-time — all of which are aimed at helping their employees be more engaged and productive.
Whether your company is already well on your way to developing a comprehensive well-being program or just beginning the journey, many best practices apply to both:
1. Assess your population and offer programs that fit your employees’ unique needs and interests. Just because Google offers a certain program doesn’t mean that it would work well for your company. If you have an older population, a financial education program about saving for retirement will have higher engagement than a program for college loan forgiveness.
2. Ask your employees about the causes of stress that impact them and their families.You can get firsthand feedback about the types of issues that are most relevant in their lives, and then tailor your program to target these high impact areas.
3. Take a multi-year strategic approach. At the outset, determine your desired end-result. Then set goals and implement programs along the way that ensure consistent progress and engagement toward those ends.
4. Use technology to interact with the employees in their preferred social medium. Whether it is a smart phone mobile app, their Fitbit or Apple watch, a Facebook page, or face-to-face contact, employees are more likely to engage if you connect with them through their social channel of choice.
5. Move away from a check-the-box approach in favor of more robust program.Programs with the highest levels of engagement tend to be those that allow employees to personalize their experience and choose from a variety of options and activities.
6. Provide consistent and frequent messaging. Your communication should continue throughout the year and align with your company’s culture and brand.
We’re moving “beyond biometrics” to a more holistic view. Is your company ready to embrace the change?
How to Bridge the Wellness Disconnect
Original post benefitnews.com
HR executives and business leaders are not always aligned about employee well-being or wellness solution buy-in, new research shows, signaling a need for adviser help to bridge the disconnect.
Optum’s seventh annual workplace study surveyed wellness budgets, return on investment (ROI), incentive strategies and challenges in building a culture of health among companies of all sizes.
Seventeen percent of HR executives versus 30% of business leaders think employee well-being is” very good,” according Optum Health’s Seventh Annual Wellness in the Workplace Study, conducted by the Optum Resource Center for Health & Well-Being.
On the other hand, 41% of HR executives versus 32% of business leaders say wellness solutions are important to the benefits mix.
Seth Serxner, chief health officer for Optum says it is important for benefit advisers and consultants to make sure that both HR executives and business leaders are all on the same page when it comes to understanding their wellness programs.
“[Advisers] might think they have everyone on board when speaking to HR executives,” Serxner says. “However, when HR goes to pitch this program to a CFO or members of the C-Suite, they may need to adjust how they present the business case.”
While HR managers view some of the non-financial productivity and moral factors that are important in a wellness program, the non-HR managers are focused on the bottom line, ROI, cost containment and healthcare cost issues, he adds.
“[Non-HR managers] tend to think the population is healthier and more well than the HR folks,” Serxner says. “So they may not think there is as much of a problem as the people who are closer to the data and understand the health risk condition of the population.”
Optum’s survey did find that wellness budgets are not decreasing, but are actually increasing. Twenty-eight percent of employers increased their wellness program budgets, according to the survey, up from 22% last year.
Serxner says advisers should use the data gathered in this study to help ground their clients in respect to what is happening within the client’s respected industry and with their peers.
“Clients will ask, ‘where do I sit in terms of culture of health, how am I doing with how I am investing my money,’ and what we find is it is very helpful to share some of these benchmarks about what other clients are doing and what the trend over time has been,” Serxner says.
Optum’s seventh annual workplace study surveyed wellness budgets, return on investment (ROI), incentive strategies and challenges in building a culture of health among companies of all sizes.
Optum surveyed 554 benefit professionals at U.S. companies across a variety of industries, which offer at least two types of wellness programs to employees. The size of respondent companies ranged from 20% small companies with two to 99 employees, to 38% jumbo employers with 10,000 or more employees.
Why Employers Should Boost Dental Benefits Enrollment
Original post benefitsnews.com
You might eat a balanced diet and squeeze in a mix of cardio and weight-lifting workouts every week to stay healthy. But to be truly healthy, you’ve got to focus on more than just working out and eating well. Believe it or not, you’ve also got to focus on oral health.
