Major debate on Friday's edition of the Today Show. This was very interesting to me and hopefully it will be to you.
What I am about to explain (you can search the msnbc.com website and find the actual video) may offend you. This topic is not about 'touchy feely' it is about the pathetic state of health and fitness in our country. I know you are amazed that you are reading yet another one of my blogs addressing this issue :)
Here goes.
Paying people to get in shape or Charging people to get in shape?
About 3 years ago was when I first heard of insurance companies paying a portion of an individual's health club membership. A step in the right direction, in my opinion, to enhance the health of this country and the insurance companies beginning to switch their focus to 'health' rather than 'sickness.' I also do some consulting with a very progressive corporation when it comes to health & fitness program offerings to employees and have seen some major changes some of the people.
This is different and something I have yet to hear of prior to Friday (I am very fond of this idea).
The CEO of Clarian Health Partners in Indiana (an entire statewide hospital system) was interviewed on the Today Show discussing his new policy:
Employees will pay the company for smoking and the degree to which they are overweight due to the rising health care costs of the employer. Now many people are appalled at this idea. Let's look at both sides.
For years, our country has stood for freedom in all shapes and forms. The minority of the people respond to this. People overwhelmingly respond to a 'fear of loss' rather than a 'desire for gain'. This means there will be more program adherence if they have to PAY instead of receiving it for free. The CEO of this company took it a step further and is penalizing those in poor health to pay even more to offset their health care costs.
Penalty vs Rewards
Penalties seem to bring the best in most people. Rewards only bring it out in the few.
Some people need a hug. Most need a KICK IN THE ASS.
This is why I am for this type of program. It gets people moving, because they don't want to pay out of their own pocket. Therefore, they are benifitting in a host of ways: paying less, getting in shape, having more energy, losing weight, feeling great, setting an example to their kids, and on and on.
What is the downside to any of those? I don't see any.
Now the debate was that is invading people's personal lives. Get past the group hug. Seriously. These people will not do anything until FORCED to do so. They aren't going to willingly start tomorrow, next week, and for sure not on January 1st (which might be the biggest lie ever told!)
Face it. In this country, Money = commitment, money = accountability. Commitment & Accountability rule the world. If they did not exist, not much would get done. Most people need to pay in order to be committed and they need to pay to be accountable. That's just the way it is. I myself have a business coach that I pay monthly consulting fee in order to hold me accountable to my goals and business ideas.
Do you have a coach? If not, get one. When you begin to pay for something, suddenly your demeanor changes for the better, and most likely so will A LOT of other aspects of your life.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Very true. The old adage still holds true: Money talks, BS walks.
I'm all in favor for penalties. Why should employers pay extra for you if you don't care about yourself? Answer: They shouldn't.
When I think of all the money I spend every month on fitness (trainers, classes, education)... why on earth should I be penalized by paying higher and higher insurance rates because some choose a lifestyle that is health destructive?
I see the "penalties" more like a reward for people who choose health, fitness and life. Personally... I am sick of enabling the American population to choose obesity, heart disease and diabetes.
So long as this doesn't become Law I have no problem with it.
I wonder if people are thinking through the implications of this policy though. Fat people have a lifestyle that is not as risky as homosexuals. Would they feel comfortable charging homosexuals for their lifestyle?
Personally I'm a "freedom to contract" person. You should be able to hire and fire and engage in whichever corporate policies you desire so long as you abide by your contracts. Good policy will be rewarded and bad policy penalized in the marketplace.
Post a Comment