Carrie and I were watching the Today Show this morning and were shocked to hear a preview of an upcoming story where an employer will start penalizing their employees for leading what the deemed to be "an unhealthy lifestyle."
Imagine our shock when we heard this company was in Indiana.
Imagine our outright disbelief when we found out that this is the same company that my mother works for.
Clarian Health is going to start docking their workers up to $30 every two weeks for 'failing to meet health standards set by the company'. Things like high cholesterol, high body mass index, smoking, high blood pressure, and high blood sugar will result in fines for employees that can total close to $800 a year. My jaw was on the floor when I heard this. My disbelief turned to anger when smug CEO Daniel Evans tried to defend his position. The thinking is the age-old 'why should I have to pay for someone else's care.' We've heard that one before, for sure.
So let me get this straight; my mother who has survived cancer, has a history of high blood pressure and cholesterol in her family and who most importantly has put in over 25 years of good service to Clarian (heck, she was there before it was even Clarian) is going to be penalized for the way she lives her life? I talked to mom this morning and she said they are still working out the details concerning how employees will be penalized if they are seeking treatment for said health problems or have a family history of them. But doing that reeks of discrimination.
I can hear the opposition now "it's Carian's right to run their business however they want to." Bullshit. Are corporate rights more important than your right to privacy? Where does it stop? Does Clarian have the right to penalize employees for speeding? attending loud rock concerts? flying? having unprotected sex?
A solution offered by some might be for my mom to just get another job. If she's unhappy she can do something about it, right? Suggesting so is compassionless. Like I said she's been at her job for a long, long time and has been a good employee for them. Asking her to get another job having no college degree and getting along in years (sorry Mom! hehe) is out of the question.
All this boils down to is a corporation looking to make some money off of their employees because they hate having to pay for health care. And the biggest irony of all is I see their point, they shouldn't have to pay for their employee's health care and with a public health care system intact we wouldn't have to worry about numbers-crunchers whose job it is to save money making decisions about our health.
********
In a somewhat related story, because of my recent car troubles I've been researching purchasing a new vehicle lately and in doing so came across a very interesting article. It seems that GM has to add $1,500 to the price of every car to cover health costs of employees. Again, public health care could do nothing but help this problem and perhaps strengthen our American car companies.
A Disgusting Display of Greed
About this entry
Youre currently reading A Disgusting Display of Greed.
- Published:
- at 9:23 AM on Friday, August 10, 2007
- Previous:
- Older Post
- Next:
- Newer Post
-
12:10 PM
Are you talking about Clarian management that put a McDonald's in Riley Hospital for Children whose main customers are Clarian employees and not sick children on special diets? Clarian who charges staff for any health advantage program offered who said they've given us lots of chances to do right and use their programs? Oh yeah that's who I work for.
- 4:28 PM
-
7:30 PM
I'd like to see what their "health standards" say about the relative health risks of smoking, extreme sports -- there's absolutely NO objective way to enumerate a universal, comprehensive "health index" for individuals.
Hello, ACLU? I've got a corporation full of employees who spend more than 1/3 of their waking time working for a company in teeny tiny office spaces, limited to seated work who wants to penalize them for failing to meet health standards which largely work against said standards. Yeah, and we discourage them from participating in our sponsored health promotion programs by charging them and then we fine them for being unhealthy. Do you think we're in any way liable or discriminatory?
I'm aghast. I can't believe there is any way this will fly. I'd like to know whether any of the worker classifications are union members? In many places, nurses are unionized---seems like such organizations might have some leverage in this instance.
This is kind of giving me the heebie jeebies; in 1990, the state of Florida successfully sued major tobacco interests for restitution of health costs attributed to illness related to smoking among persons who were unable to pay and therefore those costs were borne by the state. You all probably know that several other states followed suit (pardon pun) until finally the Feds stepped in and directed tobacco manufacturers to provide the same support to all state governments and to take serious and dramatic action to inform consumers of the health risks of using tobacco products and to also support smoking cessation programs and education. Those rulings cost the tobacco industry big bucks; none of which got to the primary care provider community... I would suspect that this current effort by Clarian is a result of many, many health care corporations trying to figure out how to get a piece of the action. I can't believe they would chose to begin with their own employees.
OK, I know we just did the whole private insurance thing. I'll stop. Clearly there's a really, really big problem here. Seems like the only folks doing well on this score are the corporate bigs. I haven't noticed the tobacco industry faltering, have you? Hospital CEOs? Doing pretty well. Loyal employees? You just never know, do you? -
8:47 PM
Amen! One of my favorite sayings..."Gaze fondly upon today for tomorrow is bound to suck worse." I'm not a pessimist, just been around the block and know how Corporate America works. Every day people work their ass off and end up with nothing to show for it in the so-called Golden Years. Lyman, maybe you should run for office!
Trish
P.S. Miss You! -
9:41 AM
Oh, and I should add that the finding of GM passing on health care costs for its employees to the consumer makes it absolutely certain I'll never buy another GM product. A responsible corporation would consider the costs of health insurance to be part of the price doing business. To expect the consumer to bear that cost if patent bullshit.
-
11:54 AM
Aloha KeAlii: I did read the story on my morning program and the fact that it's based in Indiana. I had no idea that this is the same company Donna works for. The days of company loyalty and respect for employees are gone. Bottom line is all that counts. The good news is that she has value in the medical field. She can take her talents elsewhere. Please give her my best.
and my love to you, Carrie and MILO!!
(. . . by the way - did you receive the DVD?) -
9:05 AM
I read an article on this in the Indy Star recently and was shocked. I used to work with people with disabilities, and it is the employee's right to disclose or not disclose their disability or health condition. I'm afraid what impact this would have on Clarian employees with disabilities and health conditions that they have no control over. Seems like employee discrimination to me.
-
1:46 PM
Yes, Lyman, Mr. Evans is a smug, pencil-dicked, corporate hound. He's been shuffling around the law firm/political scene in Indy since the 1970s.
On a completely urelated topic, go see "Talk to Me." Think I saw the one of the 2007 Oscar performances. Chedle is awesome...as is the supporting case...particularly the actor who plays Dewey Hughes. Anxious to hear what you think.
So glad you had such a wonderful time in Paradise...and thanks for posting the pictures.
Love you & Carrie and Mr. Milo (and Murphy too, of course).
PS: Joyce Ann and Rudy have a new puppy Pebbles..gets a bath weekly so she won't mess like a dog...LOL. Shitsu. Nikki's moving into a condo next month...she's excited!!
8 comments: