Find out how HR professionals really felt about the fall of the AHCA in this great article from HR Morning by Tim Gould.
Everybody knows that the GOP’s attempt to repeal and replace Obamacare came to a rather ignominious end. But how did the HR community feel about that outcome?
HR powerhouse Mercer addressed that question in a recent webcast, and the results were eye-opening.
Here are some stats from the webcast, which asked a couple key questions of 509 benefits pros.
On how they felt about the American Health Care Act being pulled:
So (utilizing our super-sharp math skills here) considerably more than half of the participants were not in favor of the AHCA, while just slightly more than one in five were disappointed it was shot down. Looks like Obamacare isn’t as deeply disliked as we’ve been led to believe — at least with benefits pros.
Mercer also asked participants to rate priorities for improving current healthcare law — using 5 as the top rating and 1 as the lowest. Those results:
Perspective? As Beth Umland wrote on the Mercer blog, “Policymakers should view this health reform ‘reboot’ as an opportunity to partner with American businesses to drive higher quality, lower costs, and better outcomes for all Americans.”
In case you’ve been hiding in a cave somewhere for the past several months, here’s a quick recap of the fate of the American Health Care Act.
Why did the AHCA fail, despite Republicans controlling the House, Senate and White House?
The answer starts with the fact that the GOP didn’t have the 60 seats in the Senate to avoid a filibuster by the Democrats. In other words, despite being the majority party, it didn’t have enough votes to pass a broad ACA repeal bill outright.
As a result, Senate Republicans had to use a process known as reconciliation to attempt to reshape the ACA. Reconciliation is a process that allows for the passage of budget bills with 51 votes instead of 60. So the GOP could vote on budgetary pieces of the health law, without giving the Democrats a chance to filibuster.
The problem for Republicans was reconciliation severely limited the extent to which they could reshape the law — and it’s a big reason the why American Health Care Act looked, at least to some, like “Obamacare Lite.”
Ultimately, what caused Trump and Ryan to decide to pull the bill before the House had a chance to vote on it was that so many House Republicans voiced displeasure with the bill and said they wouldn’t vote for it.
Specifically, here are some of what conservatives didn’t like about the American Health Care Act:
See the original article Here.
Gould T. (2017 April 14). Hr pros were relieved when obamacare replacement bill got pulled Ob[Web blog post]. Retrieved from address http://www.hrmorning.com/hr-pros-were-relieved-when-obamacare-replacement-bill-got-pulled-off-the-table/
Do you know what is needed to attract new talent to your company? Here’s a great article from SHRM about 5 trends that new hires are looking for in 2017 by Shonna Waters & Alex Alonso
Waters S., Alonso A. (2017 January 5). Five trends in talent [Web blog post]. Retrieved from address http://blog.shrm.org/blog/five-trends-in-talent
Great article from the Kaiser Family Foundation about Americans thoughts on ACA repeal by Ashley Kirzinger, Bryan Wu, and Mollyann Brodie
The latest Kaiser Health Tracking Poll finds health care among the top issues Americans want President-elect Donald Trump and the next Congress to address in 2017. When asked which issue they would most like the next administration to act on in 2017, one-fourth of the public mention the economy and jobs (24 percent), followed by immigration (20 percent), and health care (19 percent). Among Democrats and independents, the economy and jobs is the top issue (23 percent and 24 percent, respectively) while the top issues for Republicans are immigration (30 percent) and economy and jobs (29 percent). Among all partisans, health care ranks among the top three issues that the public wants the next administration to act on in 2017.
The top issue for voters who supported President-elect Donald Trump are similar to those among Republicans: economy and jobs (31 percent) and immigration (31 percent), followed closely by health care (27 percent).
When asked to mention which health care issue they would most like President-elect Trump and the next Congress to act on in 2017, about one-third of the public mention the Affordable Care Act (ACA) but attitudes are mixed between wanting the next administration to act on repealing the 2010 health care law (14 percent), improving/fixing the law (11 percent), or keeping/expanding the law (8 percent).
