Saturday, Jul 04, 2020 | Last Update : 09:16 AM IST

101st Day Of Lockdown

Maharashtra1929901046878376 Tamil Nadu102721583781385 Delhi92175630072864 Gujarat34686249411905 Uttar Pradesh2579717597749 West Bengal2048813571717 Karnataka197108807293 Rajasthan1878515043435 Telangana185709069275 Andhra Pradesh169347632206 Haryana1550911019251 Madhya Pradesh1410610815589 Bihar10911821184 Assam8956583212 Jammu and Kashmir76954856105 Odisha7316535333 Punjab56683989149 Kerala4594243626 Uttarakhand2791190937 Chhatisgarh2339193713 Jharkhand2339160512 Tripura140110931 Manipur13166390 Goa11984783 Himachal Pradesh9796179 Puducherry73930112 Nagaland5351820 Chandigarh4463676 Arunachal Pradesh182601 Mizoram1601230 Sikkim101520 Meghalaya50421
  Life   Health  17 Mar 2018  Employee health plans charge smokers extra but don’t help them quit

Employee health plans charge smokers extra but don’t help them quit

REUTERS
Published : Mar 17, 2018, 10:00 am IST
Updated : Mar 17, 2018, 10:00 am IST

Smokers are charged higher premiums by employers, this entitles them to programs that will help them quit smoking at the same time.

Smokers are charged higher premiums by employers, this entitles them to programs that will help them quit smoking at the same time. (Photo: Pixabay)
 Smokers are charged higher premiums by employers, this entitles them to programs that will help them quit smoking at the same time. (Photo: Pixabay)

Almost half of small employers that charge tobacco users extra for their health insurance don’t offer wellness programs to help employees stop smoking, according to a recent study.

The Affordable Care Act permits these surcharges only when employers provide a wellness program, yet more than one million employees in the US work for a company that is noncompliant, researchers estimate in the journal Health Affairs.

 

“If tobacco users are charged more for health insurance, they should be provided with access to resources to quit,” said lead author Michael Pesko, a health economist at Georgia State University in Atlanta.

The ACA allows employer plans in the small-group marketplace to charge tobacco users up to 50 percent more for premiums, but only if the employer offers a tobacco cessation program and the employee chooses not to participate, the study team writes. Seven states - California, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island and Vermont - prohibit tobacco use surcharges under any circumstances.

“Tobacco use surcharges can help offset higher health care costs for tobacco users,” Pesko said in an email. But studies don’t show whether tobacco surcharges are effective as a financial incentive for employees to stop smoking.

The researchers used 2016 survey data collected by the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation and the Health Research and Educational Trust for 278 employers in the Small Business Health Options Program.

They found that 16 percent of the 278 small employers used tobacco surcharges, yet 47 percent of those companies failed to offer tobacco cessation counseling. In addition, 14 percent used surcharges in states that completely prohibit them.

The study team estimates that in states where surcharges are allowed, 950,712 employees work for a company imposing the charges without an accompanying wellness program, and of these, 155,917 smokers would be affected. An additional 118,229 employees, including 13,242 smokers, worked for such companies in states where the surcharges are not even allowed.

Overall, 37 percent of employers had tobacco cessation programs, which were most common in health care jobs. Noncompliance in the service industry in particular affected more employees than all industries combined, the researchers note.

“It is unclear why these noncompliant health insurance plans are being sold,” Pesko said. “We recommend that regulators enforce existing ACA regulations to prevent the sale of plans using tobacco surcharges without providing tobacco cessation wellness program access.”

“We don’t think tobacco surcharges are a good way to reduce smoking. It can either lead to lower enrollment for tobacco users, who are a high-risk health population, or noncompliance in reporting,” said Cameron Kaplan of the University of Tennessee Health Science Center in Memphis, who wasn’t involved in the study.

From a policy perspective, researchers want to look to states to figure out what authority exists to protect tobacco users from being taken advantage of in the meantime, if the complex system of regulations, surcharges and workplace wellness programs is flawed, said Alex Liber of the American Cancer Society in Atlanta.

“While tobacco users can be charged higher premiums by their employers, they are entitled to programs that will help them quit smoking at the same time,” Liber, who also wasn’t involved in the study, said in an email.

“It is truly unfair that employers are violating federal regulations that say they are supposed to offer carrots in addition to the sticks of higher premiums,” Liber added.

Tags: medical health, healthcare, employee, american cancer society, atlanta, smoker, tobacco, university of tennessee health science center, memphis, affordable care act, health affairs