The link between oral health and cardiovascular health isn’t new; however, there is new evidence that more closely ties periodontitis, better known as gum disease, to heart attacks and stroke. One study showed that treating oral inflammation caused by gum disease with a topical remedy reduced vascular inflammation, which is a leading risk of hypertension, heart attack and stroke.
Heart disease is a serious problem in the United States — one in four people will die of the malady if it goes untreated. It’s also a major expense for Americans, including employees and employers who sponsor their health plans; heart disease costs nearly $1 billion a day in medical care and lost productivity.
Gum disease can affect more than just the heart. For pregnant women, it can also affect unborn babies. The bacteria caused by periodontitis can get into the blood stream and target the fetus, contributing to premature birth or low birth weight. Not only does prematurity and low birth weight put newborns at risk for issues in the beginning of life and learning, as well as developmental issues later on, it’s also costly for a family. In its first year, a preemie can cost around $49,000 in expenses, compared to just $4,551 for an infant who doesn’t experience complications. The March of Dimes reports that pre-term birth costs more than $12 billion in excess healthcare costs.
Diabetics also need to pay special attention to their oral health. In addition to monitoring their feet, eyes, kidneys and heart for complications, they are more prone to periodontitis. A higher risk of gum disease can make it more difficult to control blood glucose, and can also cause disease and infections in the bones that hold teeth in place, making it more difficult to chew. Gum disease may also lead to tooth loss. Diabetes costs the United States $322 billion in a combination of healthcare fees and lost productivity.
It’s important for employers and employees to understand how oral health plays a part in overall health, and that simple, inexpensive treatment can save businesses and plan participants thousands of dollars and countless hours of pain and suffering.
Analyzing claims data is one way to see how oral health might affect employees. The highest number of claims typically comes from cardiovascular, maternity, diabetes and musculoskeletal claims — all of which are exacerbated by periodontitis.
For years, dental health was given a back seat in health plans, wellness initiatives and employee education. Most initiatives focused on preventing heart disease through diet and exercise, and focused little, if at all, on dental care. Many health plans did not — and still do not — include dental coverage, which is a minimal expense compared to other program costs overall. Consequently, employees may simply write off dental care because they may not have a history of cavities. But dental coverage and consistent employee education and communication can help them understand the risks, develop good habits and begin to take their dental health into their own hands.
Employers can work closely with insurance brokers to understand medical and dental coverage, and what their costs and claims are for both. They’ll likely see that medical claims are far higher than dental claims. They can then work together with benefit consultants to create an affordable dental plan, or bridge the gap between dental and medical for those at higher risk for periodontitis issues so that employees can get the treatment they need.
Finally, employers need a long-term communication strategy to educate employees on the value of benefit offerings and the importance of good oral hygiene. They’ll be happy and healthier, and the employer’s medical costs will decrease.
Everybody wins.
Why Employers Should Consider Mindfulness Training as an Employee Benefit
Original post benefitsnews.com
Some previous blogs have noted the research supporting the benefits of mindfulness for both individual performance and workplace relationships. Research also finds that mindfulness improves employee well-being and resilience.
Resilience gained attention in the 1970s as psychologists and trauma researchers began to articulate the amazing ability of many people to bounce back following a devastating event, crisis or injury. Over time, researchers have identified the characteristics of resilient people, and have identified how to train people to develop skills to increase their resilience. Hence, resilience has evolved to reflect a coping style that allows someone to endure during difficult times and emerge more competent and skillful in dealing with challenges.
A growing body of evidence suggests that mindfulness is particularly important for developing resilience at work, through its effects on employee physical and psychological health, absenteeism, turnover, and in-role performance. Here are some of the findings:
- In workplace samples, mindfulness has been linked to reduced levels of reported burnout, perceived stress, work-family conflict, and negative moods, along with better sleep quality.
- In studies where employees were randomly assigned to a self-directed mindfulness intervention or a control group, those in the mindfulness intervention reported greater job satisfaction and less emotional exhaustion. Similar effects have been found in a range of occupations, including doctors, soldiers and teachers.
- Mindfulness has been linked to increased psychological capital and resilience in managers and entrepreneurs.
- Mindfulness training predicted employee engagement among employees at the Mayo Clinic. Additional studies have further shown that such engagement may be mediated by greater authenticity, positive emotions, hope and optimism.
