Work culture trumps benefits for millennials
Original post benefitspro.com
Millennials don’t just work for money. They also like doing things that they believe in.
That’s according to a new report from Virgin Pulse, which surveyed over 1,000 full-time millennial employees to get a sense of what they’re looking for in a job.
That’s not to say that today’s youth are all devoted philanthropists. In fact, only 39 percent believe that charity is very important at work.
But what they do want is a culture and mission they can get behind. The report found that 77 percent of young workers believe that company culture is at least as important as pay and benefits. Three-quarters of them can identify their company’s mission and nearly just as many believe it is important that their employer have one.
The survey also suggested that most millennials aren’t stressed that technology is eroding the barrier between work and personal time. Ninety-three percent said that it’s OK to work during off-hours. Two-thirds of them say they have texted with their boss about work. And a slight majority — 55 percent — say that tech helps balance their work-life priorities.
And yet, the survey suggests that millennials expect their responsiveness to emails and texts to be rewarded with some slack from their boss, as 80 percent identified flexible work hours as important.
The report warns employers to watch out for burnout among young workers, no matter how infinite their energy or availability may appear: “24/7 accessibility does a number on their stress levels and your business, so encourage employees to put up some tech parameters.”
7 tips to get employees listening to your benefit chat
Employees care about their health care benefits. It's an important part of why they get up and go to work each day.
However, when it comes to open enrollment, many zone out and often forget the pile of paperwork offered each year to figure out what's happening with their benefits.
Alison Davis, founder and CEO of Davis and Company, offers 7 tips to cut the clutter and get employees to listen.
1. Tell the 'Why?' behind changes.
Tell the "why" behind changes. Why does your company offer benefits? How does the package stack up against the competition? Answer these questions for your employees, and then share the reasoning behind your decisions. Chances are, you thought carefully about changes, looked through the data, and made strategic decisions based on cost-benefit analysis. Walk employees through that process.
2. Use the inverted pyramid to organize information.
This classic structure puts the most relevant information first and saves the details for lower down in the message. And it works for any kind of communication, from e-mail to enrollment packages to benefits meetings.
3. Focus on what employees need to do.
In these information-overloaded times, employees want you to cut to the chase and tell them what action is required. So be clear, with content such as "Five decisions you need to make" and "A three-step process for choosing your benefits."
4. Be visual.
Instead of long narrative copy, break content into easily scannable segments. For example, create a table that captures key changes to next year's benefits. Or add a sidebar with a checklist of decision items. And whenever possible, use icons, photos, or sketches to illustrate your points.
5. Avoid the urge to sugarcoat.
Communicating benefits is often a "bad news, bad news" proposition. Sometimes costs increase; other times benefits are eliminated. To maintain credibility, it's important to communicate honestly. Tell employees why a change was made, how costs were managed, and how they can choose and spend wisely.
6. Don't be shy about celebrating good things.
Use communication to remind employees about benefits that are designed to make their lives better, such as flexible spending account debit cards, preventive care, discount gym memberships, and free financial advice.
7. Be service-oriented.
Include tips, advice, and Q&As that will help employees be smarter consumers and live healthier. Here are some examples of service-oriented topics you can integrate into your communications:
- How to determine if you're saving enough for retirement
- Low-impact ways to get more exercise
- How I saved $300 on my prescriptions
- Five often overlooked discounts offered by the company medical plan
RELATED: Why Companies Are Wasting The Money They Spend on Pay and Benefits
Technology, interaction, variety: What Millenials look for in a benefits package
Millenials are thinking differently about their company's benefit packages. Understanding what this growing generation in the workforce is looking for could help with your company's recruiting efforts.
A Millenial is someone born after 1980 and the first generation to come of age in the millennium. Pew Research reports this group will number 75 million this year. That's greater than Generation X and Baby Boomers.
But not all Millenials in the workforce are signing up for a benefits package. The Society for Human Resources Management found that just under half of all Millenials consider their overall benefits package to be very important.
Those that find the benefit package important are likely to offer up these answers when asked about employee benefits, according to benefitspro.com.
"I want choice and variety."
Millennials are accustomed to having access to what they want when they want, especially when it comes to information. They want choices and are often offended by a one-size-fits-all approach. Overall, they look for a well-rounded array of benefits, which may mean that a mix of employer-paid products with supplemental and voluntary products will play an increasingly important role for many employers.
