If anyone reading is a lawyer familiar with labor laws/practices: This question is moot to the extent that it won't affect me, but I'm wondering if a threat coming down the paygrade pipeline is valid or would be a violation of labor law if acted on.
I work for a municipality, and participate in the offered insurance package. I'm no expert, but it has always been my understanding that the city is "self-insured" and the named company on our cards is simply a benefits management company that oversees the administration of benefits on behalf of the city. The company that coordinates our benefits recently partnered with a local hospital and has initiated a voluntary employee wellness program which in summary can reduce your premium if you participate in a health screening to include some bloodwork and complete quarterly health challenges through some online program. For the projected amount of savings, I could work two more details in a year and cover the difference without jumping through their hoops, so I didn't bother attending the screenings. It was clearly noted that if you didn't attend a screening by a certain date you would be ineligible to participate and receive any savings until the next year, so I'm a big boy and read and understood that and chose not to participate - kind of like when they have an open enrollment period and they notify you and if you miss the cut-off date you have to wait until the next year to change things. No problem.
After the dates had passed, they set another round and sent out a letter stating they noted I had not attended, reminding me of the requirements to be completed should I wish to participate, the new deadline, and a waiver form they wished signed and returned if I did not wish to participate. Due to scheduling and the notice being put in my box at work rather than mailed to my house, I received this on the last day available. Still didn't wish to participate, and since the last scheduled screening time had passed, I considered the waiver a moot point and disregarded it.
Now I have received (again in my box at work) similar notice, again past the last screening date (I have been out on a short vacation stint), this time with a notification that the mayor has decreed that the next paycheck will be withheld from any employee not completing and returning the waiver if they choose not to participate.
It's not that I disregarded the waiver because of any personally held belief that I should not have to sign it, it just seemed unnecessary given the last posted date had already gone by. It's no skin off my back to sign and return the damned thing, but I take some umbrage with what seems like a strong-arm tactic by the city administration in a matter that the more I think about it really doesn't seem like it should even concern them, and question the legality of such action if carried out.
An employee's completion of such a form for such an issue has no bearing on their work performance or reaching any goal of operating the city. The monetary difference between participating or not would seem to me to only affect the city in regards to the dollar amount to withhold from the employee's check. As the issue of the waiver seems to be for the benefit management company to have on file proof someone chose to opt out of their program and knowingly waived participation rights until the next open period, it appears to me that any contention surrounding such would be a civil matter between the employee and the benefit management company and that the city wouldn't be an available target for any litigation should an employee raise an issue, unless that "self-insured" bit makes them somehow ropes them into the equation (again, I'm on expert on the mechanics of that end). Finally, it would seem to me that to withhold an employee's wages for such a thing would be improperly punitive.
If anyone reading deals with this kind of stuff and has some input regarding whether such a penalty would be appropriate or legal under labor laws, I'd appreciate a response. To reiterate, I have every intention of signing it if their knickers are in such a twist, but the tone of the threat to penalize monetarily over something like this really didn't sit well with me.
I work for a municipality, and participate in the offered insurance package. I'm no expert, but it has always been my understanding that the city is "self-insured" and the named company on our cards is simply a benefits management company that oversees the administration of benefits on behalf of the city. The company that coordinates our benefits recently partnered with a local hospital and has initiated a voluntary employee wellness program which in summary can reduce your premium if you participate in a health screening to include some bloodwork and complete quarterly health challenges through some online program. For the projected amount of savings, I could work two more details in a year and cover the difference without jumping through their hoops, so I didn't bother attending the screenings. It was clearly noted that if you didn't attend a screening by a certain date you would be ineligible to participate and receive any savings until the next year, so I'm a big boy and read and understood that and chose not to participate - kind of like when they have an open enrollment period and they notify you and if you miss the cut-off date you have to wait until the next year to change things. No problem.
After the dates had passed, they set another round and sent out a letter stating they noted I had not attended, reminding me of the requirements to be completed should I wish to participate, the new deadline, and a waiver form they wished signed and returned if I did not wish to participate. Due to scheduling and the notice being put in my box at work rather than mailed to my house, I received this on the last day available. Still didn't wish to participate, and since the last scheduled screening time had passed, I considered the waiver a moot point and disregarded it.
Now I have received (again in my box at work) similar notice, again past the last screening date (I have been out on a short vacation stint), this time with a notification that the mayor has decreed that the next paycheck will be withheld from any employee not completing and returning the waiver if they choose not to participate.
It's not that I disregarded the waiver because of any personally held belief that I should not have to sign it, it just seemed unnecessary given the last posted date had already gone by. It's no skin off my back to sign and return the damned thing, but I take some umbrage with what seems like a strong-arm tactic by the city administration in a matter that the more I think about it really doesn't seem like it should even concern them, and question the legality of such action if carried out.
An employee's completion of such a form for such an issue has no bearing on their work performance or reaching any goal of operating the city. The monetary difference between participating or not would seem to me to only affect the city in regards to the dollar amount to withhold from the employee's check. As the issue of the waiver seems to be for the benefit management company to have on file proof someone chose to opt out of their program and knowingly waived participation rights until the next open period, it appears to me that any contention surrounding such would be a civil matter between the employee and the benefit management company and that the city wouldn't be an available target for any litigation should an employee raise an issue, unless that "self-insured" bit makes them somehow ropes them into the equation (again, I'm on expert on the mechanics of that end). Finally, it would seem to me that to withhold an employee's wages for such a thing would be improperly punitive.
If anyone reading deals with this kind of stuff and has some input regarding whether such a penalty would be appropriate or legal under labor laws, I'd appreciate a response. To reiterate, I have every intention of signing it if their knickers are in such a twist, but the tone of the threat to penalize monetarily over something like this really didn't sit well with me.
