by admin | Mar 29, 2017 | Cybersecurity, Human Resources
I’ve looked at clouds from both sides now
From up and down and still somehow
It’s cloud illusions I recall
I really don’t know clouds at all
— Joni Mitchell, “Both Sides, Now”
And like that song from 1969, it appears that most employees really don’t know cloud computing at all. In an article on the Society for Human Resource Management’s website titled, “Public Enemy No. 1 for Employers? Careless Cloud Users, Study Says,” a North American IT solutions and managed services provider called Softchoice found that 1 in 3 users of cloud-based apps (e.g., Google Docs and Dropbox) download the app without letting their IT department know. Cloud computing became popular a few years ago because people could store all their documents, photos, and other information and then access that data from anywhere at any time and on any device.
What makes this such a bad situation is not the cloud computing itself, but that the vast majority of employees lack any sense of cybersecurity. That same study found that 1 in 5 employees:
- Keep their passwords in plain sight (e.g., on Post-it Notes on their desks).
- Have accessed work files from a device that was not password-protected.
- Have lost devices that weren’t password-protected.
Complicating this further is that the employees who actually do use passwords usually have weak passwords. That is, they are easy to guess (e.g., “1234,” “password,” or their username). Rather than leave a company and its network vulnerable to attack, some IT people suggest a ban on cloud accounts for work.
Security breaches involving a company’s intellectual property can be very costly. Sometimes referred to as “ransomware,” the important data of an organization will either be stolen or encrypted and will not be released until a fee is paid.
A better solution to a ban on cloud accounts would be to educate employees on the necessity for cyber security, train them to improve their online security habits, and remind them that IT rules are in place to make a company more secure, not make it more difficult for employees to be productive. Cyber thieves are clever and when they can’t break into a system using technology, they often rely on the flaws of human nature.
As we become more and more connected to the Internet, we leave ourselves and the companies where we work more accessible to cyber threats. It’s imperative that employees keep everything locked down.
By Tara Marshall, Originally Published By United Benefit Advisors
by admin | Mar 22, 2017 | Benefit Management, Compliance, Human Resources, Medicare
Entities such as employers with group health plans that provide prescription drug coverage to individuals that are eligible for Medicare Part D have two major disclosure requirements that they must meet at least annually:
- Provide annual written notice to all Medicare eligible individuals (employees, spouses, dependents, retirees, COBRA participants, etc.) who are covered under the prescription drug plan.
- Disclose to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) whether the coverage is “creditable prescription drug coverage.”
Because there is often ambiguity regarding who in a covered population is Medicare eligible, it is best practice for employers to provide the notice to all plan participants.
CMS provides guidance for disclosure of creditable coverage for both individuals and employers.
Who Must Disclose?
These disclosure requirements apply regardless of whether the plan is large or small, is self-funded or fully insured, or whether the group health plan pays primary or secondary to Medicare. Entities that provide prescription drug coverage through a group health plan must provide the disclosures. Group health plans include:
- Group health plans under ERISA, including health reimbursement arrangements (HRAs), dental and vision plans, certain cancer policies, and employee assistance plans (EAPs) if they provide medical care
- Group health plans sponsored for employees or retirees by a multiple employer welfare arrangement (MEWA)
- Qualified prescription drug plans
Health flexible spending accounts (FSAs), Archer medical savings accounts, and health savings accounts (HSAs) do not have disclosure requirements. In contrast, the high deductible health plan (HDHP) offered in conjunction with the HSA would have disclosure requirements.
There are no exceptions for church plans or government plans.
By Danielle Capilla, Originally Published By United Benefit Advisors
by admin | Mar 17, 2017 | Employee Benefits, Health & Wellness, Human Resources
There is no denying our industry is changing rapidly, and it’s not about to slow down. Combined with disruptive advances in technology and evolving consumer expectations, we’re seeing consumer-driven health care emerge. Take, for example, the fact that employees now spend more than nine hours a day on digital devices.
There’s no doubt that all this screen time takes a toll.
- Device screens expose users to blue light. It’s the light of the day and helps us wake up and regulate our sleep/wake cycle.
- Research suggests blue light may lead to eye strain and fatigue. Digital eye strain is the physical eye discomfort felt by many individuals after two or more hours in front of a digital screen.
- In fact, digital eye strain has surpassed carpal tunnel syndrome and tendonitis as the leading computer-related workplace injury in America1.