"I want customization and control."
Personalization is highly important to millennials. When they’re offered benefits, they expect those benefits to be tailored to their needs. And, they want control over how they spend their money. While giving them plenty of options puts them in the driver’s seat, too many options may paralyze them. Try to strike a healthy balance by considering a choice of plan designs within a product category, or perhaps core/buy-up options.
"I want true simplicity."
Employee benefits shouldn’t be complicated, and communication is the key. Millennials are looking for simple, clear, easy-to-follow steps, which includes systems that are easy to use. It will be to your advantage to recommend working with a carrier who embraces simplicity and offers varying enrollment strategies. This gives you flexibility in recommending the one that’s likely to be most effective.
"I want interaction and collaboration."
Social is the name of the game for the millennial generation. Peer networks play a huge role in decision-making. Employers would be wise to offer ways their employees can interact and network to get information. Blogs are an important way millennials build trust, gather information and connect. Promote them with your clients. They work.
"I want technology, not paper."
Clearly, the biggest difference between millennials and other generations is their use of technology … and their expectation that technology also be important to others with which they interact. They want to use tools that make benefits easier, such as apps and online portals. And they want alternatives to paper. They trust technology.
What Employers Need to Know About Court’s Gay-Marriage Ruling
Originally posted by Rachel Emma Silverman on June 30, 2015 on wsj.com.
The Supreme Court on Friday ruled that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry, meaning that same-sex marriages must be recognized nationwide. The ruling will have vast implications for employers, which until now have been operating under a patchwork of different state and federal laws governing the legal and tax treatment of same-sex unions.
Here’s what businesses should keep in mind as they navigate the new landscape.
If an employer offers spousal health-insurance benefits, do they need to offer them to all married employees, gay or straight?
In general, yes.
Companies that offer spousal health benefits and use a separate insurance company to fund their benefits will now be required to cover both gay and straight spouses. “Based on the court’s ruling. there is simply one type of spouse,” says Todd Solomon, a law partner in the employee-benefits practice group at McDermott Will & Emery in Chicago, who has been tracking same-sex employee benefits for nearly two decades.
But companies that are self-insured, which means they assume the insurance risks for their own employees, a common practice among large companies, aren’t under the same legal constraints. “There is technically no legal requirement that a self-insured company has to include a same-sex spouse,” Mr. Solomon says. As a result, self insurance “is where we are going to see a lot of activity and a lot of litigation.”
Companies should think twice about self-insuring but denying benefits to gay spouses because they will be vulnerable to discrimination suits, he says.
What if an employer has a religious objection to gay marriage?
They have limited options.
Companies could choose not to offer benefits to spouses altogether. Or they could self-insure and attempt to offer benefits to only straight spouses, but they run a high risk of discrimination suits, Mr. Solomon says.
Now that same-sex marriage is legal, will it add a lot of people to employers’ benefits plans? Will this be expensive for employers?
It could, but it depends on what type of plan a company already had.
If a company already covered unmarried same-sex domestic partners, it could be cheaper because covering spouses doesn’t have negative tax implications and is easier to administer than most domestic partnership benefits, Mr. Solomon says.
But if a company only offered spousal benefits, the ruling will add new couples that previously weren't allowed to marry.
Will the Supreme Court ruling lead to fewer employers offering spousal benefits?
Yes—that has been the trend, and the ruling might exacerbate it.
Employers have been cutting spousal benefits to save money, either dropping spousal coverage or imposing surcharges on spouses who can obtain health insurance elsewhere. A survey from consulting firm Mercer of more than 1,100 large employers found that 17% either excluded spouses with other coverage available or imposed a surcharge in 2014, compared with 12% in 2012.
The Supreme Court ruling might spur some employers who were already inclined to cut spousal benefits to do so, Mr. Solomon says.
What are the tax implications?
It equalizes the tax treatment of gay and straight married couples.
Until the ruling, there were a patchwork of state and federal tax laws governing same-sex couples. Employers, depending on the state, sometimes faced additional payroll taxes for same-sex employees, and workers sometimes faced additional income taxes.
Now, for both federal and state tax purposes, companies and employees won't face different tax treatment for gay and straight married couples. That will make benefits easier for companies to administer, Mr. Solomon says.
