It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

How did we ever get to the point that employers were expected to pay for your health insurance?

page: 1
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 07:39 PM
link   
How did it ever become expected of employers to provide their workers insurance of any kind? It doesnt really benefit the business, it is just an expense. I think companies should stop subsidizing their workers health insurance premiums.

Maybe if people had to pay for their own insurance the cost would go down because they might take more time to find a cheaper alternative to solve whatever health problem they might have.

This could be the solution that will really lower health care costs, as opposed to Nationalized Healthcare.

People really need to stop looking to everyone else to take care of them and become more self-reliant.




posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 07:51 PM
link   
reply to post by grapesofraft
 


Well, as an employer who has ALWAYS provided full healthcare benefits to their employees, I beg to differ.

Companies should be the ones providing health care or providing it at reduced rates. My company does well, pretty darn well actually, and I have never had a problem providing these things, even when I was just starting out.

The problem with self reliance is that companies would rather deal with a company when it's insuring people, than the actual individual. It reduces paper costs and headaches when it comes to filing for benefits and coverage.

And nationalized health care is not bad. It's just a matter of how you set it up. Sure there are some horror stories, but nothing's perfect. I live in Canada and have NEVER had a problem with the healthcare system, if I did, I can ALWAYS pay for better service through other means.

And I have a child whose medical bills would total over 50K a year without my government healthcare program.

~Keeper



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 07:55 PM
link   
I didn't think companies had to pay health insurance for anybody. I have had many jobs and they didn't have health insurance and the last job I had stopped paying for it just before they hired me...



PEACE!!!



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 07:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Lichter daraus
 


You are correct they dont have to, but many companies are expected to or are looked down upon if they dont and I wonder why that is or how it came about? A good example is how everyone used to complain about Wal-Mart not providing health insurance for most of its employees.

[edit on 7/31/2009 by grapesofraft]



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 07:59 PM
link   
You can bet it wasn't the milk of human kindness that motivated most corporations to offer health insurance. It was, for most companies, a way of making their jobs more attractive to potential employees.

During this time of high unemployment, the notion of employers being anxious to find workers may sound strange, but often there is more demand for workers than there are workers. So, companies have to compete during such times. One benefit is to offer health insurance. One advantage of health insurance is the employers get a tax break. In the olden days (not all that long ago), healthcare wasn't the hot steaming mess it is now. Expenses weren't completely out of control with profiteering pharma. Companies could actually *afford* to pay the insurance rates.

Things have changed now. Jobs are scarce; insurance is astronomical. But it wasn't always like this.



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 08:02 PM
link   
well geee...wow. it was intended as a benefit to get employees to want to work for you. and there were mutual benefits to be had from this....group rate discounts, happy employees, and the like. unfortunately, our entire system kind of developed around this and there really aren't many if any ways around this. the vast majority of insured people in this country get that insurance either from their employer or the horrible socialist programs known as medicare and medicaid.

the elimination of this benefit or parts thereof by most employers when the costs started spinning out of control (about the time illegal immigration started jacking those costs up by my best estimate, compounded by the ridiculous rates the insurance companies started charging self-insurers and those with smaller businesses ) is what has compounded if not outright caused a great part of the horrific situation we're in today. again, there is simply no alternative for many people today that is not cost prohibitive.

another thing that hurt the employee is that no one like a union was really around anymore to go to bat for them. decisions to eliminate or reduce the benefit were made by bean counters with absolutely no regard for humans and no care for the intangible ramifications.

to the op, i ask, what do you see or propose as a way around this? what happens when the benefit is completely eliminated? you don't really state any sort of real world solution proposal here.

[edit on 31-7-2009 by ~Lucidity]

[edit on 31-7-2009 by ~Lucidity]



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 08:02 PM
link   
YOU NEED to read up on the history of the labour movement.

If you are going to sacrifice a third of your life on this planet to make some corporate schmucks rich you better damn well fight for every perk and privilege you can squeeze out of them before they squeeze the life out of you.

Or can your labour be had that cheap?



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 08:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by grapesofraft
reply to post by Lichter daraus
 

A good example is how everyone used to complain about Wal-Mart not providing health insurance for most of its employees.
[edit on 7/31/2009 by grapesofraft]


Well that's because Wal Mart is one of the richest companies in the world and still pays minimum wage, gets their products from sweat shops and doesn't provide ANY benefits for it's employees.

Don't you see a problem with that?

~Keeper



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 08:03 PM
link   
reply to post by chiron613
 


Thanks for your reply. That is what I kind of thought that it was either that or driven by unions demanding their employees get health care coverage for free.



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 08:05 PM
link   
reply to post by ~Lucidity
 


Thanks for asking my opinion on working around this. I believe that individuals should take responsibility for their own needs, including health care insurance. Maybe their companies could afford to pay them more if they were not paying out so much for insurance.



