Not a Member? Get access to HR news and resources that you can trust.
Standing desks and other innovative workstations can help counterbalance the negative health effects of sitting.
Is your employee handbook ready for the New Year? With SHRM’s Employee Handbook Builder get peace of mind that your handbook is up-to-date.
Get the HR education you need without travel expenses or time out of the office.
Elevate Your Talent Strategy. Join us in Chicago, IL – April 24-26, 2017.
Changing workplace culture, outreach to chronic-condition sufferers could be a better way
An increasing amount of health information has been digitized, aggregated into various demographic categories and then analyzed in an attempt to lower health care costs. In the aggregate, such as through an analysis of health insurance claims, that information can point to workforce issues, such as high diabetes rates, that can be addressed by offering medical compliance support to those with chronic conditions or by changing the workplace culture away from, say, pizza and pastries as the go-to refreshments at meetings.
But when personal health data is collected through individual health screenings, with the results tied to financial incentives—or penalties such as being assessed a higher share of health care premiums—employees may consider this a heavy-handed approach that intrudes on their privacy.
Whether the effort of collecting biometrics such as cholesterol readings and weight measurements from employees—as many employers do—is worth the investment is becoming a more pointed question. For example:
Waterbury, Conn.-based labor attorney Eric Brown said he was recently approached by a man who expressed concern about his wife's health insurance premium being based on participation in her employer's wellness program. Brown said young, healthy individuals aren't particularly apprehensive about sharing such data but he understands the uneasiness of others who fear the inequity over being charged more for not wanting to undergo biometric screenings at work. "Those dollars add up and they matter, particularly for lower-income people."
While Levin-Scherz said the scenario in which an employer uses an individual's data to target him or her in some way is unlikely, the concern among workers is real.
Beyond the risk of antagonizing employees and stoking fears, incentive-based wellness programs may unwittingly and ironically be contributing to growing numbers of "worried well" individuals, leading to overtreatment and higher costs—exactly the opposite of what such screenings are intended to do.
Levin-Scherz noted that two of the usual hallmarks of a workplace wellness biometric screening are cholesterol tests and BMI readings, yet research is emerging that calls the role of both in accurately addressing health status into question.
Vindication for Wellness Gadflies?
Such findings were no surprise to wellness program skeptic Al Lewis, who with Vik Khanna founded the health education platform Quizzify. In an essay the two published in
Health Affairs in 2013, they
estimated that the cost to prevent one heart attack using biometric screening was exorbitant.
"Vik and I posited—and were never rebutted—that it costs about $1 million to prevent a heart attack using biometric screening," Lewis said. "But the elephant in the room is that U.S. Preventive Services Task Force guidelines are quite opposed to annual screenings. Why do something that the leading experts in the field have concluded, quite rightly, is a bad idea?"
Khanna, a trained physician's assistant, said the fetishization of health data and the belief that data can predict disease has been the result of a misdirecting narrative that a technology-loving society has been eager to embrace.
"It plays to people's fears," he said. "The average American worker is in his or her late 30s to early 40s. The vendors play on this fear that you need to be screened
now so you don't get cancer or a heart attack or diabetes that eventually leads to cardiovascular disease and eventually a stroke. What they never tell people is that [the likelihood of those outcomes] is age-related."
[SHRM members-only toolkit:
Designing and Managing Wellness Programs]
Time to Phase Out Incentives?
The rising concern about exactly how accurate and fair the use of individual health data really is might signal a shift in employers' practice away from such a wide net.
"I do think there are some employers who wonder if this is really the best use of a subsidy or premium discount," said Christopher Sears, a partner in the employee benefits group of Indianapolis-based law firm Ice Miller, citing the Pareto principle, the 80-20 rule that postulates 20 percent of a given population usually accounts for 80 percent of costs.
"Could that money better be used to pay a vendor and do a deep dive into the data and target chronic diseases and disease management programs to help the 20 percent manage their disease? They're starting to think they should try to promote prescription compliance and diabetic-diet compliance to try to tackle those larger costs."
Sears noted a more complicated regulatory climate around the programs; for instance, he said the new EEOC rules call for not only an affirmative notice to employees who are contemplating participating in a wellness program but that to get a spouse involved under the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, an employer would need to go further and get affirmative consent.
"I hear employers talking about this," Sears said. "I'm not saying these plans should not be regulated, they should be—but at some point employers will view that regulation as burdensome and say, 'It's really not worth my time or money. I'm just going to charge employees the premium I was going to charge them.' "
[SHRM members-only how-to guide:
How to Establish and Design a Wellness Program]
Culture, Not Carrots and Sticks
The doubts expressed about how useful and fair the collection of all this data really is may present an opportunity for a reboot that could lead to a climate of better education and a healthier work environment.
According to Levin-Scherz,
the trend away from direct incentives targeting the workforce generally can be expected to accelerate in the near future, and company survey data backs that observation up: Of 487 U.S.-based employers surveyed in Willis Towers Watson's 2015-16 Global Staying@Work survey:
Said Khanna, "When you give people support and good information they can trust, they can and do change [to healthier lifestyles] on their own. People migrate across risk categories all the time."
But healthier behavior, "to make a difference, has to be sustained, and it is not likely that one-time, once-a-year payments of relatively small—or even large—amounts of dollars will actually mean a population will weigh less or better control its blood pressure," Levin-Scherz said. "This might not be the best place to promote [the use of] incentives."
Greg Goth is a freelance health and technology writer based in Oakville, Conn.
Related SHRM Articles:
AARP Lawsuit Casts Shadow over Wellness Programs,
SHRM Online Employment Law, October 2016
EEOC Issues Final Rules on Employer Wellness Programs,
SHRM Online Benefits, May 2016
Court: Employers Can Require Health Screenings for Insurance, SHRM Online Benefits, January 2016
Time to Set Limits on Wellness Screenings?,
SHRM Online Benefits, January 2016
Groups Offer Guidance on Biometric Health Screenings,
SHRM Online Benefits, October 2013
Was this article useful? SHRM offers thousands of tools, templates and other exclusive member benefits, including compliance updates, sample policies, HR expert advice, education discounts, a growing online member community and much more.
Join/Renew Now and let SHRM help you work smarter.
You have successfully saved this page as a bookmark.
Please confirm that you want to proceed with deleting bookmark.
You have successfully removed bookmark.
Please log in as a SHRM member before saving bookmarks.
Your session has expired. Please log in again before saving bookmarks.
Please purchase a SHRM membership before saving bookmarks.
An error has occurred
Recommended for you
Exam Late Application Deadline: April 14
SHRM’s HR Vendor Directory contains over 3,200 companies