Employer charging smokers.. Thoughts?

magj0y

My opinion is it makes sense b/c smokers cost a company more in medical bills. I'm no doctor but I read that smokers will get sick easier than non-smokers, have a higher risk of developing cancers, heart disease (even if blood pressure is not high), and other diease that simply makes a smoker more expensive than an identical person who did not smoke.

How do you figure? I smoked for 20 years and not once did I go to the hospital for anything "smoking" related.

It's statistical. Maybe you yourself didn't. However, the average smoker costs an employer about $11,000 per year more than a non-smoker.

where did you get this statistic?

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/04/120403124252.htm

AnnaMC1977

I think all employers should do this. If you choose to put something in your body you know will harm you. Something you know can lead to cancer, stroke, heart attacks and other major health problems that cost a LOT of money....then they should charge a premium for the people at a higher risk.

Take auto insurance for example. If you're an irresponsible driver, who disobeys the speed limits, and drives recklessly (and you get stopped by the cops), your premiums go up. When you are a responsible driver, your premiums go down. The same philosophy should go for heath insurance. This also applies to smokers, HEAVY drinkers, ect. Employers, insurance companies SHOULD charge extra for actions that predispose you to major health problems.

lbetancourt

i only smoke when i drink... so, i dont take breaks to smoke at work. and, i dont know where this money goes, i will learn more later. in my head, why not charge folks that are obese with awful eating habits & that are sedentary.

Never heard of someone getting fat sitting next to an overweight person.

:laugh: I've never either. But have heard of ppl dying of 2nd hand smoke! I think smoking trumps someone overweight because the 2nd hand smoke kills others, a burger won't hurt you unless you're eating it yourself. Sorry OP but that line you posted above was a bit lame, particularly using it on MFP. :noway:

like someone else just said its no different than charging teens higher premiums for car insurance. higher risk...higher rate....blame the actuaries!

Well put!

what i meant by that line is that obesity-related health care costs partly paid by non-obese folks thru higher insurance premiums is much the same as nonsmokers paying in part for health care costs associated with smoking, i wasn't referring to second hand smoking. i do my best not to smoke around others. i really do.

magj0y

Sorry, but no one is picking on only the smokers.

My group health plan at work just last year began requiring that we have a wellness check (insurance company pays for) and if we do not fall within healthy ranges on cholesterol, fasting glucose, blood pressure etc then our premiums go up drastically. It was enough to push me to lose 135lbs, so no complaints at all. I just needed the swift kick because I wasn't paying an additional $240 month just because I couldn't control my eating habits or didn't want to get up and excercise. There are provisions for things such as type 1 diabetes, high cholesterol that is not weight related, but those cases are few and far in between.

*your group health plan*
Many companies (like my husband's and several others) only charge extra to smokers.

BeingAwesome247

Didn't read all the comments but if they are going to target one bad habit, then people who are overweight should pay more too - by BF %

I see my point was already made and to piggy back on a comment about smokers get sick more....I use to smoke and only time I went to the dr was for annual exams. Never sick

zebisis

I think it's a good idea.

Where I live, if you smoke, you get a smoke break. If you don't smoke, too bad for you!

the main reason my wife smoked in HS...as a waitress it's the only way she got a break "like everyone else".

Yup- 10 years serving tables, non-smoker, non-break-taker! Backwards logic!!... I used to say I was going to take a "smoke break" and then just go stand outside for 5 min.

DannyMussels

I work with a few guys who take 5-10 smoke breaks a day, and I estimate are only physically there for about 6-7hrs of their 8hr shifts.

We should charge them.

Nicolle71

I totally agree with it! I am sorry but anytime someone say's "Yeah, I know it's not good for me, BUT" you are admitting guilt and you know better. I have a son that is 21 years old that is built like a professional football player, works out 2 hours a day, the kid is beautiful and HE SMOKES. I would tell him the same thing "pay up." :ohwell:

raggyanndoll

I'm all for having those who engage in risky behavior pay more for their insurance.

Chipmaniac

Just a note about enforcement. They can test your hair, and assuming you have a decent length, it contains a record of the substances you've consumed as its grown. If you want to cheat the system, shave your head.

