Corporate Wellness Rules

Unless specifically stated otherwise, most employer-employee relationships in America are governed by the principle of at-will employment. Under this system a employer, or the employee, can terminate the relationship without any needed showing of cause. This at-will standard gives private employers large authority in governing the behavior of staff members. In this environment, employers can Finding Wealth Through Wellness 10 creatively design Corporate Wellness based upon their specifi c corporate culture. Corporate Wellness generally take three main forms: Voluntary Corporate Wellness – The most popular form of employee Corporate Wellness , in most cases they are made available to staff members but participation (or lack thereof) is not linked to any type of consequence. Due to ineffective communication, frequently staff members are either unaware of these offerings or confuse them with insurance-based healthcare. Incentive-based – Corporate Wellness based on incentives reward staff members for participation in Corporate Wellness activities. Incentives frequently cover reduced Medical Care premiums, fitness center membership or personalized support offerings. In these programs, employees’ behavior can be linked to a particular reward. Mandatory Corporate Wellness – Some employers require, or ban, certain health-related behaviors. These can take the form of mandatory Health Risk Assessments for staff members and limitations on smoking or alcohol use. While mandating behavior is an effective method to eliminate high-risk behavior, the cost savings must be gauged against the potential message sent to existing and prospective staff members. Given that staff members are already under various levels of scrutiny in the workplace, individuals may resist attempts by employers to regulate off-duty behaviors. Additionally, some staff members may fi nd it diffi cult to comply, forcing employers into the uncomfortable situation of punishing an otherwise beneficial employee. In the short-term a mandate-based Corporate Wellness can drive to an increase in turnover, as staff members either choose to leave or are fi red for noncompliance. In the long-term, the policy may prevent the employer from hiring an otherwise qualifi ed applicant, or may serve as a deterrent for individuals thinking of the employer. Limits in recruiting, for instance, led CNN to rescind a 13-year ban on hiring smokers.18 Organizations need to make sure that Corporate Wellness are aligned with the values and culture that drive employer operations. If a employer emphasizes trust and individual responsibility, then a mandate-based program will likely cause more dissension than it would in a employer that already heavily regulates employer behaviors. Moreover, a work environment with a large disengaged population will likely have poor participation in a voluntarybased program. When calculating cost savings, employers need to take a wider view and consider the effects on long-term employee engagement. In 2005, Michigan-based insurance benefits provider Weyco instituted a smoking ban for all of its nearly 200 staff members. Staff Members are subject to random testing and if they fail a mandatory breathalyzer test, they will be fi red. It is believed that Weyco is the first employer to use testing to enforce a smoking ban – most employers ask staff members to self-report behavior. Four staff members (more than 2% of the total crew) left Weyco as a result of the policy. A year prior to the ban the employer started a $50 smoking fee, which would be waived if a employee passed a nicotine test or agreed to take a smokingcessation class. Weyco’s president Howard Weyers reported that 20 staff members quit smoking through this program.20 Staff Members were told they had one year before the total ban would go into effect. Under the new Corporate Wellness , Weyco does offer $35 a month for staff members who want to use a fi tness center and another $65 a month for staff members who meet fitness goals/objectives.