Blakely Stephen
Employee Benefit Research Institute, Washington, DC, 20005-4051, USA.
EBRI Issue Brief. 2010 Feb(339):1-23.
EBRI'S BIANNUAL POLICY FORUM: This Issue Brief summarizes presentations at EBRI's 65th biannual policy forum, held in Washington, DC, on Dec. 10, 2009, on the topic, "Employers, Workers, and the Future of Employment-Based Health Benefits." The forum brought together a wide range of economic, benefits, management, and labor experts to share their expertise at a time when major health reform legislation was being debated in Congress. The focus: How might this affect the way that the vast majority of Americans currently get their health insurance coverage? THE EMPLOYMENT-BASED HEALTH INSURANCE SYSTEM: Most people who have health insurance coverage in the United States get it through their job: In 2008, about 61 percent of the nonelderly population had employment-based health benefits, 19 percent were covered by public programs, 6 percent had individual coverage, and 17 percent were uninsured.
DIFFERENCES, AGREEMENTS: Not surprisingly, given the deep conflicts that exist over President Obama's health reform plan and the different bills that have passed the House and Senate, benefits experts also do not agree on what "health reform" will mean for either workers or employers. Views ranged from "Will anyone notice?" to predictions of great upheaval for workers and their employers, patients and health care providers, and the entire U.S. health care system. One point of consensus among both labor and management representatives: Imposing a tax on health benefits is likely to cause major cuts in health benefits and might result in structural changes in the employment-based benefits system. A common disappointment voiced at the forum was that the initial effort to reform the delivery and cost of health care in America gradually became focused on just financing and coverage of health insurance.
The ever-rising cost of health insurance affects different employers and workers in different ways--with small employers and low-wage workers being the most disadvantaged. With health premiums having risen almost five times as much as the overall rate of inflation since 2000, employers face unsustainable cost increases in health benefits. For a minimum-wage worker, the cost of family coverage (averaging about $13,700 a year in a small firm) exceeds their total annual income (about $11,500 a year). Small employers, if they offer health benefits at all, pay proportionately more than large employers for the same health coverage.
As reflected by the debate in Congress, the American public has conflicted opinions on both the U.S. health care system and on reform: Surveys find that people tend to be satisfied with the quality of their own care but not with costs and access, and a majority rates the system as fair or poor. Opinions divide sharply along partisan lines.
While large employers tend to express continued commitment to health benefits, small employers see themselves strongly disadvantaged by the current system. Consultants report many employers privately want to drop benefits to control costs, but realize there are risks to doing so and none wants to be first. Employers express strong interest in wellness and disease management programs as a way to control costs, even though some experts say there is no evidence these work. Consumer-driven health plans are expected to continue their slow rate of growth.
员工福利研究协会(EBRI)半年一度政策论坛:本简报总结了于2009年12月10日在华盛顿特区举行的EBRI第65届半年一度政策论坛上的发言,主题为“雇主、员工与基于就业的健康福利的未来”。在国会对重大医疗改革立法进行辩论之际,该论坛汇聚了众多经济、福利、管理和劳工专家,以分享他们的专业知识。重点在于:这可能会如何影响绝大多数美国人目前获得医疗保险的方式?
在美国,大多数拥有医疗保险的人是通过工作获得的:2008年,约61%的非老年人口享有基于就业的健康福利,19%由公共项目覆盖,6%拥有个人保险,17%没有保险。
鉴于围绕奥巴马总统的医疗改革计划以及众议院和参议院通过的不同法案存在深刻冲突,福利专家对于“医疗改革”对员工或雇主意味着什么也未达成一致,这并不奇怪。观点从“会有人注意到吗?”到预测这将给员工及其雇主、患者和医疗服务提供者以及整个美国医疗体系带来巨大动荡不等。劳工和管理层代表达成的一个共识点是:对健康福利征税可能会导致健康福利大幅削减,并可能导致基于就业的福利体系发生结构性变化。论坛上普遍表达的一种失望是,美国医疗保健服务与成本改革的最初努力逐渐只聚焦于医疗保险的融资和覆盖范围。
医疗保险费用不断上涨,对不同的雇主和员工产生了不同影响——小雇主和低薪员工处于最不利地位。自2000年以来,医疗保险费上涨幅度几乎是总体通货膨胀率的五倍,雇主面临着健康福利方面无法承受的成本增加。对于一名最低工资工人来说,家庭保险费用(在小公司平均每年约13,700美元)超过了他们的全年总收入(约每年11,500美元)。小雇主如果提供健康福利,为相同的健康保险支付的比例比大雇主更高。
正如国会辩论所反映的,美国公众对美国医疗体系和改革存在矛盾的看法:调查发现,人们往往对自己的医疗服务质量感到满意,但对成本和可及性不满意,而且大多数人认为该体系公平或较差。观点在党派界限上存在明显分歧。
虽然大型雇主倾向于表示继续致力于提供健康福利,但小雇主认为自己在当前体系中处于严重不利地位。顾问报告称,许多雇主私下希望放弃福利以控制成本,但意识到这样做存在风险,而且没有人愿意率先行动。雇主对健康与疾病管理项目表现出浓厚兴趣,将其作为控制成本的一种方式,尽管一些专家表示没有证据表明这些项目有效。消费者驱动的健康计划预计将继续缓慢增长。