![]() |
|
|
By Richard Trombly | Industrial Distribution: April 2002 Rising costs and an increased number of uninsured
Americans has increased the burden on employers. Can they continue to
carry the weight? The cost of employer-sponsored health care plans for
distributors is expected to rise nearly 20 percent for the second year
in a row, according to a recent study by the National Assn. Of Wholesaler-Distributors.
And the double-digit increases are expected to continue. For distributors, attracting and retaining employees
is one of their greatest concerns and a comprehensive benefit package
is often a big part of their human resource strategy. However, according
to the NAW study, the number of distributors paying 100 percent of health
care benefits dropped from 14.5 percent in 2002 to just 11 percent this
year. The share of premiums covered by the employer also dropped from
74 percent to 73 percent during the same period. "These premium increases place enormous pressure
on a company's bottom line," said NAW vice president of government
relations Jim Anderson. "Distribution firms are sharing the pain
with their employees through larger copayments, higher deductibles and
increased premiums for employees, but this is clearly not sustainable." More working people will find these costs prohibitive
and will join the ranks of the 41 million uninsured Americans, said Anderson.
This will further exacerbate the problem through increased costs in the
medical system from uninsured patients. In 2001, U.S. Hospitals spent $24 billion providing care
to patients who could not pay their medical bills, according to a study
from the Urban Institute, a research agency. This was passed along to
employers via insurance and managed care providers in the form of a nearly
$3 billion increase in premiums. Lewis supply Co., Inc. shopped for the best total health
care package based on price and benefits, said president Ed Van Dyke.
The Memphis, Tenn.-based distributor has still seen considerable cost
increases. Van Dyke said there are higher expenses for employees as well. "Our employees pay a fixed percentage of their insurance
costs," said Van Dyke. "In any cost increase, the company and
the employees share the burden." The NAW study showed that larger companies, those with
over 500 employees, face a 16 percent increase while companies of 51 to
500 employees face 18 percent premium hikes on average. Hardest hit are
firms with less than 50 employees, where rate increases averaged 23 percent. Haggard & Stocking Associates, Inc., is a small distributor
based in Indianapolis. While insurance providers requested 25 percent
to 30 percent increases, price shopping allowed the company to hold the
increase to about 20 percent, said president Bill Holden. "It's insanity. We've seen at least five years of
consecutive double-digit increases," said Holden. "We pay 50
percent of our employees' health insurance costs, but it ultimately becomes
prohibitive for employers to take on these costs." The benefits of the health care plan have also been weakened in an effort to hold down costs, Holden said. He adds that it's increasingly common for employees who receive raises to see a net loss in take-home pay due to increased health insurance deductions. There are few alternatives for smaller firms, however.
One is outsourcing organizations or trade association plans that can help
small companies reduce their benefits costs by combining businesses to
form a larger pool, said Holden. Lack of buying power is a major problem faced by small
companies, said Alwyn Cassil, spokesperson for the Center for Studying
Health. System Change. Bigger organizations purchase from a stronger position
with respect to price negotiation and the pool of employees over which
incident claims are spread, but the greatest savings come from allocating
administration fees over the larger pool. Oliver H. Van Horn Co., Inc., a distributor headquartered
in New Orleans, looked into a group plan through one of its trade associations.
According to president Charlie Van Horn, the company found that its own,
private provider offered a better package. Nonetheless, the plan the company
offers its employees is less robust than it was in the past. NAW is supporting a bill that may help to even the playing
field for small employers. Entitled The Small Business Health Fairness
Act of 2003, it would allow multistate operation and certain state regulatory
exemptions for trade association health plans. The Employee Income Retirement
and Security Act already allows certain large corporate and union health
plans to take advantage of these benefits. The bill recently passed the House of Representatives
and was introduced to the Senate by Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Me.) as $.545.
The bill was referred to the Senate's Committee on Health, Education,
Labor and Pensions. This legislation also would allow small employers
to achieve the benefits of scale now open only to larger corporations. "It would reduce costs by allowing for increased
competitiveness among insurance providers," said Anderson. "Market
forces are the best way to restrain cost increases and make affordable
coverage available to a greater number of businesses." COPYRIGHT 2003 Reed Business Information in association with The Gale Group and LookSmart.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Home | Contact | ||
|
© Copyright Richard Trombly 2005
|
|||