What does this mean for domestic partnership benefits?
This is a particularly complicated issue for employers.
Over the past decade, a growing number of companies offered “domestic partnership” coverage for gay employees and their partners as a way to provide equal benefits for couples who couldn’t legally wed. Others companies offer coverage more broadly to unmarried domestic partners, regardless of sexual orientation, recognizing that some employees simply prefer not to marry.
Companies that offer unmarried partnership benefits to both gay and straight couples will likely continue to do so.
But companies that offer partnership benefits just to gay couples may begin to phase them out because now all their employees can legally marry. Offering domestic partnership benefits just to gay couples but not straight ones might make firms vulnerable to reverse discrimination lawsuits, lawyers say.
On the other hand, firms may choose to keep domestic partnership benefits to help protect gay employees from discrimination. The majority of U.S. states lack anti-discrimination protection for gay employees, so workers can be fired for their sexuality. Because marriage certificates are public, forcing employees to get married for spousal benefits may end up “outing” an employee, while domestic partnerships are typically private matters, gay advocates say.
If it's On-site, It's Alright
During this period of health care reform, most employers are looking at ways to control health care costs while still maintaining a healthy workforce and providing excellent medical services to their employees. One of the ways to accomplish this goal is by having an on-site clinic or one that’s nearby. A survey conducted by the National Association of Worksite Health Centers (NAWHC) revealed that 95% of the companies surveyed said they met their goals -- at least partially -- of increasing employee satisfaction and productivity with an on-site clinic. When you consider such a high percentage was achieved, it makes having an on-site clinic a no-brainer; right? Especially when that same survey also found that more than 80% reported that access to care was improved by their clinic and increased participation in worksite health programs was increased by 75%. Even more amazing is that nearly 70% said the clinic improved their health and 64% said reduced medical costs were achieved.
New non-insurance benefits hit the market
Originally posted December 12, 2014 by Mike Nesper on Employee Benefit Advisor
As employee benefits plans evolve, so too does the employer’s perspective, particularly when it comes to voluntary benefits. More and more, employers are viewing benefits holistically instead of taking a siloed approach. As Mercer’s U.S. innovation leader, Betsy Dill expects to see that trend continue as we head into the New Year as employers continue to personalize benefit plans to their workforce.
That includes adding non-insurance products, which are steadily becoming part of more benefits packages, says Rob Shestack, senior vice president and voluntary benefits national practice leader at AmWINS Group. “Every year, they’re gaining more popularity,” he says. “It’s all part of this wellness balance,” which includes employers ensuring the physical, financial and mental well-being of their workforce. “A stool can’t stand on two legs,” he says.
Even if a client doesn’t opt for a non-insurance plan, Shestack says, they’re always interested in what’s available. “Today, it’s really getting a lot of conversation going,” he says.
And why not? There are plenty of useful items to choose from — Shestack estimated upwards of 50 products — everything from identity theft protection to telemedicine to roadside assistance. Along with those three, some of the more popular products include legal services, pet insurance, consumer goods purchasing programs and financial helplines.
“The list goes on,” Shestack says. “Some of these things have been out for quite a while and some are new this year.” In 2014, Shestack says, a few new products hit the market — one of those being Estate Assist, a digital safety deposit box where important information such as a will and/or insurance policies can be stored. In 2015, “we’ll probably see three or four or five more,” he says.
‘High-impact, low-cost programs’
Non-insurance plans are usually inexpensive and often consist of a handful of products offered in a package, Shestack says. “A lot of these things are bundled,” he says. “Employers are looking for high-impact, low-cost programs.”
Employers of all sizes offer these plans, Shestack says, and he’s seeing more employer-sponsored programs with a buy-up option. “When an employer funds a base plan for everybody, the cost significantly decreases,” he says.
Despite the prevalence of non-insurance products, Shestack says there’s still plenty of employers unaware of their existence — that’s where advisers need to step in and educate employers about these types of voluntary programs.
Not only does an adviser have to be adept at product assessment, they must select the appropriate plan for the workforce in question, says Jim O’Connor, national practice leader for employee benefits at CBIZ. A manufacturing company made up of lower-wage employees is much different than a financial services firm. “You need to know how the product lines up with the workforce,” O’Connor says.