When asked about a series of health care priorities for President-elect Trump and the next Congress to act on, repealing the ACA falls behind other health care priorities. Two-thirds of the public (67 percent) say lowering the amount individuals pay for health care should be a “top priority” for President-elect Trump and the next Congress. This is followed by six in ten (61 percent) who say lowering the cost of prescription drugs should be a “top priority,” and nearly half (45 percent) who say dealing with the prescription pain killer addiction epidemic should be a “top priority.”
Smaller shares say repealing the 2010 health care law (37 percent), decreasing how much the federal government spends on health care over time (35 percent), and decreasing the role of the federal government in health care (35 percent) should be top priorities.
While about two-thirds of Democrats, Republicans, and independents say lowering the amount individuals pay for health care should be a “top priority,” partisans differ in how they prioritize other health care issues. Most notably, while 63 percent of Republicans say repealing the 2010 health care law should be a top priority – this view is shared by much smaller shares of independents (32 percent) and Democrats (21 percent). Similarly, Republicans (50 percent) are more likely than independents (34 percent) or Democrats (26 percent) to place a top priority on decreasing the role of the federal government in health care. By contrast, Democrats and independents are somewhat more likely than Republicans to place a top priority on lowering the cost of prescription drugs (67 percent, 61 percent, and 55 percent, respectively) and on dealing with the epidemic of prescription painkiller addiction (51 percent, 46 percent, and 39 percent, respectively).
Lowering out-of-pocket health care costs is a top priority for Americans, and this was also a campaign promise from Donald Trump during his 2016 presidential campaign. When asked how confident they are in President-elect Trump’s ability to deliver on this campaign promise that Americans will get better health care at a lower cost than they pay now, Americans are split with similar shares saying they are either “not too confident” or “not at all confident” (51 percent) as saying they are “very confident” or “somewhat confident” (47 percent).
Confidence in President-elect Trump’s promise that Americans will get better health care at a lower cost is largely divided by party identification and 2016 vote choice with nearly nine in ten Republicans (85 percent) and Trump voters (86 percent) saying they are either “very” or “somewhat” confident in the next administration’s ability to deliver on this campaign promise. This is compared to 81 percent of Democrats and 86 percent of Clinton voters who say they are either “not too confident” or “not at all confident” that the next president will deliver on this promise.
Throughout the 2016 presidential election, it became clear that the two major political parties in the U.S. have competing views on the future of health care. When given two competing approaches to the future of health care, six in ten Americans (62 percent) prefer “guaranteeing a certain level of health coverage and financial help for seniors and lower-income Americans, even if it means more federal health spending and a larger role for the federal government” while about one-third (31 percent) prefer “limiting federal health spending, decreasing the federal government’s role, and giving state governments and individuals more control over health insurance, even if this means some seniors and lower-income Americans would get less financial help than they do today.”
There are also partisan differences, with about half of Republicans (53 percent) preferring the approach that Republican leaders have coalesced around – limiting federal health spending, decreasing the federal government’s role, and giving states and individuals more control; this approach is preferred by much smaller shares of independents (27 percent) and Democrats (15 percent). The majority of Democrats (79 percent) and independents (65 percent) prefer guaranteeing a certain level of coverage for seniors and lower-income Americans – even if it means a larger role for the federal government and increased federal spending.
The future of the Affordable Care Act has been at the forefront of the political agenda since the 2016 election with President-elect Trump and Republican lawmakers in Congress saying they will quickly move to repeal the health care law in 2017. The latest survey finds public opinion towards the law is divided with similar shares of the public saying they have an unfavorable opinion (46 percent) as say they have a favorable opinion (43 percent) of the law, which is largely stable from previous months.
As Congressional lawmakers make plans for the future of the ACA, the latest Kaiser Health Tracking survey finds that – similar to overall attitudes towards the law – the public is also divided on what they would like lawmakers to do when it comes to the 2010 health care law.
Overall, 49 percent of the public think the next Congress should vote to repeal the law and 47 percent say they should not vote to repeal it. Of those who want to see Congress vote to repeal the law, a larger share say they want lawmakers to wait to vote on repeal until the details of a replacement plan have been announced (28 percent) than say Congress should vote to repeal the law immediately and work out the details of a replacement plan later (20 percent).
