Workplace Wellness Initiatives - The Good and The Bad

Workplace Wellness Initiatives at the corporate level are beneficial, right? Wellness statistics clearly show that such Workplace Wellness Initiatives are not only cost-effective for the corporation but can assist the staff member in developing a healthier lifestyle. With the increasing cost of health care, Workplace Wellness Initiatives simply make sense. So where does the problem come in? Let’s examine the topic from both perspectives.

Workplace Wellness Programs: The Good
• A sampling of ROI for Workplace Wellness Programs: Bank of America: 600 percent; General Motors:370 percent; Pepsico: 300 percent; Citibank: 465 percent; and the Washoe County School District leading the pack at a whopping 1,560%. (Campbell,J., Wellness Improvement Experts, www.wellnessimprovementexperts.com, Albuquerque, New Mexico.)
• Companies with Workplace Wellness Initiatives have realized a 28% reduction in sick leave, a 26% reduction in adjunctive health care costs and a 30% reduction in disability and workers compensation costs. (Health Affairs, Volume 21, No.2, March, 2002.)
• The Washoe county School District in Northern Nevada realized a $15.60 ROI for each dollar spent due to a 20% reduction in rates of absence. (Hardy,A. (2005). At the Top Of The Class. WELCOA’s Absolute Advantage Magazine, 5(1), 14-20.)
• Workplace Wellness Initiatives provide the structure, encouragement, incentives and ongoing support that many people need in order to make lifestyle changes.
• Employees also realize returns on their efforts. FiServ, a financial services technology corporation, gave workers who filled out a health risk assessment a significant discount on their health insurance premium. (Holland, Kelley, The New York Times, July 22, 2007.)

Workplace Wellness Programs: The Bad
The flip side of the argument centers on basic human rights. Do we want/need our employer to tell us to eat our veggies or lose 30 pounds? Some organizations are doing just that and at least one lawsuit has resulted because of it.
• Three hundred organizations have requested assistance from a national employment and labor law firm to institute more aggressive Workplace Wellness Programs.(Cornwell, Lisa, Associated Press, Albuquerque Journal, September 10,2007.)
• Clarian Health, based in Indianapolis, Will start reducing staff member paychecks by $10.00 for every staff member who has a Body Mass Index (BMI) of greater than 29.9 because not enough workers were utilizing their wellness services.(Cornwell, Lisa, Associated Press, Albuquerque Journal, September 10,2007.)
• Scott Rodrigues filed a suit against his prospective employer, Scotts Miracle-Gro, because he believed the corporation’s antismoking policy violated his civil rights. The corporation has a policy against hiring workers who smoke and Mr. Rodrigues’drug screen was positive for nicotine.(Holland, Kelley, The New York Times,July 22,2007.)
• staff member advocates are concerned that health discrimination may not be covered under the Americans with Disabilities Act.(Cornwell, Lisa, Associated Press, Albuquerque Journal, September 10,2007.)

Penalizing workers by hitting them where it hurts the most,their pocketbook, does not appear to be a favorable approach to molding human behavior.
Such tactics may result in increased resentments and retaliation, primarily in the form of rates of absence and presenteeism (decreased productivity on the job.) Voluntary, incentive-based initiatives, such as the one in the Washoe County School District, can and do produce results. A positive attitude on the part of management along with an opportunity for workers to have a stake in the decision-making may yield the greatest dividends to both employer and staff member.The motivation and resolve needed to change unhealthy lifestyle habits can best be derived from the basic tenets of encouragement, respect and support.