Spicy, Sweet and Good to Eat!
This month, we are bringing you some food favorites of our own Abby Graham!
Abby is a member of Saxon's Wealth Management team with over 12 years of experience in the health and wellness industry. When she isn't helping members understand their benefits, she can be found sewing and quilting or out with her husband and son.
Her favorite place to be eat can be found in Mariemont. "The outside seating [at Dilly Café] is perfect on a nice night and/or when we have our little one with us. They generally have a band playing, the food is excellent, and the beer and wine list are great! Their crab cakes, wings and burgers are my favorites!"
At home, the family favorite is Corn Avocado Salsa. "My husband and I make this together since part of it is grilled and the rest is just chopping! It’s best in the summer when the tomatoes are ripe and the corn is sweet."
Here's what you'll need:
- 1 ripe tomato
- 1 avocado
- 1 ear of corn
- 1/2 cup chopped cilantro
- 1 sweet corn
- 1 jalapeno
- 2-3 garlic cloves
- 1 ripe lime
- salt to taste
Grill the tomato until the skin is cracked and peeling off. Cut the avocado and grill it face down for about 5 minutes. Grill the corn until it is cooked all the way. In the meantime, finely chop the onion, jalapeno, cilantro and garlic cloves. Squeeze ½ of the lime over onion, jalapeno, cilantro and garlic combination.
Once tomato, avocado, and corn are finished grilling, cut corn off of the cob, and peel skin off of tomato. Dice tomato and avocado and add to chopped mix. Add salt to taste and serve warm with tortilla chips!
Sounds like a great dish Abby! Thank you!
Report highlights employers’ biggest concerns: ACA, new bias claims and OT regs
What are your top concerns as an employer? See what others had to say in the article by Tim Gould.
What’s keeping C-level execs up at night? Just a few small concerns like the new overtime rules, a likely increase in bias claims based on sexual orientation, the Affordable Care Act and the threat of workplace violence.
Those are the takeaways from the 2016 Executive Employer Survey from Littler, the giant employment law firm. The fifth annual survey, completed by 844 in-house counsel, human resources professionals and C-suite executives from some of America’s largest companies, examines the key legal, economic and social issues impacting employers as the 2016 presidential election approaches.
Those pesky OT rules
As you well know, the Department of Labor (DOL) has advanced several regulatory initiatives that have brought the agency’s enforcement of federal employment laws to the forefront for employers. This concern is no doubt driven in large part by the recently finalized Fair Labor Standard Act overtime regs, which will dramatically increase the number of Americans who can qualify for overtime pay. Although respondents completed the survey in the weeks prior to the release of the final rule, 65% had already conducted audits to identify affected employees.
“Employers are clearly feeling the impact of the DOL’s increasingly aggressive regulatory agenda, most notably the new overtime regulations,” Littler attorneys Tammy McCutchen and Lee Schreter said in a joint statement.
They added a sobering note: “While it is encouraging that the majority of respondents started to prepare before the rule was finalized, more than a quarter (28%) said they had taken no action given delays in the rulemaking process. Given that the reclassification process can take up to six months and the rule is unlikely to be blocked from going into effect on December 1, 2016, employers should move quickly to ensure compliance.”
And participants are pretty sure the DOL’s going to be aggressive about making the new rules stick: The vast majority of respondents to this year’s survey (82%) expect DOL enforcement to have an impact on their workplace over the next 12 months, with 31% anticipating a significant impact (up from 18% in the 2015 survey).
Where are the presidential candidates likely to land on employment policies? The majority of respondents (75%) said income inequality (e.g., overtime rules, state equal pay, minimum wage laws, etc.) would be a significant priority of the Democratic candidate. Only 4% felt income inequality would be a significant priority of the Republican candidate.
Top regulatory and legislative issues
With the National Labor Relations Board’s recent expansion of the definition of a “joint employer,” 70% of respondents to the Littler survey expect a rise in claims over the next year based on actions of subcontractors, staffing agencies and franchisees. Approximately half of respondents predicted higher costs (53%) and increased caution in entering into arrangements that might constitute joint employment (49%).