By the way, as a 41-year old woman you have been benefiting from lower car insurance rates for years. Meanwhile, males like myself get charged higher, whether we are reckless or not, simply due to probability theory predicting higher risk. This is how insurance works. If you don't like it, maybe you should pay the males of America back for all the cheaper insurance you've received due your predicted lower risk.

rileamoyer

As an HR person I see how 'creative' insurance companies can be. All kinds of things will be coming down the pike the next few years, but that is another soap box. However - is $40 a month, plus what ever it is costing you for cigarettes enough of a financial incentive for you to quit. Sorry about that, I am one of 'those' ex smokers. I loved it, quit on a dare and have never reqretted it.

jessilee119

My husband has to do bloodwork for his health insurance. They also record his weight and ask if he's a smoker. This helps with the costs of insurance, so if he was unhealthy it would affect him. (he is not a smoker btw)

When I was on his insurance they were charging him an extra $25 per paycheck because since I was employed and my company has health insurance, they figured I should have the insurance through my job (which I now do). However, if I was unemployed, I could be on his insurance and he wouldn't have to pay the extra $25 a month because I wouldn't have a job that offers insurance. While I understand why the insurance companies say this, I don't think it's fair.

So basically it stinks because it's something you don't want to risk not having, but at the same time it's expensive. We pay one way or another. It's a matter of figuring out what will be the best option for the individual. Before I was pregnant I paid for the cheapest insurance my company had because I didn't go to the doctors often. I took a risk, though, because if something serious happened to me I would have to pay more out of pocket (up to $10k). When I got pregnant, I chose the better insurance. More came out of my paycheck but it still paid off in the end to have it because I only had to pay copays...lord knows I didn't have 10k to pay for my baby's delivery.

Oh, and while we're at it...they call stress the unknown killer. My job stresses me out, like everyone else, which can lead to high blood pressure, increased weight, and other problems. Will this cause my insurance premium to go up one day? Sounds like a vicious cycle to me...

magj0y

The insurance company charges those who smoke a higher premium. Your boss isn't ringing his hands making money of the choice of those who smoke. It's covering the cost of the higher premium. Insurance companies charge it because ultimately they have to pay more out in services to smokers. They also do charge those that are obese when it comes to life insurance. It costs nearly twice as much to take out a policy if you are not physically fit vs are.

Most people who are in the obese category are declined life insurance...it's hard to get.

According to the Mayo clinic, smokers cost an average of 1,275 higher than non-smokers.
Obese people cost an extra $1,850 morbid obesity cost over 5K.
so...who is more expensive here?

gwendb

In this way of thinking it seems like people who go to the gym should get a discount....

LadyBeryl

Never heard of someone getting fat sitting next to an overweight person.

So this. It is not just the smoker who is harmed. My father died early of cancer after sitting 8-16 hours a day in a smoky VFW location. Christopher Reeve's wife got lung cancer after singing in smoke filled lounges. Second-hand smoke does cause cancer.

I agree with this policy. There are a LOT of other habits (promiscuity, risky sports, alcoholism) that are effect health costs but smoking is low hanging fruit.

AngelsInThighHighs

Money money money money money money money thats all i am seeing. Greedy greedy greedy.

Howbouto

I will admit that I did not read through all 5 pages so I'm sorry if I'm repeating something. Health insurance companies charge a flat rate for insurance a group of people. Your employer decides how much they will cover and what they won't. The choice to charge more for smokers is their decision not to subsidize them as much. My employer gives a discount to non smokers and a discount if you can pass an optional health screening, which is a nice way to say they charge more for smokers and people with unhealthy blood work. So be it, one of the things that pushed me to my healthy lifestyle was the announcement of the policy. I would not have passed the blood test last year but passed it this year because of the health changes I made. It's within your control and you need to choose if smoking is work the extra money to you. BTW my employer only charges for a regular daily smoker, so a couple cigs a month while you are drinking wouldn't count unless you drink daily.

LadyBeryl

The insurance company charges those who smoke a higher premium. Your boss isn't ringing his hands making money of the choice of those who smoke. It's covering the cost of the higher premium. Insurance companies charge it because ultimately they have to pay more out in services to smokers. They also do charge those that are obese when it comes to life insurance. It costs nearly twice as much to take out a policy if you are not physically fit vs are.

Most people who are in the obese category are declined life insurance...it's hard to get.

According to the Mayo clinic, smokers cost an average of 1,275 higher than non-smokers.
Obese people cost an extra $1,850 morbid obesity cost over 5K.
so...who is more expensive here?

Obesity is tricker than smoking. Apple shaped people who are slightly more overweight have more health problems that many pear shaped obese people, for example. That is a fact.

mfpcopine

I don't have a problem with it. There's a rational reason for it, the penalty is not crushing, and you've been put on notice well in advance. The smoking of tobacco is unhealthy. It causes or is correlated with many serious illnesses. Public education alone has failed. What's an employer who wants to save on unnecessary health-related problems to do?

mfpcopine

In this way of thinking it seems like people who go to the gym should get a discount....

Some policies do reward people who go to the gym.