New Wellness Rules Could Limit Program Effectiveness

by | Sep 4, 2015 | Program Design | 2 comments

Transparency is extremely important to us, so we are letting you know that we may receive a commission on some of links you click on from this page. See our disclaimer.


Former Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN) writes in The Hill that wellness programs are working.

“For many years, U.S. corporations have sponsored wellness programs to incentivize employees to live healthier lives. These programs are the very definition of a ‘win-win' situation: employers get more productive employees and lower health care costs, while employees have the opportunity to improve their health and the health of their families. At the same time, our nation is also a ‘winner,' as these programs lower the overall costs of our health care system.”

“Recently, however, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) proposed a series of rules to further govern corporate wellness programs. Fearing discrimination and potential violations of the American with Disabilities Act, the EEOC issued these rules with what I’m sure are the best of intentions. And, for the most part, their rules do help reinforce many protections currently in place under the ACA. However, it is important that the EEOC does not add any further restrictions beyond what they have already outlined—and that they clarify a few points.”

“I worry that the new rules from the EEOC—at least without further clarification regarding incentive limits and reporting guidelines—could unintentionally limit wellness programs’ effectiveness. The EEOC needs to ensure that their rules would not infringe on the current 30 percent incentive for such programs in order to keep these programs as a viable option for employers. Instead of promoting wellness programs to the fullest extent, the EEOC’s rules could derail years of progress made by employers, employees, and governments nationwide.”

“Employee health is not a zero-sum issue—corporate wellness programs can help employers save money in health care costs while also helping employees live happier, healthier lives. In fact, these programs are part of a growing, and positive, trend towards preventative medicine in our country. As a nation, we should be encouraging these programs, not undermining them.”

Written By Laura McKenzie

undefined

Related Posts

Study: Walking Breaks Add Up

Study: Walking Breaks Add Up

Got a Minute? Actually, Two. Because if you can spare two minutes, you may want to use them on walking breaks. They add up. The Journal of the American Heart Association recently ran a study titled "Moderate‐to‐Vigorous Physical Activity and All‐Cause Mortality: Do...

read more
Walking Meeting: ‘How Fast is Fast Enough?’

Walking Meeting: ‘How Fast is Fast Enough?’

Yesterday we noted that finding opportunities to exercise during the workday can be challenging, but it's a key area of focus for well-run workplace wellness programs. And one of the easier methods: Walking. In particular, the walking meeting. But how fast does one...

read more

2 Comments

  1. Ray Jagger

    Ours at least appears to be a scam designed to move healthcare cost from the employer to the worker. I hope they do some serious work to eliminate or at least limit to no more than ten percent.

  2. Ray Jagger

    A much better plan would be to require them to use positive instead of negative incentives and eliminate that part of the program all together.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This