Wellness Plans : Wellness Programs – the Good and the Bad.

Health promotion programs at the corporate level are beneficial, right? Health Promotion statistics obviously show that such wellness programs are not only cost-effective to the business but can assist the worker in developing a healthier lifestyle.

With the rising cost of health care, wellness programs simply make sense. So where does the problem come in? Let’s examine the topic from both perspectives.

Health Promotion Programs –  the Good

• A sampling of corporate returns on investment for wellness programs –  Bank of America –  600%; General Motors – 370%; Pepsico –  300%; Citibank –  465%; and the Washoe County School District leading the pack at a whopping 1,560 percent. (Campbell,J., Health Promotion Improvement Experts, www.wellnessimprovementspecialists.com, Albuquerque, New Mexico.)

• Companies with wellness programs have realized a 28% reduction in sick leave, a 26% reduction in adjunctive healthcare costs and a 30% reduction in disability and personnel compensation costs. (Health Affairs, Volume 21, No.2, March, 2002.)

• The Washoe county School District in Northern Nevada realized a $15.60 return on investment for every dollar spent because of a 20 percent reduction in absenteeism. (Hardy,A. (2005).  At the Top of the Class. WELCOA’s Absolute Advantage Magazine, 5(1), 14-20.)

• Health promotion programs provide the structure, encouragement, incentives and ongoing support that many person need to make lifestyle changes.

• Workers also realize returns on their efforts. FiServ, a financial services technology corporation, gave personnel who filled out a health risk appraisal a meaningful discount on their medical insurance premium. (Holland, Kelley, the New York Times, July 22, 2007.)

Wellness Programs –  the Bad

The flip side of the argument centers on basic human rights. Do we want/need our corporation to tell us to eat our veggies or lose 30 pounds? Some businesses are doing just that and at least one lawsuit has resulted because of it.

• Three hundred businesses have requested assistance from a national employment and labor law firm to institute more assertive wellness programs.(Cornwell, Lisa, Associated Press, Albuquerque Journal, September 10,2007.)

• Clarian Health, based in Indianapolis, Will begin lowering staff member paychecks by $10.00 for every staff member who has a Body Mass Index (BMI)  of greater than 29.9 because not enough employees were utilizing their wellness services.(Cornwell, Lisa, Associated Press, Albuquerque Journal, September 10,2007.)

• Scott Rodrigues filed a suit against his prospective corporation, Scotts Miracle-Gro, because he believed the company’s antiuse of tobacco policy violated his civil rights.  The corporation has a policy against hiring employees who smoke and Mr. Rodrigues’drug screen was positive for nicotine.(Holland, Kelley, the New York Times,July 22,2007.)

• Employee advocates are concerned that health discrimination might not be covered below the Americans with Disabilities Act.(Cornwell, Lisa, Associated Press, Albuquerque Journal, September 10,2007.)

Penalizing staff members by hitting them hardest where it hurts the most,their pocketbook, does not appear to be a favorable approach to molding human behavior.

Such tactics may result in increased resentments and retaliation, primarily in the form of absenteeism and presenteeism (decreased productivity on the job.) Voluntary, incentive-based health promotion programs, such as the one in the Washoe County School District, can and do produce results.

A positive attitude for upper management along with an opportunity for personnel to have a stake in the decision-making may yield the greatest dividends to both corporation and staff member.

The motivation and resolve needed to change unhealthful lifestyle habits can best be derived from the basic tenets of encouragement, respect and support.