Exempt salaried management employee, Health Insurance
moon
45 Posts
I don't think I have made my question clear. Let me try again.The issue under discussion is in regard to health insurance for exempt employees and has nothing to do with hourly employees. We are discussing strictly one class of employee - EXEMPT SALARIED MANAGEMENT. Whereas, everyone in this class is currently being treated the same in that all of their insurance premium is being paid by the company, we now need to ask for participation. Since a wide salary range exists we are considering asking for less from the lower salary ranges. It seems to me that if the entire group is looked upon as being "similarily situated" then everyone would not be treated equally if we ask for different participation levels. On the other hand if the wide salary range between lower level, mid level and uppper level management would remove the "similarily situated" test then we should be able to ask for participation based upon salary without fear of discrimination.
Do any of you have this same situation?
Moon in Louisiana
Do any of you have this same situation?
Moon in Louisiana
Comments
I still do not see why the fact that someone is an EXEMPT SALARIED MANAGEMENT ee should pay more for insurance because of the amount of money s/he makes. The point I tried to make in my first post was....do hourly ees pay more/less for insurance based on the amount they make.
I think you can do whatever you want. I still say, as I did before, that you negotiate a price with your health provider for certain tiers. That should drive your decision on what your EXEMPT SALARIED MANAGEMENT ees are responsible for. I would recommend that you either charge the same for the tier (my preferred) that the ee selects (ee only, ee/spouse, etc.), or that you pay the same percentage toward the cost of the benefit, with the ee picking up the balance. This will result in different premiums for ees, but may not be based on pay.
But here is a different perspective. You have an entire management strata that is currently being treated the same from top to bottom, with respect to health insurance. Now you want to add an EE contribution feature that would differentiate based on salary.
Seems to me that you have introduced, at a minimum, a question of discrimination. If you have members of a protected class that happen to be at the lower rungs of you salary structure, you might have a prima facie case of discrimination that might invite legal proceedings. Look at the demographics within this group. Do the majority of women (for instance) have lower salaries than men?
Will you calculate the contribution on base salary, or salary plus bonus?
I think the contribution differences could introduce issues, and who needs more issues?
Take a close look at HRinFl's suggestions - seems like a reasonable approach to me.
I also did not respond because I felt HRinFL hit the target.
Lisa
Personally I felt that while this was very helpful for people who don't make as much money, it also penalizes people who do. Who knows whether that person who makes $30,000 per year has more bills, etc. than the person who makes $90,000 per year.
My objection to this idea in our company was the following:
If I make only $20,000 per year and I go to Walmart and buy a shirt for $15.00, can't the person who makes $90,000 also buy the same thing at the same price.
We were talking health insurance that is the same company-wide. I just don't like this idea and it has nothing to do with how much I make (or don't, in my case, make). Each time you receive a raise in pay, your health insurance premium would increase.......Nope, don't like it at all.