The survey examines the malleability of attitudes towards Congress repealing the health care law and finds that both supporters and opponents of Congress voting to repeal the law can be persuaded after hearing counter-messages. After hearing pro-repeal arguments, the share of the public supporting repeal can grow to as large as 60 percent, while counter-messages against repeal can decrease support to 27 percent.
Among those who originally said Congress should not vote to repeal the 2010 health care law, about one-fifth (22 percent) change their opinion after hearing that some consumers around the country have seen large increases in the cost of their health insurance – which is similar to the share who shifted their opinion after hearing that the country cannot afford the cost of providing financial help to individuals to purchase health insurance.
On the other side of the debate, some of those who originally said they support Congress voting to repeal the health care law are also persuaded by hearing arguments often made by opponents of the repeal efforts. The survey finds that a share shifts their opinion after hearing that some people with pre-existing conditions would no longer be able to get health coverage and after hearing that some of the roughly 20 million Americans who got health insurance as a result of the law would lose their coverage.
Overall, large shares of Americans say their own health care will “stay about the same” if lawmakers vote to repeal the 2010 health care law. More than half of Americans say the quality of their own health care (57 percent) and their own ability to get and keep health insurance (55 percent) will stay about the same if the law is repealed. Fewer (43 percent) say the cost of health care for them and their family will stay about the same if the law is repealed. In each of these cases, about equal shares believe their own situation will get better as say it will get worse.
After being read a definition of “pre-existing condition,” just over half (56 percent) of U.S. adults say that they or someone in their household would be considered to have such a condition. Overall, these individuals are more likely than those without a pre-existing condition to say their access, quality, and cost of health care will get “worse” if the ACA is repealed. However, about one in five of these individuals say their access, quality, and cost of health care will get “better” if the ACA is repealed.
One-third of individuals who have someone in their household with a pre-existing condition say the cost of health care for them and their family will get worse if the ACA is repealed, compared to about one in five of those living in a household without someone with a pre-existing condition. Larger shares of those with a pre-existing condition also say their ability to get and keep health insurance will get worse than those without a pre-existing condition (24 percent vs. 17 percent), and the quality of their own health care will get worse (21 percent vs. 15 percent).
In addition, individuals with a pre-existing condition in their household also report being more worried about health-care related issues than those without a pre-existing condition. Slightly more than half (54 percent) of those with a pre-existing condition say they are either “very worried” or “somewhat worried” about not being able to afford the health care services they need, compared to 43 percent of those without a pre-existing condition. Similarly, 43 percent of those with a pre-existing condition are worried (either “very” or “somewhat”) about losing their health insurance compared to 30 percent of those without a pre-existing condition.
The latest Kaiser Health Tracking Poll finds President-elect Donald Trump’s transition and cabinet appointments was the most closely followed news story during the past month with seven in ten (68 percent) Americans closely following news about his transition. Other stories that captured the attention of Americans include the conflict involving ISIS in Mosul, Iraq (64 percent), the CIA’s report of Russia interfering in the 2016 presidential election (64 percent), and the top health policy story this month – Republican plans to repeal the ACA (63 percent). Other health policy stories followed by Americans this month include the ongoing heroin and prescription painkiller addiction epidemic in the U.S. (57 percent), Republican plans for the future of Medicare (51 percent), and the passing of the 21st Century Cures Act (37 percent).
See the original article and charts Here.
Krizinger A., Wu B., Brodie M. (2017 January 06). Kaiser health tracking poll: health care priorities [Web blog post]. Retrieved from address http://kff.org/health-costs/poll-finding/kaiser-health-tracking-poll-health-care-priorities-for-2017/
The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) recently released statistics on work-related injuries and illnesses in 2014. According to the BLS, two key factors are used to measure the severity of these injuries and illnesses:
* Incidence rate: The number of cases, per 10,000 full-time employees, of injuries and illnesses that require time away from work.
* Average days away from work: The average number of days an employee spends away from work to recover from an injury or illness. The BLS found that the overall incidence rate of nonfatal occupational injury and illness cases in 2014 was 107.1, down from a rate of 109.4 in 2013. The number of days away from work was approximately the same in both years. Additionally, the BLS detailed the most common workplace injuries and illnesses, as well as the most commonly affected parts of the body.