Developing a formal mindfulness practice is thought to increase resilience in three ways:
1. Flexible cognition. Practicing mindfulness may actually rewire our brain circuitry, improving our ability to think flexibly, more easily perceiving different perspectives and generating novel solutions to problems. This same skill may allow one to observe potentially toxic workplace events while adopting a “decentered perspective,” making perceived stressors appear less threatening.
Imagine an employee witnesses verbal aggression directed at a fellow co-worker, which causes the employee to feel physiological reactivity and psychological stress. Experiencing the event with mindful attention could decouple this automatic link between the toxic experience and emotional reactivity, leaving them feeling less depleted. This reinterpretation of events actually starts to form new habits of thinking, which may involve perception of stressors as challenges that elicit growth, rather than as hindrances. In addition, application of mindfulness skills may elicit compassion for the fellow co-worker.
2. Growth in the face of adversity. Research shows that exposure to a threat without being overcome by that threat can result in higher levels of well-being than not experiencing the threat at all. In other words, experiencing but quickly recovering from workplace stress may indeed make an employee stronger.
So where does mindfulness fit in? Mindful individuals show an ability to perceive stressful and adverse situations from different angles, and demonstrate a willingness to behave more flexibly in response to them. As workers successfully experiment with new coping behaviors, they experience increased confidence and stronger self-efficacy, improving their ability to deal with many types of challenging situations and developing greater resilience.
3. Positive thinking. Positive emotions play a crucial role in one’s ability to recover physically from adverse events, as well to facilitate better emotion and behavior self-regulation. Mindfulness not only enhances regulation of negative emotions, but also cultivates positive emotions. It’s not that resilient people don’t experience negative emotions like anyone else; they do. Resilient people, however, do not dwell on them. Rather, they have learned how to use their attention and other internal resources to notice and amplify pleasant experiences and meaningful events as well.
To summarize, mindfulness may improve employee resilience by training the mind to reinterpret stressors as less personally threatening, empowering workers to take new perspectives and try new behaviors, which may actually result in growth in the face of challenges, and cultivating positive thinking, which is especially important during hardships. A new wave of resilience research is supporting the idea that mindfulness practice may lead to improved workplace outcomes like job satisfaction, retention, and employee health.
2017 HSA Limits Released
Original post benefitspro.com
Change is not the order of the day for health savings account (HSA) limits in 2017.
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) issued its new guidelines for contributions and out-of-pocket expenses for HSAs that are tied to a high-deductible plan this week.
Maximum OOPs for individual and family accounts won’t budge next year, and contributions will remain intact for family plans. Individual contributions increased slightly.
Here’s the run-down of the details:
- Out-of-pocket maximums are unchanged at $6,550 for individuals and $13,100 for families;
- Maximum contributions for family plans remain the same at $6,750;
- Individual contributions can increase from $3,350 to $3,400.
High deductible plans in 2017 will be those that have an annual deductible of least $1,300 for self-only coverage and $2,600 for family coverage.
HSAs are open to all men and women enrolled in a high-deductible health insurance program (exceeding $1,300 for individuals and $2,600 for family) aside from those policyholders currently covered by Medicare or listed as a dependent.
For both 2015 and 2016, IRS regulations mandating the potential contributions on plans covering families (a minimum of two people) held successive increases of $100. Individual restrictions, meanwhile, were bumped up by $50 in 2015, but remained stable the following year.
The annual fluctuations of HSA contribution levels are based directly upon federal cost of living adjustments. They will be applied for the calendar year of 2017.
A full account of the new guidelines may be read under Revenue Procedure 2016-28.
Making Sense of the Alphabet Soup of Healthcare Spending Accounts
Original post benefitnews.com
Employers are passing more and more healthcare responsibility to their employees, and in some cases, giving them a greater share of the financial burden. Likewise, businesses are looking for ways to help employees manage healthcare expenses. There are a number of products for that purpose, and while they’re similar, they’re not the same.
With acronyms being used to explain still-new concepts, it can be difficult for employees to understand the difference between them or even to remember which product they use. It’s important to educate them about these products so they get the most out of them.