As was the case in the 2015 survey, 85% of employers said the Affordable Care Act (ACA) would have an impact on their workplace in the next 12 months. While two-thirds said they do not expect a repeal of the ACA if a Republican is elected president this fall, respondents saw a greater likelihood of changes to individual provisions. Fifty-three percent said a Republican administration could lead to a repeal of or changes to the Cadillac excise tax and 48% saw a likelihood for changes to the play-or-pay mandate.
Social issues come to the forefront
Today’s companies are increasingly experiencing the incursion of social issues into the workplace, the survey indicated.
In the largest year-over-year change in Littler’s survey results, 74% of respondents expect more discrimination claims over the next year related to the rights of LGBT workers (up from 31% in 2015) and 61% expect more claims based on equal pay (up from 34% in 2015).
This change is driven by LGBT discrimination and equal pay ranking among the top enforcement priorities for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), but it also mirrors key focus areas for the Obama administration, government efforts at the state and federal levels, and increased public awareness.
Preventing workplace violence
In response to tragic mass shootings across the nation, companies are taking a range of actions to keep their employees safe, including updating or implementing a zero-tolerance workplace policy (52%), conducting pre-employment screenings (40%) and holding training programs (38%). Only 11% of respondents said they had not taken any action because violence is not a concern for their company.
“Putting policies in place to increase awareness of workplace violence and ensure that employees understand how to report threats in the workplace are steps that all employers would be advised to take,” said Littler’s Terri Solomon, who has extensive experience counseling employers on workplace violence prevention. “Unfortunately, even though workplace violence – and particularly active shooter instances – are statistically rare, no employer is truly immune.”
See the original article from HRMorning.com Here.
Source:
Gould, T. (2016, July 13). Report highlights employers' biggest concerns: ACA, new bias claims and OT regs [Web log post]. Retrieved from https://www.hrmorning.com/report-highlights-employers-biggest-concerns-aca-new-bias-claims-and-ot-regs/
Adopting a coaching mindset to help employees plan for retirement
Are your employees prepared for retirement? See how Cath McCabe gives tips and tricks on coaching your employee for retirement.
America may be becoming the land of the free and the home of the grey as more adults are living longer lives.
According to the Administration on Aging, the number of centenarians more than doubled between 1980 and 2013. But lifespans aren’t the only thing increasing – so are the expenses that many older Americans face.
Retiree health care costs have surged exponentially – the Employee Benefits Research Institute (EBRI) estimates that the average healthy 65-year-old man will need $124,000 to handle future medical expenses. For a healthy woman of the same age, the expected amount is $140,000.
Many of these extra years – or decades – will be spent in retirement, so it’s crucial that Americans plan to have the income they need not only to retire, but to last throughout a potentially long retirement.
Since many adults use employer-sponsored retirement plans as a source of retirement funding, plan sponsors are in a key position to act as retirement “coaches” by encouraging employees to plan ahead and help them plan for their financial security in retirement.
Engage employees early and often
We have found that employers are a trusted source of financial information for employees. Plan sponsors can leverage this trust to engage employees with a variety of programs and tools that help them understand their future retirement income needs.
A plan sponsor’s role as coach begins when employees begin their careers by providing financial education. Education can help new employees recognize the importance of contributing to a retirement plan and the benefits of saving early, as well as help to optimize employee participation in retirement programs. Education designed for mid-career employees, and those nearing retirement, can cover more complex topics as they encounter life events that require a change to their road map for retirement.
And if employees can get started earlier in their careers, there is an increased likelihood that employees will have a positive retirement experience. A recent survey among current TIAA retirees found that those who began retirement planning before age 30 are more likely to retire before the age of 60, and 75 percent say they are very satisfied with their retirement.
Coach employees through education and advice to create a retirement road map
Many Americans need help in setting and achieving their retirement goals – a recent survey found that 29 percent of Americans are saving nothing at all for retirement. It’s important to develop a retirement coaching strategy that can help put participants in the right frame of mind and offers the resources they need to establish clear retirement goals and a road map for achieving those goals.
Many people think about their retirement savings in terms of accumulation – how much of a “nest egg” they’re able to build to fund their retirement. But employers should help their employees think about their retirement savings in terms of the amount of income they will have each month to cover their living expenses. Having a source of guaranteed lifetime income can help employees mitigate the risk of outliving their retirement savings.
