Big employers want to outsource healthcare, retirement benefits

http://www.reuters.com/article/governmentFilingsNews/idUSN1230790920070613

Big employers propose health benefits overhaul
Wed Jun 13, 2007 12:04AM EDT

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Some of the biggest U.S. employers said on Wednesday health care coverage and retirement plans for American workers should be delivered by competing third-party benefit administrators such as banks, investment companies and insurers.

Employers would continue to fund health insurance and retirement benefits, but would pool their purchasing power and outsource administrative functions to save money under the proposal, the ERISA Industry Committee said.

The committee, which includes executives from IBM and Tyco International Ltd., spent more than a year studying how to overhaul corporate health and retirement benefits to rein in soaring employer costs.

"Deficiencies in the current system clearly are challenging employers and, in some cases, the viability of the benefits system in general," the committee said in its report.

more...

Right. Put the fox in charge of the hen house. Good thinking.

"Viability of benefits systems" is code for "we don't want to spend the money anymore." Fine. Nationalize health care and pensions and make them entitlements. Charge employers for both.

I'll be flying to Bangalore early Monday morning so I can make my appointment with Dr. Suresh. I'll be back by Thursday unless they need more tests. I already told work I'd proabably miss the whole week.

'WE' must get and keep wall street's grubby mitts out of our necessities for a decent quality of life.

considering most of europe and 1st world countries HAVE NATIONAL HEALTH CARE, companies should be on the front lines for government run single payer. car companies should be demanding it.

corporations and the financial industry because:



Also note the casual use of "benefits system." Next target, paid leave?

All emphasis mine.

That would save the most money.

But, a lot of companies will be faced with offering less health coverage, or going under, and I'm guessing a lot of them will choose less health insurance for their employees... which might help in the short-term, but will be devastating for everybody in the long-run.

Dilute the risk pool, cut the admin costs, and literally everyone wins.

But nah, that's far too sensible, I suppose.