Glock Talk

Glock Talk (http://glocktalk.com/forums/index.php)
-   The Okie Corral (http://glocktalk.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=29)
-   -   More US Companies Imposing Consequences on Unhealthy Employees... (http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1478824)

ChiTownPicaro 03-25-2013 22:04

More US Companies Imposing Consequences on Unhealthy Employees...
 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_2950392.html

I hope more companies take these sorts of steps. As a stock holder it will be good for the country. I would rather they fired out of shape folks to help raise stock values and save on salaries.

But either way, perhaps they will start requiring physicals prior to hiring. Imagine if they start telling smokers that they are ineligible to be hired as they tested positive for tobacco and they told fatties that they are too heavy and must lose weight before they can be hired. Hopefully this will help the nation with its obesity epidemic.

What do you all think?

sputnik767 03-25-2013 22:09

So basically, get healthy or pay more. About time.

JVMHGF 03-25-2013 22:11

The article headline says that the "U.S. companies" are doing this but it's the leverage of the Affordable Care Act that's really responsible. If they don't do wellness surveying or testing, they'll get fined by the government. If the employee gets dropped by the health insurance, the employee will have to pay a fine -- for not having health insurance. Government gets paid no matter what.

M2 Carbine 03-25-2013 22:19

Quote:

What do you all think?
If they are going to insist in getting into your private life then go all the way.
Fire an employee that uses a cell phone while driving.

Definitely fire dopers.

Fire employees that don't eat enough fresh fruit.

Fire employees that drive too old a (unsafe) car.

Fire an employee that doesn't get enough sleep.

Of course fire everyone when they reach the age of 50.

Fire any woman with big boobs and a nice butt. She is a distraction that may get someone hurt while looking at her.


No, I'm really tired of people, government, work, whatever getting into peoples private lives.

As a pilot it was my responsibility to maintain decent enough health to fly but I think such as that is the limit.

Folsom_Prison 03-25-2013 22:44

I agree with M2 ^^^^

If your gonna do it, why not go all out?

Hey your a gun owner, we can have you work here ect ect. It cracks me up on here reading things such as the OP posted. Take the smoking bit for example, he would have no problem trying to tramp on someone's freedom such as that.

I'm sure if someone wanted to tramp on his 2ND A freedom...... Awww hell nah! Hypocritics!

Atlas 03-25-2013 22:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by G19_AJ (Post 20124014)
If your gonna do it, why not go all out?
..

Just say 'no'.
Work for a different employer.

sputnik767 03-25-2013 23:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by M2 Carbine (Post 20123980)
If they are going to insist in getting into your private life then go all the way.
Fire an employee that uses a cell phone while driving.

Definitely fire dopers.

Fire employees that don't eat enough fresh fruit.

Fire employees that drive too old a (unsafe) car.

Fire an employee that doesn't get enough sleep.

Of course fire everyone when they reach the age of 50.

Fire any woman with big boobs and a nice butt. She is a distraction that may get someone hurt while looking at her.


No, I'm really tired of people, government, work, whatever getting into peoples private lives.

As a pilot it was my responsibility to maintain decent enough health to fly but I think such as that is the limit.

Just to play devil's advocate:

If you work for a private company, do they not have a say in various aspects of their employees' lifestyle? For example, if you want to come to my house and I ask you to leave your gun at home, I would expect you to comply.

What about dopers? Something tells me that delivery companies probably don't want their employees chasing a rainbow-farting dragon down the middle of a crowded sidewalk in the company vehicle.

What about obese people? Insuring them costs the company and the rest of the employees more money. Barring the rare case of an actual medical reason, isn't it appropriate to have them shoulder some of the burden for their healthcare? Why should I have to pay more for my healthcare coverage when I hardly ever use it? The same applies to smokers.

My point is, nobody is dictating to any private company how they should manage their employees. If a business wants to promote wellness (and their bottom line), it is their choice on how they do it. And it is your choice to work there or work elsewhere.

Want to set your own rules, start your own business and manage your employees as you see fit.

AK_Stick 03-25-2013 23:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by M2 Carbine (Post 20123980)
If they are going to insist in getting into your private life then go all the way.
Fire an employee that uses a cell phone while driving.

Definitely fire dopers.