Education and communication are also part of an adviser’s job. “That’s not just about sending a memo out and leaving it at that,” O’Connor says. Advisers who communicate well do so via thoughtful, thorough and various channels, he says. “You have to have a diverse approach to your communicating strategy,” O’Connor says.
Wellness programs adopt outside-the-box solutions
Originally posted December 15, 2014 by Mike Nesper on Employee Benefit Advisor
Increasing participation in a particular activity can be done with incentives, “but you can’t buy commitment to health,” says Alexander Domaszewicz, a principal and senior consultant with Mercer. “Getting people committed to health takes other influencers and motivators.”
That’s the state of wellness programs in the workplace, Domaszewicz says, trying to make a program as valuable as possible and doing so in a meaningful way. “We’re enhancing and refining as we go,” he says.
More employers are using outcomes-based incentives, says Beena Thomas, Optum’s vice president of health and wellness. “It increases personal responsibility,” she says. Financial incentives, like premium reductions for employees who meet biometric thresholds, are widely used, but there are other strong motivators, Domaszewicz says. People are more likely to participate if an activity is easy and accessible, he says. Participation is less likely if an activity is difficult, he says, even if there is money attached to it.
Wellness programs have moved past a one-size-fits-all mentality, Domaszewicz says, and employers are now focused on employee health both at work and at home. The latter is even being recognized — such as rewarding someone who plays in an adult soccer league.
Employees prefer face-to-face interaction
There’s also more focus on one-on-one interaction, Domaszewicz says. “We tried to make everything so digital in the last decade,” he says, but employees prefer in-person communication. Employers are bringing professionals, like dieticians, to the workplace, Thomas says. “Employees like to see someone face-to-face,” she says.
Social media has helped increase participation, too, Thomas says. “Social media has played and will play a larger, more defined role in driving employee engagement,” she says.
Wellness programs have evolved rapidly in the past five years, Domaszewicz says, just look at all the wearable devices available today. “There’s a lot to be said for the groundswell of support we’ve seen,” he says. Wellness should continue to accelerate and be more successful in the future, he adds.
Wearables are evidence that employers are focusing on outcomes rather than return on investment, says Robin Widdis, business unit president and interim wellness director at CBIZ. “It’s about encouraging employees to take their health more seriously,” she says, “and employers have shown greater interest in healthy outcomes rather than dollars spent.”
Integrated approach
An integrated health strategy is an approach many employers are taking, Thomas says, and using one vendor for all benefits. “Affordability still continues to remain paramount for employers,” she says.
Regardless of any new legislation, Thomas says wellness programs will keep progressing and employers will continue to emphasize wellness as a core piece to their business strategy. “It’s not something that just sits siloed in the HR department,” she says.
Perry Braun, executive director of Benefit Advisors Network, isn’t so sure. “Intuitively, it is a sound business strategy to invest in these programs, however, businesses are cautious about making investments until the regulatory environment and tax policies have greater certainty or predictability to them,” he says. “Wellness programs require a long-term view and investment from the business community, and unfortunately, the overall business climate is short-term focused at present.”
Ensuring compliance
Advisers got a reminder this year to make certain wellness plans are compliant with the Affordable Care Act after the EEOC sued Wisconsin-based Orion Energy Systems, claiming the employer imposed too harsh a penalty for opting out of the program. Employees who participated had 100% of their premiums covered by the employer, while those who didn’t participate had to pay 100% on their own.
“For a lot of employers it was frustrating to see these lawsuits because they’ve been asking for clarity — not legal action — for many years,” says Karen Marlo, vice president at the National Business on Group Health. “I think there’s a lot of concern. There’s certainly been a lot of going back and reviewing the programs they’ve put in place.”
It’s difficult navigating the various regulations surrounding health care, Marlo says, making it crucial advisers ensure programs are compliant with the ACA, GINA, ADA and HIPAA to avoid lawsuits.
What to expect in 2015
In 2015, employers will continue to shift the rising cost of health care to employees, Widdis says, which will create “an emphasis on healthier lifestyles. There will also be more of a focus on taking action versus pushing information.” Gone are the days of handing out booklets on the dangers of smoking, Widdis says, and employers are now taking action such as charging smokers higher premiums.
