Canadian Surveys Show that Attention to Health Policies Can Keep Older Workers on the Job

Derek Sankey, writing for CanWest News Service, picks up on two recent surveys to point out that "tweaking health-care benefit plans could help retain experienced workers for longer, yet most companies plan to reduce those benefits in coming years."

The first survey--the "The sanofi-aventis Healthcare Survey 2007"--reports that about two-thirds of workers aged 55 or older are "very likely" or "somewhat likely" to continue working or return to the workforce after retirement if their employers would offer health benefits that continue into retirement. However, the second survey--conducted by Hewitt Associates--shows taht 57% of organizations plan to reduce post-retirement health-care benefits over the next three years.

However, according to Cathy Course, a senior benefits consultant for Hewitt Associates in Calgary, emerging trends in health-care benefit plans would suggest taht there are ways to combat the increasing costs associated with such a large of number of workers exiting the workforce and wanting extended health benefits, with flexibility being a core concept.

Source: Saskatoon Star Phoenix "Health benefits worker-retention issue" (August 18, 2007)

Health Insurance's Impact on Employment of Older Workers

According to a new paper published by the Center on Aging and Work/Workplace Flexibility at Boston College, health insurance costs are one factor that affects employer's employment decisions: "When faced with expensive healthcare, employers may cut back on hiring older workers, but not reduce their wages." On the employee side, older men in cities where health care costs are higher are more likely to stay in the workforce than retire; however, people with higher outside health care costs are not more likely to be employed, suggesting that employer decisions may be an influence.

The principal investigator of the paper--"Does Health Insurance Affect the Employment of Older Workers?"--was Joanna Lahey, Ph.D., an assistant professor at the Bush School of Government and Public Service at Texas A&M University. Among other things, she also investigated how state health mandates can be driving up some of these health costs. As for the options for employers, Lahey suggests:

As firms try to control the effect of rising health care costs on their bottom line, they will discover options other than decreasing employment. For instance, they can change their workforce composition and increase their use of part-time jobs that do not offer insurance benefits. Older workers with other sources of insurance benefits may find this option attractive. Firms may also consider hiring fewer workers for more hours.

Source: Center on Aging and Work/Workplace Flexibility Issue Brief No. 8 (June 2007)

Study: Graying of Workforce May Be Leading to Graying of Health Insurance

According to study, published in the November-Decemer 2006 issue of Health Affairs,, trends are leading to the "graying" of the employment-based health insurance system, where older, higher-income people get private health insurance, and others increasingly have public coverage or go without.

According to Patricia Keenan, Ph.D., lead author of the article and assistant professor at the Yale School of Public Health, “Older, more affluent people are more likely to keep their employer-based coverage as premiums rise while others increasingly get public coverage or go without altogether. . . . Population aging combined with declines from rising premiums could further destabilize the employment-based health coverage system.”

She said private coverage has been in a slow decline since the late 1980s and younger and lower-income groups have disproportionately lost coverage. Keenan said even if the population with employment-based coverage remains quite healthy, costs of coverage could increase as the average age of people with group coverage rises.

Although the main driver of rising premium costs is ongoing changes in medical technology, Keenan said, there is the possibility that population aging will interact with ongoing differential declines in group coverage to add to ongoing increases in premium costs.

Full text of the article "The ‘Graying’ Of Group Health Insurance" is available for purchase online.

Source: Yale School of Public Health News Release (January 5, 2007)

Rising Health Insurance Costs Pressuring Employees Considering Retiring Early

John O'Neil, writing in The New York Times, reports that the evaporation of health benefits for younger retirees will be playing an important role in the final career trajectory of the baby boom generation. "Even more than pensions, they say, retirees' access to health insurance may determine whether the next decade sees an outpouring of late-in-life energy and entrepreneurialism or whether offices will be clogged with workers stuck in their cubicles until they turn 65." In particular, workers need to contemplate having $50,000 to $100,000, or more, to cover health insurance until they qualify for Medicare, assuming they are healthy enough to qualify for insurance at all.

After discussing many aspects of the problem, O'Neil does conclude by pointing out that there are some signs of new alternatives emerging. For example, some states have extended COBRA coverage. In addition, some companyies are exploring the idea of adding or extending health insurance for pre-Medicare retirees, as they try to manage the departure of their baby boom work forces--discovering that a lot of people are hanging around, ready to retire, but they just don't have the benefits."

Source: "Want to Retire Early and Hang a Shingle? It'll Cost You" New York Times (April 11, 2006)

Corporate Retiree Health Benefits Continue To Be Scaled Back

Sylvester J. Schieber, director of U.S. benefits consulting at Watson Wyatt Worldwide, writes that the combination of rising health care costs and Medicare coverage means that retiree benefits, as we know them, are disappearing.

As Medicare begins to cover prescription drugs in 2006, the biggest gap in medical benefits for most retirees will be filled. For those 65 and older, coverage from their former employer may no longer be necessary. The large-scale trend away from employer-provided retiree medical benefits not only will continue; it's likely to accelerate.

While the bottom line is that U.S. companies that finance retiree medical benefits are at a competitive disadvantage compared to other companies in their industry that do not offer the benefits so that, over the long term, the inability to compete on costs may inevitably threaten the viability of any company that provides rich retiree health benefits, there is still a need for insurance coverage by those who retire before age 65. "Our challenge is to develop alternate approaches for workers to accumulate assets to cover their insurance and out-of-pocket health costs during retirement, but to do so in affordable and sustainable ways that allow U.S. companies to compete and continue to serve the needs of future retirees."

Source: "Retiree medical benefits-past, present and future" Employee Benefit News (March 2006)