Common Injuries and Illnesses
Sprains, strains and tears were the most common workplace injury in 2014. The incidence rate for these injuries was approximately 38.9 cases per 10,000 full-time employees, which represents a decrease from 2013’s rate of 40.2 cases. However, these are still significant injuries; on average, workers with sprains, strains or tears needed 10 days away from work to recover.
The statistics also show that soreness and pain were common injuries, but generally required fewer days away from work.
Commonly Affected Parts of the Body
The upper extremities (e.g., hands, shoulders) were most affected by injuries and illnesses in 2014, with an incidence rate of 32. Hands accounted for 40 percent of those cases, the most among upper extremities. However, shoulder injuries and illnesses required an average of 26 days away from work to recover, more than any other part of the body.
The BLS specifically noted that musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) accounted for 32 percent of all workplace-related injuries and illnesses in 2014. Although the incident rate of MSDs was lower than it had been in 2013, these injuries can affect employees in any industry.
For more information on preventing workplace injuries and illnesses, contact Hierl Insurance Inc. today.
Great article from our partner, United Benefit Advisors (UBA) by
Recent research into individuals’ financial resolutions for 2017 can tell you whether your financial wellness initiatives are giving employees what they want. It can also tell you whether to expect employees to increase their retirement contributions next year.
Personal finance company LendEDU recently asked 1,001 Americans about their financial goals for 2017, as well as what their biggest concerns are. The results were published in LendEDU’s “Financial Resolution Survey & Report 2017,” which can help employers determine if their financial programs are on point.
Here are some of the more interesting Q&A’s from the research:
What’s your most important financial resolution in 2017?
Takeaway for employers: Improving savings should be front and center in any financial wellness strategy.
What’s your top financial resolution?
Takeaway for employers: Employees need the most help creating a budget they can stick to.
What’s your top financial concern?
Takeaway for employers: Helping employees manage healthcare costs can be a key add-on to any financial education program.
Do you think you’re better off financially in 2017 than in 2016?
Takeaway for employers: Employees’ financial state of mind is on the upswing, which is good. But it could make increasing participation in wellness initiatives more challenging.
Do you make financial resolutions with your spouse or significant other?
Takeaway for employers: When it comes to finances, very few people go it alone, so invite spouses to be a part of your wellness offerings.
What would make you stick to a financial resolution?
Takeaway for employers: Incremental rewards and incentives, can help drive participation and success in 2017 financial wellness initiatives.
Do you think you’ll increase your retirement savings contributions this year?
Takeaway for employers: This could be a good year to really push employees to bump up retirement plan contributions.
Author (Date). Title [Web blog post]. Retrieved from address http://www.hrmorning.com/financial-wellness-heres-what-employees-want-need-in-2017/
Great article from our partner, United Benefit Advisors (UBA) by Jason Reeves
Our 2016 Health Plan Survey results are in and as our preliminary findings indicated, while employer costs remained steady, employees continue to take on more cost for coverage. With PPO deductibles rising 50 percent, UBA finds that consumer-directed health plans (CDHPs) continue to increase in popularity even though they are offering less savings than a year ago. Our newly released 2016 Health Plan Survey Executive Summary finds 26.4 percent of all U.S. employees are now enrolled in CDHP plans, an increase of 21.7 percent from last year and nearly 70 percent from five years ago.
Conversely, CDHP costs have risen 2 percent from last year. So while they are still 3.5 percent less costly than the average plan, they offered more savings in 2015 when they were 5.6 percent less than the average plan.
“CDHP interest among employers isn’t surprising given these plans’ savings over the average plan,” says Les McPhearson, CEO of UBA. “Employees typically pick up 32 percent of the cost, slightly below the 35 percent average employee contribution rate among all plans, making them an attractive choice for many employees as well. But like all cost benchmarks, plan design plays a major part in understanding value.”
Looking at prevalence of CDHPs, the UBA survey finds that 25.7 percent of plans offered by employers are CDHPs, a 14.2 percent increase in the last five years. Regionally, however, there are major differences in CDHP popularity.
UBA’s survey finds CDHPs account for the following percentage of plans offered by employers:
Read our breaking news release for full coverage regional trends, especially the unique plan shift happening in the West, particularly California.