As a rule of thumb, most employees will need between 70 percent and 100 percent of their pre-retirement income. If employees find they are not on track to meet this ratio, plan sponsors can help identify the necessary actions to increase the chance of success. For example, employees may need to increase their savings rate. Plan sponsors can help by encouraging employees to save enough of their own dollars to get the full employer match. If employees already are saving enough to get the full match, they then should aim to increase their contributions each year until they are saving the maximum amount allowed. Many employees older than 50 also can take advantage of catch-up provisions to save additional funds.
Perhaps the most important function of education is to drive employees to receive personalized advice from a licensed financial consultant supporting the employer’s retirement plan. This is where the road map is created, with the advisor providing turn-by-turn guidance. For most employees, an annual meeting can help keep them on track.
Why is it important to “coach” employees to create the road map? Simply put, it can improve both plan outcomes and the employees’ retirement outcomes. Advice is proven to positively correlate with positive action – enrolling, saving or increasing saving or optimizing allocations. (See this Retirement Readiness research for more information). Individuals who have discussed retirement with an advisor are much more likely to “run the numbers” and calculate how much income they’ll need in retirement – 79 percent versus only 32 percent who have not met with an advisor.
Helping employees along the road to retirement is a win-win for employees and plan sponsors, even beyond the fiduciary requirements. A 2015 EBRI report found that 54 percent of employees who are extremely satisfied with their benefits, such as their retirement plan and health insurance, also are extremely satisfied with their current job. Similarly, a 2013-2014 Towers Watson study revealed that nearly half (45 percent) of American workers agree that their retirement plan is an important reason why they choose to stay with their current employer. Establishing strong connections between employees and their retirement plans may aid employers’ retention efforts.
Supporting employees on their retirement readiness journey
Once employees have a better sense of the actions they need to take, plan sponsors can provide additional support by highlighting the investment choices that may help employees achieve their desired level of income. Many employees may understand how to save, but they are far less familiar with how and when to withdraw and use their savings after they have stopped working. Offering access to lifetime income options, such as low-cost annuities, through the plan’s investment menu can help employees create a monthly retirement “paycheck” that they can’t outlive.
The peace of mind that these solutions offer can last a lifetime, too. A survey among TIAA retirees found that those who have incorporated lifetime income solutions into their retirement have been satisfied with that decision. Among the retirees with a fixed or variable annuity, 92 percent are satisfied with their decision to annuitize.
Employers also should set a benchmark for regularly evaluating employees’ progress toward their retirement goals. This will allow employees to monitor their retirement outlook and identify opportunities to adjust their savings strategy so they don’t veer off their retirement road map.
Remember the emotional aspect of retirement
In addition to the financial aspects of retirement planning, it’s important to factor in emotional considerations. Offering a mentoring program, one-on-one advice and guidance sessions, or workshops and seminars to guide people on how to navigate this major milestone could be helpful for new retirees.
For some employees, going from working full time to not working at all may be a too abrupt change. Employers may want to consider offering a phased approach to retirement that gives employees the opportunity to work part time or consult to help ease the transition. An alumni program that offers occasional reunions or other programming can help retirees still feel connected to their organization for many years after they stop working.
Employers are uniquely positioned to guide employees through the retirement planning process, from early in their careers to their last day in the office – and beyond. It’s not enough to simply get employees to retirement: Plan sponsors need to help them get through retirement as well. Establishing a coaching mindset can be an effective way to actively engage employees in retirement planning and help them see that the end of their working careers can be the beginning of a wonderful new stage of life.
See the Original Post from BenefitsPro.com Here.
Source:
McCabe, C. (2016, August 04). Adopting a coaching mindset to help employees plan for retirement [Web log post]. Retrieved from https://www.benefitspro.com/2016/08/04/adopting-a-coaching-mindset-to-help-employees-plan?slreturn=1472491323&page_all=1
Form 5500 changes could increase obligations for plan sponsors
With proposed changes to Form 5500, small business may need to be prepared to stay in compliance as exemption statuses may change. See the article by Joseph K. Urwitz, Srarh Engle and Megan Mard fro Employee Benefit Adviser.
Historically, Form 5500 has served primarily as an information return used by plan administrators and employers to satisfy their reporting obligations under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act and the Internal Revenue Code. However, the DOL and IRS are increasingly relying on information reported on Form 5500 as a key component of their compliance and enforcement initiatives.