Fire employees that don't eat enough fresh fruit.

Fire employees that drive too old a (unsafe) car.

Fire an employee that doesn't get enough sleep.

Of course fire everyone when they reach the age of 50.

Fire any woman with big boobs and a nice butt. She is a distraction that may get someone hurt while looking at her.


No, I'm really tired of people, government, work, whatever getting into peoples private lives.

As a pilot it was my responsibility to maintain decent enough health to fly but I think such as that is the limit.



When your personal life starts to affect the companies bottom line, I'd say they have a understandable reason to make regulations.

WmHBonney 03-26-2013 03:02

What's next? Will a big city mayor tell you that you cannot order a large soda? Oh, wait, someone already did that.

Tiro Fijo 03-26-2013 03:17

ChiTownPicaro is clearly a Lib troll who has infiltrated GT and who supports Obama. Don't be a sucker & take the bait. :wavey:

He's trolling here as in all of his threads and I'd bet he doesn't even own a gun. Avoid him. :upeyes:

Restless28 03-26-2013 04:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atlas (Post 20124022)
Just say 'no'.
Work for a different employer.

Agreed. If it's a condition of employment, it is voluntary to remain employed.

CourtCop 03-26-2013 04:50

The current US obesity rate is 35.7%. Do you really want more than 1/3 of the country unemployed and sucking on the the government tit?

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire

Fracball 03-26-2013 04:57

So it's all about the bottom line, eh?

My employer has wellness testing where they collect and record basic health information. They also have health fairs and mandatory driving training for all employees regardless of whether you drive a company vehicle or not.

But my employer will not do anything about coworkers that surf FB, youtube and chat all day on company owned computers!

walt cowan 03-26-2013 05:30

this is what the insurance company written obama health care plan is all about.

Revvv 03-26-2013 05:37

I'm pretty sure some of, if not all of, what is being requested is an invasion of my privacy. My cholesterol, BP, bmi, etc is my business. My wife can't even get this info from my doctor unless I approve.

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire

superhornet 03-26-2013 05:42

Whats next :faint:?? 1984

cowboy1964 03-26-2013 07:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Revvv (Post 20124367)
I'm pretty sure some of, if not all of, what is being requested is an invasion of my privacy. My cholesterol, BP, bmi, etc is my business. My wife can't even get this info from my doctor unless I approve.

It's not an invasion of your privacy if you agree to the terms. If you don't, look elsewhere for a job. That's what it boils down to. I don't necessarily like it either but that's the way of the future. The fact is we are going broke, as a country, and poor health choices is one of the main factors.

Start drug testing welfare recipients too.

Revvv 03-26-2013 07:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by cowboy1964 (Post 20124603)
It's not an invasion of your privacy if you agree to the terms. If you don't, look elsewhere for a job. That's what it boils down to. I don't necessarily like it either but that's the way of the future. The fact is we are going broke, as a country, and poor health choices is one of the main factors.

Start drug testing welfare recipients too.

Our health isn't the source of the Country's financial distress.

It saddens me to see people willing to just roll over and take what they are given, even if what they are given is a negative.

Are there jobs that should have a health code? Absolutely. Law Enforcement is a prime example. There are physical requirements the job entails daily. Same as our military, physical fitness matters for survival and the protection of others on the team.

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire

SCHADENFREUDE 03-26-2013 07:48

I see the disability roles swelling soon. My question is this. Are those fat people doing their job? Do you want to send them home to sit on their couch and collect a check that we all pay for? Or do you want them to get up and go to work and help pay for all the able body people sitting at home already?

I think both sides of the political spectrum need to get out of people's life's. If any person uses more health care than some guy in an office says is the usual than they should pay more for it. That would be if you are fat, cancerous, kidney disease, etc. If you are fat and use no insurance you are costing no one anything. If your fatness starts to eat away at you then you have to pay for it. That would be personal accountability.

Atlas 03-26-2013 07:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by SCHADENFREUDE (Post 20124675)
.. My question is this. Are those fat people doing their job? Do you want to send them home to sit on their couch and collect a check that we all pay for? Or do you want them to get up and go to work and help pay for all the able body people sitting at home already?
..