For information on the regions, industries and group sizes driving the move to CDHPs (as well as those resisting these plans), be sure to download UBA’s 2016 Health Plan Survey Executive Summary, a free publication detailing all the comprehensive survey findings.
Employers can also request a custom benchmarking report comparing your specific premiums, contributions, copays, deductibles, etc., to national and regional averages within your industry and group size.
Reeves, J. (2016 October 20 ). Survey: enrollment in consumer-directed health plans jumps 22 percent despite increase in plan cost [Web blog post]. Retrieved from address http://blog.ubabenefits.com/survey-enrollment-in-consumer-directed-health-plans-jumps-22-percent-despite-increase-in-plan-costs
Great article from Benefits Pro by Gil Lowerre and Bonnie Brazzell
A recent Eastbridge survey of employers found that the use of private exchanges continues to be minimal among all size categories and that a positive correlation remains between use and employer size (with use increasing as employer size increases). Many times, it is the broker who influences these employers to adopt the exchange model, and to offer more options to their employees or to move to a defined contribution approach.
Since brokers are often the ones suggesting an exchange for their clients, it makes sense that most employers (74 percent) continue to use a broker for their employee benefits after implementing a private exchange. Only 19 percent of the employers no longer utilize broker services.
While use has been low, employers that have implemented an exchange believe their employees’ experience with the private exchange has been positive. Forty percent indicated the experience was not only positive, but easier than previous enrollments, and 52 percent said it was positive, but not significantly different from previous enrollment.
The survey also pointed to future interest by employers in private exchanges. Over one-quarter of the employers that are not using a private exchange today are open to using this concept in the future, and another one-quarter are still undecided.
Whether or not to offer a private exchange is a decision that should be based on many factors. Nonetheless, it is important for brokers to at least consider broaching the subject with employer clients — or risk the chance that some other broker will. The fact that most employers rate the exchange process positively should provide comfort to those considering this approach to benefits.
Lowerre, G. & Brazzell, B. (2016 November 02). Employers rate private exchanges positively, but use is still low. [Web blog post]. Retrieved from address http://www.benefitspro.com/2016/11/02/employers-rate-private-exchanges-positively-but-us
Do you know what millennials are looking for in the workplace? Travel and flexibility are among the top 2 as mentioned in the article below by Marlenen Y. Satter.
Original Article Posted on BenefitsPro.com
Posted: October 7, 2016
Millennials have itchy feet.
In fact, their desire to see faraway places is their main reason to work — after, of course, paying basic necessities. According to FlexJobs survey, a hefty 70 percent of millennials say their “overwhelming desire to travel” is their main motivation on the job — that’s just a tad less than the 88 percent who cite that basic motivator: necessities.
Gen X respondents are fond of travel too, but not as much as millennials; 60 percent ranked it as the fourth most important reason for working. And boomers are apparently settling down; just 47 percent ranked travel as fifth in importance.
Not only are millennials wanderers, they want flexibility — up to a point. Freelance work seems to be going farther than they’d like (particularly since at least some of that “flexibility” is really out of a freelancer’s control and in the hands of clients).
Although millennials tend to be more associated with freelance work than other generations, only 42 percent of millennials are open to freelancing as a flexible work arrangement.
Gen Xers actually view freelance work more favorably than millennials, with 47 percent willing to consider it. Forty-four percent of boomers also expressed interest in freelancing.
Flexibility, on the other hand, is important enough to millennials that 82 percent say it’s a factor in evaluating a potential job, and 34 percent have actually left a job because it did not have work flexibility. In addition, 82 percent say they’d be more loyal to an employer if they had flexible work options.
Yet, although they’re the ones most interested in flexibility, millennials are also the generation most required to be at the office to work than older generations: 34 percent, compared with Gen Xers at 26 percent and boomers at 19 percent. Their work schedule — part of that flexibility — is also important to more millennials (65 percent) than it is to Gen Xers (57 percent) or to boomers (62 percent).
Interestingly, though, none of the generations regard the office during traditional working hours as their location of choice for optimum productivity.
See the Original Article Here.