As a result, the proposed revisions to Form 5500 would add a number of new reporting requirements designed to aid the DOL and IRS in assessing whether an employer-sponsored health and welfare plan is being operated and maintained in compliance with the Internal Revenue Code, ERISA and the Affordable Care Act. Most notably, the revisions would limit the reporting exemption for small health and welfare plans, and require employers to disclose significantly more information about their plans in a new Schedule J (Group Health Plan Information) to the Form 5500.
Proposed changes limit exemption for small health and welfare plan reporting
Under the existing reporting regulations, employer-sponsored group health plans with fewer than 100 participants that are fully-insured, self-insured or a combination of insured and self-insured, are not required to file a Form 5500. The proposed changes would eliminate this small plan exception and would require all employer-sponsored group health plans that are subject to ERISA (including grandfathered and retiree plans) to file a Form 5500, regardless of a plan’s size or funding.
The DOL’s executive summary on the proposed regulations states that this change will improve the DOL’s effective development and enforcement of health and welfare plan regulations, as well as the DOL’s ability to educate plan administrators regarding compliance. The new reporting rules will also provide the DOL with data needed for congressionally-mandated reports on group health plans. Under the proposed rules, the existing financial reporting exemptions for health and welfare plans on Schedule C (Service Provider Information), G (Financial Transaction Schedules) and H (Financial Information) will continue to apply. Small, fully-insured plans would have a new limited exemption and would only be required to complete basic participation, coverage, insurance company and benefit information.
Changes to form 5500-SF eligibility
Currently, a welfare plan with fewer than 100 participants, including a plan that provides group health benefits, may file the Form 5500-SF if it is not exempt from the reporting requirements and otherwise eligible. Under the proposed regulations, welfare plans that provide group health benefits and have fewer than 100 participants would no longer be permitted to use the Form 5500-SF. For example, under the proposed rules, a plan funded through a trust with fewer than 100 participants would be required to complete the Form 5500 and Schedule H and Schedule C, if applicable. Welfare plans that do not provide group health benefits, have fewer than 100 participants, and are not otherwise exempt from the reporting requirements would still be able to use the Form 5500-SF.
Proposed changes require disclosure of significantly more plan information
The proposed revisions would also add a new Schedule J (Group Health Plan Information) to the Form 5500. Schedule J would require group health plans to report detailed information about plan operations and compliance with both ERISA and the ACA. For example, plans would be required to disclose, among other things:
- The number of participants and beneficiaries covered under the plan at the end of the plan year.
- The number of individuals offered and receiving Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA) coverage.
- Whether the plan offers coverage for employees, spouses, children, and/or retirees.
- The type of group health benefits offered under the plan, i.e., medical/surgical, pharmacy, prescription drug, mental health/substance use disorder, wellness program, preventive care, vision, dental, etc.
- The nature of the plan’s funding and benefit arrangement, and information regarding participant and/or employer contributions.
- Whether any benefit packages offered under the plan are claiming grandfathered status, and whether the plan includes a high deductible health plan, a health flexible spending account, or a health reimbursement arrangement.
- Information regarding rebates, refunds or reimbursements from service providers.
- Stop-loss coverage premiums, information on the attachment points of coverage, individual and/or aggregate claims limits.
- Whether the plan’s summary plan description (SPD), summaries of material modifications (SMM) and summaries of benefits and coverage (SBC) comply with applicable content requirements.
- Information regarding the plan’s compliance with applicable Federal laws, including, for example, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA), the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 (MHPAEA) and ACA.
- Detailed claims payment data, including information regarding how many benefit claims were submitted, appealed, approved and denied during the plan year, as well as the total dollar amount of claims paid during the plan year.
The DOL has generally requested comments on the new proposed reporting requirements for group health plans and has specifically requested comments on several of the proposed disclosures listed above, including the costs and feasibility of collecting COBRA coverage information and the methodology and reasonableness of collecting information on denied claims.
Next steps
The proposed revisions to Form 5500 are complex and will likely be subject to a number of changes in response to comments received by the DOL. It is clear, however, that future Form 5500 reporting obligations will require more data, more resources and be subject to increased scrutiny by Federal agencies. Employer sponsors of group health plans should begin to evaluate plan documentation and the potential new disclosures required by Schedule J to ensure that each plan sponsor will be in a position to access such information and adequately communicate the new reporting requirements.