Vinnie Daboul, partner at Sage Benefit Advisers, agrees, saying “the successful wellness programs are not going to be the status quo.” Effective programs will be ones that take action based on biometric data and reduce claims, he says. “When you start talking to some of the organizations that are tied to wellness, they’re starting to look at changing the claim curve,” Daboul says.
That includes involving family members, Widdis says. “Employers are also encouraging employees’ spouses and families to become more involved in their wellness programs,” she says. “Moving forward, employers are making wellness less about ROI, and more about improving health, productivity and morale.”
Government releases Form 5500 changes
Originally posted December 17, 2014 by Mike Nesper on Employee Benefit Advisor
The government recently announced changes to the Form 5500 and the Form 5500-SF. The changes, released by the IRS, Employee Benefits Security Administration and the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, are listed on the Department of Labor’s website. They include:
- DOL Form M-1 compliance information. The MEWA Form M-1 compliance information that was filed as an attachment for 2013 now appears as three new questions on the Form 5500.
- Signature and date. The Form 5500 and Form 5500-SF instructions for “signature and date” have been updated to caution filers to check the filing status. If the filing status is "processing stopped" or “unprocessable,” the submission may not have had a valid electronic signature, and depending on the error, may be considered not to have been filed.
- Active participant information. Filers are now required to provide the total number of active participants at the beginning of the plan year and at the end of the plan year on both forms.
- Terminated participant vesting information. Form 5500-SF filers now must provide the number of participants that terminated employment during the plan year with accrued benefits that were not fully vested.
- Multiple-employer plan information. In accordance with the Cooperative and Small Employer Charity Pension Flexibility Act, the Form 5500 and Form 5500-SF now require multiple-employer pension plans and multiple-employer welfare plans to include an attachment that generally identifies each participating employer, and includes a good faith estimate of each employer's percentage of the total contributions during the year.
- Schedule H. The instructions for line 1c(13) have been enhanced to set out what is an investment company registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940.
- Schedule MB. New Line 4f requires plans in critical status to indicate the plan year in which a plan is projected to emerge from critical status or, if the rehabilitation plan is based on forestalling possible insolvency, the plan year in which insolvency is expected.
- Schedule SB. Line 3 has been modified so that the funding target is reported separately for each type of participant (active, retired, or terminated vested). Line 11b has been split into two parts: the calculation based on the prior year’s effective interest rate, and the calculation based on the prior year’s actual return. Line 15 instructions have been expanded to address situations in which the AFTAP was not certified for the plan year. Line 27 and related instructions have been modified to reflect funding changes under the CSEC Act for defined benefit pension plans impacted by the act.
Most Consumers Value Integrated Benefits for Time and Cost Savings
Originally posted December 11, 2014 on Insurance Broadcasting
Whether it’s dental insurance or the smartphone, consumers want products that offer simplification and savings. In a new survey, Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield asked Americans what products make their lives easier and the findings revealed that integrated products and services are highly valued – for example, the smartphone (74 percent), printer/copier/scanner (64 percent) and the toaster oven (36 percent). And, when it comes to insurance, consumers overwhelmingly (81 percent) said it would be extremely helpful to trust the same carrier to provide their dental, vision and health coverage.
“We’re meeting the needs of both employer and employee by providing affordable and comprehensive coverage benefits, which helps save time and money every step of the way.”
So, what specifically are consumers looking for when it comes to selecting an insurance plan? Survey respondents said a range of factors are important to consider, but they most frequently point to cost as being an extremely important aspect (67 percent), followed by comprehensiveness of coverage (61 percent), customer service (60 percent) and ease of use (58 percent). Additionally, 86 percent would expect to save time, save money or receive improved care if they had the same carrier integrate dental with their vision and medical benefits.
In the current health care environment, employers are looking for products that offer their employees exceptional valuei. The good news is that simpler processes, vast networks and deep discounts offered by multiline carriers like Anthem can provide employers and employees with the exceptional value they are seeking.
“For example, we offer a vast choice of dental benefits that employees want, along with large, reliable provider networks that make it easy and affordable for consumers to maintain good oral health,” said Erin Hoeflinger, President of Anthem in Ohio. “We’ve built strong relationships with the dentists in our network and we have negotiated rates, which saves members on average 25 to 32 percent on their covered dental services.”
