Is this health cost-cutter worth the morale hit?

by Jared Bilski

Employers are always looking for proven ways to lower health costs, so why are so many firms balking at a tactic with guaranteed results?  

Restricting healthcare coverage to employees’ spouses who are offered health insurance through their own employer will no doubt impact an employer’s healthcare costs.

Consider these findings from a 2014 study by the Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI): Insured employees spent an average of $5,430 on healthcare services, while insured spouses spent $6,609, a difference of $1,179.

(Note: Because the EBRI study found that spouses in an employment-based health plan are two times more likely to be female than male, the stark difference in cost uncovered in the EBRI study is at least partly explained by pregnancy-related expenses for wives insured through their husbands’ plans.)

Even if employers aren’t comfortable completely excluding spouses who can receive coverage elsewhere, there are other deterrents such as imposing a spousal surcharge.

But in spite of the potential savings of such a move, a surprisingly low number of employers are tackling the cost of spousal healthcare coverage through carve-outs.

Click here for entire article.