See the original Article Posted on EmployeeBenefitAdvisor.com here.
Source:
Urwitz, J.K., Engle, S., Mardy, M. (2016, August 04). Form 5500 changes could increase obligations for plan sponsors [Web log post]. Retrieved from https://www.employeebenefitadviser.com/opinion/form-5500-changes-could-increase-obligations-for-plan-sponsors
The Next Innovation In Controlling Healthcare Costs
As healthcare costs continually increase, understanding where the cost come from and how to manage them is critical. Bruce Barr gives a great editorial on why new trends are essential in controlling costs.
Original post from EmployeeBenefitAdviser.com on August 1, 2016.
Four decades ago, PPOs were hailed as the “silver bullet” to control healthcare costs. Participating providers were contractually obligated to accept discounted fees, which seemed like an obvious solution to out-of-control increases in healthcare costs. Self-funded plan sponsors readily adopted this approach to gain access to network discounts and lower their healthcare costs. In fact, some self-funded plan sponsors still periodically conduct a re-pricing analysis or another method of comparing which PPO yields the best discounts for their specific group.
However, as provider contacts expired, they were renegotiated at higher rates for providers and higher costs for plan sponsors. In addition, hospital charge-masters have increased at an exorbitant pace and have largely gone unregulated and uncontrolled. As a result, the significant discounts once achieved by PPOs no longer deliver the true savings that were seen in the 1980s and 1990s.
For example, a 60% discount on a $1,000 “oral cleansing device” (more commonly referred to as a toothbrush) clearly does not deliver value for the plan sponsor or member and is indicative of some of the billing practices that go undetected. The same could be said of a $150,000 knee replacement. Using a PPO for its discounted fees is somewhat analogous to buying a car by negotiating a discount off the list or sticker price.
As employers gain a better understanding of the questionable value of PPO discounts and pricing optics, reference based pricing (RBP) and reference based reimbursement (RBR) provide possible solutions by addressing the demand for:
· Price transparency,
· Benchmarking the cost of claims,
· Eliminating inappropriate charges, and
· A fiduciary or co-fiduciary serving on behalf of the plan sponsor.
With RBP, the plan specifies the amount that will be allowed for certain common procedures such as MRIs or knee replacements based on prevailing charges. Covered members have access to a list of participating providers who have agreed to accept these payments. Should the member choose a higher-priced provider, he or she may be responsible for the balance of the payment.
RBR uses a common “pricing reference” — often tied to the Medicare allowance and the actual cost for a specific service – and then reimburses the hospital or facility an additional 20-80%, allowing for the provider to make a “fair and reasonable” profit. For context, many PPO discounts result in net payments equal 250% or more of the Medicare allowance.
There are different ways this strategy can be implemented. Some employers begin using RBR exclusively for out-of-network claims. In other cases, RBR is used for all facility claims in conjunction with a PPO network for physician claims or an accountable care organization.
While used successfully by many employers, RBR can be disruptive for some employees when a provider attempts to “balance bill” patients for the difference between the set plan allowance and the provider’s billed charges. In the overwhelming majority of cases, however, these issues are quickly and easily resolved in favor of the plan sponsor and member. Rarely does a discrepancy like this lead to legal action.
Employers who decide to implement a RBR strategy need to carefully select a partner with expertise in communicating and educating employees about how these arrangements work and what to do should they receive a balance bill. The RBR partner should also have expertise in negotiating pricing discrepancies with providers, providing employee advocacy, indemnifying the plan and its members, and modifying the language in the plan document.
Many early adopters of this approach were often those who were subject to extreme increases in healthcare costs and who saw RBP and RBR as a last ditch effort that would enable them to continue to provide medical benefits for their employees. We’re now beginning to see more employers adopt this approach as a way to more effectively determine and control the cost of healthcare.
See Original Post Here.