In addition to seeing a cost savings, consumers can expect to save time when they select a multiline carrier. Half of the consumers surveyed (50 percent) say that figuring out costs is the most time consuming aspect of health management. Two-in-five also say it’s time-consuming to find health care providers that accept their insurance (41 percent) and to get their doctors to talk with each other to coordinate care (39 percent).
“With all of the advantages available to consumers and employers who get their benefits from a multiline carrier, there’s no reason to settle for the inefficiencies of having multiple benefit providers," said Hoeflinger. “We’re meeting the needs of both employer and employee by providing affordable and comprehensive coverage benefits, which helps save time and money every step of the way.”
This report presents the findings of a telephone survey conducted among 1,005 adults, 503 men and 502 women 18 years of age and older, living in the continental United States. Interviewing for this ORC International CARAVAN® Survey was completed on July 10-13, 2014. 605 interviews were from the landline sample and 400 interviews from the cell phone sample.
The margin of error for the total sample is ±3.0 percent at the 95% confidence level. This means that if we were to replicate the study, we would expect to get the same results within 3.0 percentage points 95 times out of 100.
HHS Formally Moves To Close Loophole Allowing Plans Without Hospital Benefits
The Obama administration took another step to close what many see as a health-law loophole that allows large employers to offer medical plans without hospital coverage and bars their workers from subsidies to buy their own insurance.
“It has come to our attention that certain group health plan designs that provide no coverage of inpatient hospital services are being promoted,” the Department of Health and Human Services said in proposed rules issued late Friday.
Under the new standard, companies with at least 50 workers “must provide substantial coverage of both inpatient hospital services and physician services” to meet the Affordable Care Act’s threshold for a “minimum value” of coverage, the agency said .
As reported previously by Kaiser Health News, insurance analysts were surprised this summer to learn that HHS’ online calculator for determining minimum value approved plans without inpatient benefits.
Responding to aggressive marketing by consultants, numerous lower-wage employers had already agreed to offer the low-cost plans for 2015 or were considering them.
Because a calculator-approved plan at work makes employees ineligible for tax credits to buy more comprehensive insurance in the law’s online marketplaces, consumer advocates feared the problem would trap workers in substandard coverage.
Large employers aren’t required to offer the “essential health benefits” such as hospitalization, physician care and prescriptions that the law orders for plans sold to individuals and smaller employers.
But few expected the official calculator to approve insurance without inpatient benefits. Meeting the minimum-value standard spares employers from penalties of up to $3,120 per worker next year.
HHS also proposed granting temporary relief to employers that have already committed to calculator-approved plans without hospital coverage for 2015. It also would allow workers at those companies to receive tax credits in the marketplaces if they choose to buy insurance there instead.
For 2016, no large-employer plan will meet the minimum-value test without inpatient benefits, HHS proposes.
“A plan that excludes substantial coverage for inpatient hospital and physician services is not a health plan in any meaningful sense and is contrary to the purpose” of the minimum-value standard, the agency said.
“Minimum value is minimum value,” said Timothy Jost, a consumer advocate and Washington and Lee University law professor who welcomed the change. “Nobody ever imagined that minimum value would not include hospitalization services.”
Calculator-tested plans lacking inpatient coverage, designed by Key Benefit Administrators and others, have drawn strong interest from large retailers, restaurant chains, staffing companies and other lower-wage employers seeking to control costs, benefits consultants say. Typically the coverage costs half as much as major-medical insurance including hospital benefits.
The American Worker Plans, an Illinois-based benefits consultant, helped dozens of staffing firms with a total of about 20,000 employees to provide such plans for 2015, said Jon Duczak, the company’s senior vice president. Almost all of them have already signed deals to offer the coverage, he said.
HHS’ move to disallow the insurance “is something I do applaud,” he said. “We were offering a product like this [only] because our clients were asking for it. We needed not only to satisfy our clients but to retain our business.”
Edward Lenz, senior counsel for the American Staffing Association, said the trade group has no problem with requiring hospitalization to meet the minimum-value standard for 2016. But it will seek more leeway for employers that had moved to implement plans without inpatient benefits for 2015.
“Many employers were well along the road” to committing to such plans but delayed signing contracts after Kaiser Health News reported that the administration might move against them, he said. Rather than punishing such companies for their caution, HHS should allow them to temporarily offer such coverage next year, he said.
