IBJNews

Employers slow to act on health reform

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Even though employers expect the U.S. Supreme Court to strike down at least some of the 2010 health reform law later this month, few are actually doing any contingency planning.

Forty-five percent of employers surveyed by the International Foundation of Employee Benefit Plans said they are taking a “wait and see” approach to the fate of health care reform. Not only are they waiting for the Supreme Court to hand down its decision, but more than half taking this approach say they’re eyeing the outcome of the November elections, too.

Fewer than 30 percent of employers have had detailed discussions or drawn up scenario-based plans, according to the survey. And 26 percent of employers say they have had general discussions about how changes to the law could affect their health benefits plans.

“This is the calm before the storm, if you will,” said John Gause, president of Indianapolis-based Apex Benefits Group Inc.

Gause expects most employers to wait until after the court ruling and after the outcome of the November presidential election before solidifying any changes to their health benefits strategies. Most of the provisions of the Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act take effect in 2014.

“Employers are really going to say, ‘OK, it’s here or it’s not here,’ and they’re really going to look at that point,” Gause said of late-2012 and 2013. “And they’re going to look for direction from whoever their advisers are.”

On the whole, employers would like to see the Supreme Court toss the entire law on the scrapheap, according to the foundation’s survey. Fifty-eight percent prefer that outcome, compared with 27 percent that want the full law to stand and 14 percent that want some things to stay and some to go away.

However, employers generally do not expect to get their wish. Two-thirds expect that the Supreme Court will leave the law intact except for the “individual mandate”—a requirement in the law that all Americans except some young adults acquire health insurance.

If the entire law were to be struck down, legislators on Capitol Hill are preparing bills to reinstate some of its most popular provisions. Among the employers surveyed, not one of the provisions received majority support for reinstatement. The closest was the increased tax breaks for wellness programs, which garnered support from 33 percent of employers.

However, employers do think their employees would like to see some of the law’s provisions stand.  Most popular, in the employers’ estimation of their workers’ views, is the law’s requirement that employers cover their workers’ adult children up to age 26. Fifty-eight percent of employers think their workers want to see that rule remain.

And roughly one-third of all employers think their workers also favor the law’s elimination of all pre-existing condition exclusions and forbiddance of co-pays for preventive health care services.

The survey results, released June 5, were based on responses from 1,027 U.S. employers or multi-employer groups. The people responding were administrators of the companies’ health benefits plans.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. The east side does have potential...and I have always thought Washington Scare should become an outlet mall. Anyone remember how popular Eastgate was? Well, Indy has no outlet malls, we have to go to Edinburgh for the deep discounts and I don't understand why. Jim is right. We need a few good eastsiders interested in actually making some noise and trying to change the commerce, culture and stereotypes of the East side. Irvington is very progressive and making great strides, why can't the far east side ride on their coat tails to make some changes?

  2. Boston.com has an article from 2010 where they talk about how Interactions moved to Massachusetts in the year prior. http://www.boston.com/business/technology/innoeco/2010/07/interactions_banks_63_million.html The article includes a link back to that Inside Indiana Business press release I linked to earlier, snarkily noting, "Guess this 2006 plan to create 200-plus new jobs in Indiana didn't exactly work out."

  3. I live on the east side and I have read all your comments. a local paper just did an article on Washington square mall with just as many comments and concerns. I am not sure if they are still around, but there was an east side coalition with good intentions to do good things on the east side. And there is a facebook post that called my eastside indy with many old members of the eastside who voice concerns about the east side of the city. We need to come together and not just complain and moan, but come up with actual concrete solutions, because what Dal said is very very true- the eastside could be a goldmine in the right hands. But if anyone is going damn, and change things, it is us eastside residents

  4. Please go back re-read your economics text book and the fine print on the February 2014 CBO report. A minimum wage increase has never resulted in a net job loss...

  5. The GOP at the Statehouse is more interested in PR to keep their majority, than using it to get anything good actually done. The State continues its downward spiral.

ADVERTISEMENT