Source:
Barr, B.F., (2016, August 1). The next innovation in controlling healthcare costs [Web log post]. Retrieved from https://www.employeebenefitadviser.com/opinion/the-next-innovation-in-controlling-healthcare-costs
Workers Overwhelmed by Health Care Decisions
Employees are feeling the stress of healthcare costs. In the article below by Jack Craver, he provides insight as to the pressures workers are currently dealing with in todays healthcare marketplace.
Original Post from BenefitsPro.com on July 29, 2016
In case you haven’t noticed, Americans are in a tough spot on health care.
For one, their health care costs far more than that in any other country. Even worse, perhaps, they increasingly have many more decisions to make about how to pay for that care.
A new report demonstrates the frustration and hopelessness that grips so many in the face of health care decisions.
The study by Alegeus, the benefit account platform, surveyed 4,000 adults about their health care choices. It showed that there are seldom health or insurance-related choices that Americans make with relative ease or comfort.
There are no health care finance decisions, for instance, that a majority of Americans don’t find challenging. At the top of the list was “planning for out-of-pocket costs,” which two-thirds of respondents say they found either challenging or very challenging. Fifty-five percent say the same about choosing health care benefits.
Fifty-two percent said they found “maintaining health and wellness” challenging. If respondents are being completely honest with themselves (and the pollster), that figure would probably be much higher, considering that three-quarters of Americans are overweight or obese, and a certain percentage of those who aren’t still engage in unhealthy habits, such as problem drinking, substance abuse, or smoking.
One of the reasons health care is so expensive, many argue, is that for so long, Americans have been shielded from the true cost of care by generous employer-based insurance policies. As employers increasingly shift to high-deductible plans or consumer-driven health plans, millions of Americans are for the first time confronting decisions that in the past were left to higher-ups.
Alegeus CEO Steve Auerbach explained the shifting dynamics of health care shopping to BenefitsPRO.
“In the past, with health plans paying for the majority of health care costs, consumers have been conditioned to be disengaged,” he says. “This shift to consumer directed health care represents a complete paradigm shift in how consumers will need to manage their healthcare going forward — and there is a sizeable percentage of consumers who are resistant to this change. It is definitely going to take time for consumers to acclimate, build confidence, and rise to the occasion.”
He noted, however, that a similar “paradigm shift” took place with retirement benefits two decades ago, as many companies moved from defined-benefit pensions to 401(k)s.
“The infrastructure for education and support had to be built, and consumers had to adapt,” he says. “But now 401(k)s have become ubiquitous.”
See the original article here.
Source:
Craver, J. (2016, July 29). Workers overwhelmed by health care decisions [Web log post]. Retreived from https://www.benefitspro.com/2016/07/29/workers-overwhelmed-by-health-care-decisions?kw=Workers%20overwhelmed%20by%20health%20care%20decisions&cn=20160801&pt=Daily&src=EMC-Email&et=editorial&bu=BenefitsPRO&slreturn=1470060827
Rising Health Care Costs: Driving Factor Causing Changes to Employer Health Plans, SHRM Survey Finds
Get the latest trends in healthcare benefits in the survey conducted by SHRM.
Original Post from SHRM.org on July 13, 2016
- Ninety-six percent of organizations offered some type of health care plan to their employees.
- Mail order prescriptions have gone down by 6 percent over the past five years.
- Eighty-five percent of organizations offer mental health coverage, compared to 91 percent just last year.
- Organizations were evenly split as to whether they offered coverage to spouses who had access to health care coverage through another employer, or if there was a spousal surcharge for health care coverage.
- Several new health-related items added to the survey this year: health care services such as diagnosis, treatment or prescriptions provided by photo or video (23 percent), high deductible health plan not linked to an HSA or a health reimbursement account (HRA) (17 percent), genetic testing coverage for diseases such as cancer (12 percent) and a smoking surcharge for health care plans (20 percent).
Do companies really need a culture of health in the office?
Great article by Henry Albrect on how to have an effective wellness program that truly impacts your bottom line. To many time we focus on one aspect and not the whole picture of creating an effective wellness program.
Original Post from EmployeeBenefitAdviser.com on July 28, 2016.
You’ve probably heard that a “culture of health” is the best way to see success with your wellness program.
I disagree.
A successful wellness program should align with an employer’s strategy and culture above all else. The further you get from these, the more likely your program will be “a little HR thing” — and not a vibrant part of your workplace. Frankly, and with the notable exception of healthcare companies, health isn’t a top concern for most organizations.