Health savings account. A health savings account is like a 401(k) retirement account for qualified medical expenses. An HSA helps people pay for medical expenses before they hit their deductible. Employers and employees can both contribute money tax-free, and the money can be rolled over from year to year with only a maximum annual accrual. All contributed funds can be invested once a specific minimum is met (determined by the bank).
HSA-compatible health plans don’t include first-dollar coverage (except for preventive care), which means employees must meet a deductible before benefits will be paid by a health plan. This deductible is set by the IRS each year; in 2016, high-deductible health plans must have a deductible of at least $1,300 for an individual and $2,600 for a family.
Employees and employers can both contribute funds to build an HSA, and all funds count toward the annual maximum. The employee “owns” the HSA and the money that’s in it.
HSA funds can be spent on qualified medical expenses as outlined by section 213(d) of the IRS tax code, dental, vision, Medicare and long-term care premiums, and COBRA (if unemployed). After age 65, health premiums can also be withdrawn, but are subject to income tax.
Just like a 401(k), the account is portable. If the owner of the HSA changes jobs, the money can still be used for medical expenses, but the employee can no longer contribute to it.
Health reimbursement accounts. HRAs help employees pay for medical expenses before a deductible is met. But unlike an HSA, employees cannot contribute to an HRA, only employers. The money an employer places in an HRA can be used for medical expenses not covered by a health plan, such as deductibles and copays for qualified medical expenses as outlined by section 213(d) of the IRS tax code, dental, vision, Medicare and long-term care premiums. The associated health plan can have any deductible amount — there are no minimums and the plan does not have to be a high-deductible health plan. Unlike an HSA, an HRA is not portable, and funds can’t be used for non-medical reasons, even with a penalty. Funds also don’t typically earn interest and are not invested.
Employers must be more involved with HRA accounts since they are the only party who can deposit money; they also determine if funds can be rolled over from one year to the next.
Flexible spending accounts. FSAs allow employees to defer part of their income to pay for medical expenses tax free as part of a Section 125 cafeteria plan. Allowable expenses include those outlined by section 213(d) of the IRS tax code as well as dental and vision expenses. Both employers and employees can contribute to an FSA; however, the amount employees plan to contribute at the beginning of the year can’t be changed mid-year. FSA funds can’t be invested and fees associated with the plan are normally paid by the employer. There are no underlying plan restrictions and these accounts can be maintained alongside traditional health plans. The employer owns the account and is responsible for the management.
Funds in an FSA can be rolled over only if there is a carryover provision; in this case, $500 can be carried to the next year.
With an FSA, individuals must substantiate need for a reimbursement at the time of service by keeping receipts and filling out a form. Some FSAs include “smart” debit cards that automatically pay certain copays and don’t require documentation.
Determining which is best
HSAs, HRAs and FSAs serve slightly different purposes and can even co-exist in some circumstances. For example, those enrolled in an HSA can contribute to a limited-used FSA. Those enrolled in an HRA can also contribute to an FSA without limitations.
HSAs work well for employers who don’t want to add to administrative burdens or additional costs. And they’re a great way to give employees a way to offset the costs of qualified high-deductible health plans and save for post-retirement health expenses. However, employers may want to stray from an HSA or refrain from fully funding the account early in the year if there’s high turnover at a company; the money deposited goes with the employee when they leave.
For employees, HSAs provide investment opportunity and are portable; they also encourage consumerism and are cost-effective to administer. But one of the biggest advantages is that the employee doesn’t have to pre-determine expenses since unused funds carry over.
HRAs can work well for an employer that is not offering a qualified high-deductible health plan but wants to promote consumerism while self-funding a portion of the risk. The funds contributed are immediately available and completely funded by the employer, which is an advantage to the employee. However, there is no tax advantage to employees and the fund can’t be transferred.
FSAs are the most appropriate for employers offering traditional health plans. Employees benefit because they can contribute pre-tax dollars and the funds are immediately available. But the “use it or lose it” provision is a definite disadvantage for employees.
There are pros and cons to all three funds. It’s best to review them carefully to determine which ones will work for your business, and make sure to communicate the funds’ features and restrictions to your employees.