Skip to comments.Employers shifting health-care costs to workers, survey shows
Posted on 09/02/2010 3:14:14 PM PDT by tobyhill
Amid high unemployment and a weak economy, employers have been shifting health care costs to workers, according to a study released Thursday.
The premiums that employees pay for employer-sponsored family coverage rose an average of 13.7 percent this year, while the amount that employers contribute fell by 0.9 percent, the survey found.
For family coverage, workers are paying an average of $3,997, up $482 from last year, while employers are paying an average of $9,773, down $87, according to the survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation and the Health Research & Educational Trust.
With so many people out of work, employees have little power to demand a better deal, the organizations said.
Overall, premiums for employer-sponsored coverage - the amounts paid by employer and employee combined - rose an average of 3 percent for family coverage and 5 percent for single coverage, the survey found. That was modest by historical standards. But the costs fell disproportionately on employees.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
I want 100% of the cost shifted to me. Divorce it from the employers and let us all fend for ourselves in a free market.
Why shouldn’t people pay for their own health insurance?
Let’s see...... a job or free healthcare hmmmmmmm.......
It should be noted what employer-paid health insurance was meant to be - a perk offered to lure and keep better employees. It was not meant to be a replacement for people paying for their own health care. I don’t see a problem with employers passing along more of the cost. And, no, I’m not an employer.
What I do see a problem with is government overregulation and mandating that private insurance cover x y and z regardless of whether the insured want this or not. It’s a precursor to government-run health care like Canada and Britain which feature waiting lists and (despite their denials) “death panels”.
And this was...lets hear it now...”UNEXPECTED?”
Who knew? (Everyone)
Yeah right. Employers have had this huge pot of money that is not filled because of the labor of their employees. Now they have decided not to dip into this pot to buy health care insurance for workers.
“it’s just not fair we’re not like France”-(best whiny libtard voice)
You guys make too much sense. I suppose you want people to buy their own food as well.
I believe health insurance became an employment benefit during WW2 as a way to circumvent wage restrictions.
Unfortunately by divorcing costs from the user (at both the well off end via employer insurance and at the poor end via government insurance) we lost cost sensitivity.
When I was a kid (50+ yrs ago) the doctor drove a 3 yr old Buick and came to your house if you were sick. Now they drive new Mercedes and see patients occasionally.
I agree with you and the perks are becoming a thing of the past because the Government running wild.
In the days of very low unemployment, employer-paid health insurance was used as an incentive to work for one company over another.
“I want 100% of the cost shifted to me. Divorce it from the employers and let us all fend for ourselves in a free market.”
I agree in theory, just not sure how many folks can absorb a $5-10K expense.
Same here. Give me a medical savings account, and with medical tourism I'll bring down the costs myself. Medical tourism will bring down the cost of healthcare more than anything else will.
So do I; as well as the portion of my "real" salary they held back to pay health care costs. I find that a fare trade.
That won’t work, costs would plummet and insurance companies, phamaceutical companies, doctors, and hosptitals would go out of business!
We can’t have that!
Dr's also use to perform minor surgery in their offices as well. Why do you think they stopped it? Could it be called "liability"? Or greedy patients and their lawyers who wanted to make a fast buck by suing for anything and everything......causing liability insurance rates to go through the roof?
Most Doctors I know ...aren't what you would call "wealthy". They may drive a nice car and have a comfortable house... but after devoting a decade or more to an intensive and very expensive college education...what would you deem an appropriate wage? Do you feel their salaries should be capped.... or let a free market decide?
“I believe health insurance became an employment benefit during WW2 as a way to circumvent wage restrictions.”
...yep...that’s how it started according to my parents who lived thru that era....plus there was a labor shortage during the war, hense health insurance helped a business recruit workers...it was so popular that it became a fixture in American business...but I don’t think anybody ever figured it would balloon out of control like this.
My employer paid for my health insurance 100% (was part of the package).
Now I pay a piddly $50 a paycheck. Big whoop dee doo. I would smack myself upside the head if I EVER dared to complain about that!
If the consumer is insulated from costs via employer or government paid insurance, the free market is distorted.
And yes, tort lawyers add another massive layer of costs. Their standard of living (ex: Breck Girl) dwarfs most physicians.
>>I agree in theory, just not sure how many folks can absorb a $5-10K expense<<
Look at the example in the article. If the employer gave the money to the employee instead the employee wouldn’t be out any money but the employer would not have the hassles. The employee would be much more frugal with the money too.
I was at my doc’s office yesterday. I’ve had no clue which side of the aisle the doc, his two nurses and desk chick belonged to.
So when checking out at the desk they were all standing there and we were talking about Facebook and Obama’s name came up.
Almost in unison they all threw-up their hands and did one of those Archie Bunker “Aw, geez. Did you have to go and bring that guy up?”
I was pleasantly surprised.
What the hell could possibly go wrong?
I don't feel old. I don't feel anything until noon. Then it's time for my nap.
The new message:’Improve’ health care, don’t talk cost
Key White House allies are dramatically shifting their attempts to defend health care legislation, abandoning claims that it will reduce costs and deficit, and instead stressing a promise to “improve it.” The messaging shift was circulated this afternoon on a conference call and PowerPoint presentation organized by FamiliesUSA — one of the central groups in the push for the initial legislation. The call was led by a staffer for the Herndon Alliance, which includes leading labor groups and other health care allies. It was based on polling from three top Democratic pollsters, John Anzalone, Celinda Lake, and Stan Greenberg.
I can’t wait for the rationing they also claimed won’t happen.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.