Align any health and well-being programs with your business goals
Investing a few million in feel-good programs is easy. But investing in anything off-strategy is always a risk. If you are in the manufacturing business, wellness strategies should reinforce readiness, safety, discipline and musculoskeletal health. In retail, they should support energy levels, having infectious positive energy that helps customers enjoy buying your products. In healthcare, mindfulness and resilience play a strong role.
Do it in a way that fits with your culture
The true definition of company culture has gotten lost along the way.
Your company culture is the backdrop for everything that happens within your organization. It determines workplace norms, values and beliefs. It rules employee behaviors and experiences.
Well-being, broadly defined, is a key element of all great company cultures. Wellness programs should fit into and reinforce your culture — but they aren’t the point of your culture.
Why? Because, above all else, your business goals should define your company culture. The two have to align.
According to a Willis Towers Watson report, 67% employers say developing a workplace culture of health is a top priority.
But company culture and strategy can’t exist separately. And health isn’t at the heart of the business goals for every organization. Retailers might prioritize customer service while tech companies thrive on innovation. Company culture needs to support the main mission and goals.
When culture and strategy align, businesses are successful, a study published in April 2015 in the Journal of Organizational Behavior suggests.
Researchers collected data from 95 car dealerships over six years and found that when companies had a culture that engaged and motivated employees, they had higher ratings of customer satisfaction and vehicle sales. When employers neglected their culture, their performance declined over time.
What about health and wellness?
Businesses can embrace well-being and invest in employee health even if it doesn’t define the company culture. And they should.
A 2015 survey published by Quantum Workplace and my company, Limeade found that respondents were 38% more engaged and 18% more likely to go the extra mile when they felt their employers cared about their well-being.
Use that power to build a wellness program that supports your authentic culture and achieves business objectives. Don’t worry about developing a culture of health. Well-being initiatives in the workplace should align with the culture — not the other way around.
Determine why you want a wellness program. What are the goals, and why are they important to the business? If you want to improve customer satisfaction, what programs can you use to make employees more chipper? If you’re focused on innovation, how can you inspire creativity?
These specific goals should guide which programs and initiatives are right for the company. Then, connect it back to your culture.
If your culture values teamwork, bring employees together in sports games and competitions around the office. If you value community involvement, give employees time to volunteer or participate in a local charity walk. Every company’s wellness initiative will look different.
Building a culture of health might be great for some hospitals, but it isn’t right for every organization. Focus on bringing your authentic culture to life through a program that aligns with your business goals. Winning in business helps you win with well-being, and vice versa.
Does your wellness program connect to business goals?
See The Full Article Here.
Source:
Albrecht, H (2016, July 28). Do companies really need a culture of health in the office? [Web log post]. Retrieved from https://www.employeebenefitadviser.com/opinion/do-companies-really-need-a-culture-of-health-in-the-office
How On-the-Job Training can Solve Your Pipeline Problems
Great article by Paul Wolfe on employee development as an investment to your company.
Original Post from SHRM.org on July 27, 2016
On-the-job training was popular a generation ago but has been steadily declining in the U.S. for decades. Companies expect candidates who are armed with a degree or certification and relevant work experience, which is discounting a large pool of the American workforce.
This model worked for companies when there were more qualified people than jobs available, but today’s labor market paints a different picture. Now we are seeing a lot more demand for specialized talent than there are qualified candidates. And though we have seen strong hiring, wage growth has been stagnate, leaving many workers frustrated with the lack of progress in their careers. In fact, only 15% of the job force are currently in fields that are experiencing wage growth and competitive salaries, which are the “opportunity” jobs, according to a new report released by Indeed’s research team Hiring Lab.
The upside is that 35% of all job postings on Indeed are these opportunity jobs, which are in the fields of healthcare, management, technology, business and finance and engineering. There are a lot of talented workers out there, employed or not, that have transferable skills that would be interested in moving into a role with steady wage growth and competitive salaries.
That’s why I think it's important for companies to consider investing in employee development to fill roles within their organization. Investing in training helps workers get into a high-growth career and enables companies to build its own pipeline of talent.