Satter, M.Y. (2016, October 7) Travel is millennials’ work incentive [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://www.benefitspro.com/2016/10/07/travel-is-millennials-work-incentive?ref=hp-top-stories
Wisconsin manufacturers make some of the coolest products on Earth. Take the quiz below from the Coolest Thing Made in Wisconsin competition.
Test your knowledge of state products and where they are made from the nominees for the Coolest Thing Made in Wisconsin competition, sponsored by WMC, Wisconsin’s chamber of commerce, and Johnson Financial Group.
Get the Answers here.
How are you handling the rising cost of prescriptions? Find out what the trends are and how other employers are handling increasing costs from the UBA Health Plan Survey.
Original Post from UBABenefits.com on July 21, 2016 by Bill Olson, Chief Marketing Officer at UBA.
The Latest UBA Survey data shows employers are flocking to two strategies to control rising prescription drug costs: moving to blended copay/coinsurance models vs. copay only, and adding tiers to the prescription drug plans. Almost half (48.9%) of prescription drug plans utilize three tiers (generic, formulary brand, and non-formulary brand), 4.3% retain a two-tier plan, and 44.1% offer four tiers or more. The number of employers offering drug plans with four tiers or more increased 34% from 2014 to 2015. The fourth tier (and additional tiers) pays for biotech drugs, which are the most expensive. By segmenting these drugs into another category with significantly higher copays, employers are able to pass along a little more of the cost of these drugs to employees. Over the last two years, the number of plans with four or more tiers grew 58.1%, making this a rapidly growing strategy to control costs.
Employers with 1 to 99 employees have been driving the trend to adopt prescription drug plans with four or more tiers. In three years, plans with four or more tiers increased approximately 60% among these groups, making this the top cost-containment strategy for small employers, who make up the backbone of America.
Even the largest employers (1,000+ employees), 81% of which historically have offered plans with two or three tiers, have seen a 12.9% decrease in these plans as they, too, migrate to plans with four or more tiers (albeit more slowly).
The construction, mining and retail industries have also been steadily leading the migration to plans with four or more tiers over the last three years, and in the latest UBA survey, 47.5%, 53.2% and 46.3% of their respective plans fall in this category. But this year, the utilities industry has made a more sudden switch, with 58.3% of those plans now consisting of four or more tiers, leapfrogging its perennial tier-climbing peers. This is a significant jump, considering nearly 20% of plans in the utilities industry were still two-tier plans just three years ago—far more two-tier plans than any other industry group at that time. However, this wasn’t a total surprise since, in the 2014 survey year, the industry had an above-average amount of three-tier plans (65.9% vs. an average of 57.1%).
The education and manufacturing industries are more reluctant to shift to plans with four or more tiers. Over the last three years those industries have maintained the highest amounts of three-tier plans, and in the latest survey, 52.8% of their plans remain at three tiers.
Two-tier plans are becoming nearly as rare as single-tier plans, shrinking 45% to 4.3% of all prescription plans in three years. Agriculture has the most holdouts, with 14.8% of plans still comprised of one or two tiers.
Regionally, the East Central U.S. has been leading the migration to plans with four or more tiers for the last three years, followed by North Central and Southeast employers. In the 2015 survey year, Southeast employers eclipsed East Central employers with 60.7% of their plans with four or more tiers.
Strangely enough, East Central and Southeast employers have the lowest percentage of three-tier plans (34.3% and 34.1%, respectively) but the highest percentage of single-tier plans (4.7% and 4.2%, respectively). Other Western employers (excluding California) also have below-average three-tier plans (40.6%), above-average four-tier plans (49.1%) and above-average (10.2%) one- to two-tier plans.
California employers have the most two-tier plans (22.9% vs. the average of 4.3%) which, although still off the charts, represents a 20% decline from the previous survey year.
Mid-Atlantic and New England employers have had the most three-tier plans for the last three years, making them the top resisters of plans with four or more tiers over time.
For more information on prescription drug trends, including the companies making an early leap to five-tier plans, download UBA’s free (no form!) publication: Special Report: Trends in Prescription Drug Benefits.
Olson, B (2016, July 21). See which employers are aggressively increasing Rx tiers for cost savings [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://blog.ubabenefits.com/see-which-employers-are-aggressively-increasing-rx-tiers-for-cost-savings