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 08:06 PM
link   
reply to post by grapesofraft
 


Well I will agree that employers should not foot the WHOLE bill. That simply makes no sense.

I have payroll deductions when employees want our coverage, they pay a fee of 25$ bi-monthly for families, and a fee of 10$ for single employees.

~Keeper



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 08:06 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


Actually I dont see a problem with that. They have consumers who want the best price for what they buy and Wal-Mart does a fine job of doing that as well as making a tidy profit for their shareholders. Isnt that how capitalism is supposed to work?

If people dont like the benefits or working conditions they are free to look for a job that more suits their desires.

[edit on 7/31/2009 by grapesofraft]



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 08:09 PM
link   
reply to post by grapesofraft
 


I suppose it came about because it entices people to actually wanna work there. I hate working for any company that doesn't provide, but since things are the way they are I cant really afford to be picky.



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 08:11 PM
link   
reply to post by grapesofraft
 


I don't agree unfortunetly.

I don't think it's right that a company can be super succesfull and not reward the people who make it possible. The EMPLOYEES.

At the end of the day, it's them who make that business work.

~Keeper



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 08:14 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


Oh cmon lets be realistic. Most of the jobs at Wal-Mart could be handled by a child or a well trained monkey. The truth is that if these people had any valuable skills they probably wouldnt be working at Wal-Mart.

The people that make Wal-Mart succesful are the well paid people that manage the stores and that decide logistics and ways to cut costs by still delivering the products people seek.



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by grapesofraft
reply to post by ~Lucidity
 


Thanks for asking my opinion on working around this. I believe that individuals should take responsibility for their own needs, including health care insurance. Maybe their companies could afford to pay them more if they were not paying out so much for insurance.


how though? there is currently no alternative the average person can afford...as is evident by the increasing number of uninsured. the cost structures foisted upon the insured always benefits groups over individuals. again, it's the model in this country. and it's always been a nightmare for the self-employed and smaller business owner to afford coverage. however, i've been noticing a trend away from this model and perhaps that's something that will get better in time if we support the smaller startups and insurers who actually are attempting to alleviate the situation.

as for your statement about more pay? i laugh.at least from a historical perspective. they will NEVER benefit the employee at the cost of their bottom line. when the rather large corporation i worked for for 25 years gave me the "worth" of my compensation package, in their mindwashing propoganda about why they were "better to work for," they claimed that my health insurance cost them $10K a year. when i canceled my insurance because i married someone who was insured with the same company, i sure as hell didn't get that money or even a portion of it. and got looked at like i had six eyes when i asked the question. this of course later changed when we started contributing more and more and more to the "cost" of our insurance. it's now to the point where about the ONLY benefit you get is being part of a "group," which allows you to get in on the lower cost benefit.



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lichter daraus
reply to post by grapesofraft
 


I suppose it came about because it entices people to actually wanna work there. I hate working for any company that doesn't provide, but since things are the way they are I cant really afford to be picky.


and that's EXACTLY the mindset they now want you in. and if everyone has that mindset we've lost our value to the employer. no voice. dispensable. the people who make the company a success or failure. and again, this is speaking as things are TODAY...not how we hope they will be.



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 08:20 PM
link   
reply to post by grapesofraft
 


That's a cop out statement.

The basis of any business is the lowest common denominator. Do you think those store managers and those other logistics people could do their jobs without the guy at the bottom of the totem pole?

Look I own a buisness, I actually own 3. One of them is a call center for road side assistance. Now I could train a monkey to do the job of the dispatching, but could I go without anybody there? No.

So in return for the crappy work they do, I provide them with benefits and good wages. It's not a difficult thing. Staff is upset, your business is upset, pure and simple.

Wal-Mart gets away with what they do because they are the Al Capone of Capitalism, they come in and take over and destroy communities with their cheap products and low prices.

~Keeper



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 08:23 PM
link   
One of main problems was government intervening by mandating employers offer HMO & PPO type of plans. This was mandatory up until 1995.

History of HMO's

HMO's

As for Walmart, well they should be able to offer whatever benefits they see fit without government interference or being pressured by unions. If you don't like their benefits then get a job somewhere else.

Besides, when did working at Walmart or Burger King become a career? When I was young these type of jobs were only temporary. They were summer jobs or jobs to make a few extra bucks while going to school.



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 




Wal-Mart gets away with what they do because they are the Al Capone of Capitalism, they come in and take over and destroy communities with their cheap products and low prices.


Oh so now they are equal to criminals? They dont take over and destroy communities. Have you seen Wal-Mart driving down the road in a tank wiping out everyone and everything in its path.

If anybody destroys the community it is the choice of the consumer who PREFERS to get more for their money. It is capitalism at its best. One guy has a better business model and is rewarded, while another has a failed model and is moved out of the path so something better can come along for the consumer.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join