Employee development can look very different depending on your company or industry. For example, at Indeed we bring in about 80 university graduates from around the world to our Austin technology office for a summer program called Indeed Universtiy. We train these new hires on Indeed’s data-driven development process and give them the freedom to develop new product ideas. This is helping us to fill our most in-demand jobs - software engineers - while training them to contribute right away and offer innovative ideas for our company to test. Finding a software engineer who already has 3-5 years of experience is extremely competitive, so as a company we made the decision to invest in new college grads to help fill this need.
Offering development to your employees is an investment, but for those companies who are struggling to fill roles in these highly competitive and specialized fields, it can help close the gap of of the mismatch we are seeing in the labor market.
See the original article here.
Source:
Wolfe, P. (2016, July 27). How on-the-job training can solve your pipeline problems [Web log post]. Retrieved from https://blog.shrm.org/blog/how-on-the-job-training-can-solve-your-pipeline-problems
The ACA’s uncertain lifespan following the Cadillac Tax delay
Are you questioning how the ACA will continue with the delay of the Cadillac Tax? Neil Model gives a breakdown of the "what-ifs" scenarios.
Original Post from BenefitsPro.com on July 26, 2016.
Since the delay of the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) “Cadillac Tax” provision, which was passed on December 18, 2015, some may be wondering how the ACA will be funded until 2020. I do not believe we have been given the answer.
The Cadillac Tax was to be imposed as a means of funding the ACA by penalizing employers for offering high-cost employer sponsored health insurance plans to employees. One must take into consideration that with continued double-digit healthcare premium increases, the so-called “high cost” plans are not so far-fetched for many more employer sponsored plans in the future. The Cadillac tax was also to double as an incentive for plan sponsors to look at less expensive plan alternatives by the time the tax would be imposed, which is now 2020.
The tax, were it not delayed, would have assessed a penalty of 40 percent for plans costing an employee more than $10,200 annually, and family plans costing an employee $27,500 annually. I have little doubt that the craftsman of the ACA actuarially assumed there would be more employers subject to penalties in future years, despite most efforts to curb premiums.
But because the tax has been delayed, questions about how the ACA will be funded until 2020 have arisen. While still some plan sponsors speculate about whether the ACA will ultimately be repealed, others are still preparing for 2020 by attempting to provide affordable plan options for their employees. This is and will become increasingly more difficult due to spiraling health care costs and corresponding premiums. I have heard it asked many times: “How much more can I impose on my employees?” Add to that concern the even greater Rx inflation due to new and very expensive drugs coming to market for Hepatitis C, rheumatoid arthritis and cholesterol.
Though there have been no definitive plans announced to supplement the funding that would have resulted from the Cadillac Tax, other taxes and fees have been responsible for the partial funding of health care reform, some paid by individuals, others paid by employers, including numerous taxes on medical device manufacturers, indoor tanning services, charitable hospitals that fail to comply with Obamacare requirements, brand name drugs and health insurers. Other fundraising for the ACA comes through the elimination of tax deductions for certain drug coverage and tax increases for those with a certain income threshold.
Since the ACA’s emergence, we have read about failed state exchanges, bankrupt cooperatives, and the significant losses the major insurance carriers have incurred participating in the federal exchanges. We have also seen the failure of the government to pay the subsidies to insurance carriers in the timely fashion promised and expected. With the various delays and elimination of ACA funding clauses, we all must wonder where the money to pay for ACA will ultimately come from. Does everyone have a mirror?
According to an article by Reuters with information from the Congressional Budget Office, U.S. taxpayers will ultimately be responsible for $660 billion this year alone as a subsidy to those receiving health insurance under the age of 65. Those figures are expected to rise to $1.1 trillion over the next decade.
The burden will not only fall on the backs of the consumer, but on employers that want to help lift the burden of the high cost of health care. And, providing major medical insurance might not be enough in today’s environment. Ultimately, it will come down to employers educating themselves on the most effective strategies and seeking the guidance from benefits brokers to come up with creative, alternative solutions that will make it easier for employees to live healthy lives.
As the lifespan of the ACA remains undetermined, employers need to educate and prepare as best as possible. Uncertainty, especially with the election around the corner, will be a key theme the rest of this year, particularly in the health care realm.
So, the question remains: Will the ACA keep fighting the good fight going forward, or will it crumble under pressure?