No I want them to get up and go to work.... for you, not for me though. :cool:

Atlas 03-26-2013 08:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Revvv (Post 20124367)
I'm pretty sure some of, if not all of, what is being requested is an invasion of my privacy. My cholesterol, BP, bmi, etc is my business. My wife can't even get this info from my doctor unless I approve.

.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cowboy1964 (Post 20124603)
It's not an invasion of your privacy if you agree to the terms. If you don't, look elsewhere for a job. ..


'zactly.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Revvv (Post 20124669)
..
Are there jobs that should have a health code? Absolutely. Law Enforcement is a prime example. There are physical requirements the job entails daily. Same as our military, physical fitness matters for survival and the protection of others on the team.

Or if I am an employer (and I am not) and I feel that healthy, energetic people are in my best interests, then those are the employees I'll seek out.

Sure, we are all human and we all have health problems in one way or another..

It's in an employer's interest though to seek and retain people who take an active and sensible role in maintaining their health.
That is a valid qualification for a job as much as is someone who pursues continuing education, for example.

If you have a position that requires an employee to keep up with the latest technology, then you want employees who have the personal motivation and desire to educate themselves on an ongoing basis. You're more interested in such a person than you are in someone who took one 4-year degree 15 years ago and does nothing more beyond that.

In the same way, why should I as an employer not focus on people who take responsibility for seeking and maintaining their own health and well-being? Those are the people who will have the most to contribute to my business. They have in that way further demonstrated their discipline and personal motivation, and they are the employees who are most likely to have fewer sick days and more days when they are at their most productive.

Peace Warrior 03-26-2013 08:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by WmHBonney (Post 20124247)
What's next? Will a big city mayor tell you that you cannot order a large soda? Oh, wait, someone already did that.

Exactly... this isn't about employees' health per se, this is another dialectic from the socialized healthcare mandate coming from the globalists VIA the white house.

itstime 03-26-2013 08:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by M2 Carbine (Post 20123980)
If they are going to insist in getting into your private life then go all the way.
Fire an employee that uses a cell phone while driving.

Definitely fire dopers.

Fire employees that don't eat enough fresh fruit.

Fire employees that drive too old a (unsafe) car.

Fire an employee that doesn't get enough sleep.

Of course fire everyone when they reach the age of 50.

Fire any woman with big boobs and a nice butt. She is a distraction that may get someone hurt while looking at her.


No, I'm really tired of people, government, work, whatever getting into peoples private lives.

As a pilot it was my responsibility to maintain decent enough health to fly but I think such as that is the limit.



I'm with you M2. It's only the start.

Dennis in MA 03-26-2013 09:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by CourtCop (Post 20124314)
The current US obesity rate is 35.7%. Do you really want more than 1/3 of the country unemployed and sucking on the the government tit?

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire

Yeah, only because they RE-defined obesity a decade ago.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SCHADENFREUDE (Post 20124675)
I see the disability roles swelling soon. My question is this. Are those fat people doing their job? Do you want to send them home to sit on their couch and collect a check that we all pay for? Or do you want them to get up and go to work and help pay for all the able body people sitting at home already?

I think both sides of the political spectrum need to get out of people's life's. If any person uses more health care than some guy in an office says is the usual than they should pay more for it. That would be if you are fat, cancerous, kidney disease, etc. If you are fat and use no insurance you are costing no one anything. If your fatness starts to eat away at you then you have to pay for it. That would be personal accountability.

Yup.

I thought Obamacare was going to be similar to RomneyCare where your health ins. is ONLY based on age. So a company doing this isn't going to save any $. I guess I'm wrong on that one.

In MA, this is fruitless. If I have an average age of 35 in my company and everyone is a marathon runner, I pay the same as the company next door, same # of people, also average age of 35 and all are severe Type-1 diabetics.

It's interesting to see what Obamacare mandates AREN'T going to be instituted here because we are already crazier than that. LOL

Z71bill 03-26-2013 09:26

The real solution - (if allowed or possible) is to pay people a salary - then they buy their own health insurance - life insurance - food - transportation - clothing - retirement - what ever the hell else they want and need.

Companies made a BIG mistake when they went down the fringe benefits road. Bad for companies - bad for the county.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:22.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2013, Glock Talk, All Rights Reserved.