Employees are demanding visibility into health care costs and transparency in the options available so they can take control of their own health. Consumers are more knowledgeable and sensitive to cost, and as a result becoming very selective about their care.
| Technology Exposure |
Spends more than nine hours
a day on digital devices |
| Millennials |
2 in 5 |
| Gen-Xers |
1 in 3 |
| Baby Boomers |
1 in 4 |
Lack of preventive care
Preventive screenings are a crucial piece of overall health and wellness. In fact, the largest investment companies make to detect illnesses and manage medical costs is in their health plan. But if employees don’t take advantage of preventive care, this investment will not pay off. Only one out of 10 employees get the preventive screenings you’d expect during an annual medical visit2.
It’s a big lost opportunity for organizations that are looking for a low-cost, high-engagement option to drive employee wellness.
How a vision plan can help
The good news is that the right vision plan can help your employees build a bigger safety net to catch chronic conditions early. It all starts with education on the importance of an eye exam.
Eye exams are preventive screenings that most people seek out as a noninvasive, inexpensive way to check in on their health; it’s a win-win for employers and employees.
- A comprehensive eye exam can reveal health conditions even if the person being examined doesn’t have symptoms.
- The eyes are the only unobtrusive place in a person’s body with a clear view of their blood vessels.
- And, an eye exam provides an opportunity to learn about the many options available to take control of their health and how to protect their vision.
By screening for conditions like diabetes, high blood pressure, and high cholesterol during eye exams, optometrists are often the ones to detect early signs of these conditions and put the patient on a quicker path to managing the condition. In a study conducted in partnership with Human Capital Management Services (HCMS), VSP doctors were the first to detect signs of3:
- Diabetes – 34 percent of the time
- Hypertension – 39 percent of the time
- High cholesterol – 62 percent of the time
By Pat McClelland, Originally Published By United Benefit Advisors
by admin | Mar 9, 2017 | ACA, COBRA, Compliance, Human Resources, IRS
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) recently updated its longstanding Questions and Answers about Information Reporting by Employers on Form 1094-C and Form 1095-C that provides information on:
Generally, the Q&A describes when and how an employer reports its offers of coverage and describes the codes that employers should use when completing Form 1094-C and Form 1095-C for calendar year 2016 that are to be filed in 2017. The Q&A should be used in conjunction with the Instructions for Forms 1094-C and 1095-C which provide detailed information about completing the forms.
The updated Q&A provides information on COBRA reporting that had been left pending in earlier versions of the Q&A for the past year. UBA’s ACA Advisor “IRS Q&A About Employer Information Reporting on Form 1094-C and Form 1095-C” reviews the new information and explains other reporting obligations covered under the Q&A.
Reporting Offers of COBRA Continuation Coverage
An offer of COBRA continuation coverage that is made to a former employee due to termination of employment is not reported as an offer of coverage in Part II of Form 1095-C.
If the applicable large employer is required to complete a Form 1095-C for the former employee (because, for example, the individual was a full-time employee for one or more months of the year before terminating employment), the employer should use code 1H, No offer of coverage, on line 14 for any month that the former employee was offered COBRA continuation coverage. For those same months, the employer should use code 2A, Employee not employed during the month, on line 16 for each month in which the individual is not an employee (regardless of whether the former employee enrolled in the COBRA continuation coverage).
An employer that provides COBRA continuation coverage through a self-funded health plan generally must report that coverage for any former employee or family member who enrolls in that COBRA continuation coverage in Part III of the Form 1095-C. Also, the employer may report the coverage on Form 1095-B for any individual who was not an employee during the year and who separately elected the COBRA continuation coverage.
By Danielle Capilla, Originally Published United Benefit Advisors
by admin | Mar 7, 2017 | Benefit Plan Tips, Tricks and Traps, Human Resources
Last fall I had the pleasure of hosting a UBA WisdomWorkplace webinar called “Success in Voluntary through Strategic Benefits Communication.” I discussed recent Sun Life survey data regarding employee engagement and understanding of the value of voluntary benefits.
In the world of voluntary insurance carriers, success in voluntary benefits can be measured in various ways. A key metric is employee participation. For carriers, this is important because the greater the employee participation in a voluntary product, the better the spread of risk, which leads to appropriate margins and sustainable pricing.
But in the world of HR, this has not been a key metric. While good participation can reflect employee acceptance (and low participation might raise the question about whether the product is worth the time it takes to administer payroll deductions and facilitate billing), employee engagement has become more important.
This concept of knowing what you’re participating in makes me think about a good friend of mine who, a few years ago, reached out to me in a panic. He works for a large corporation with employees spread across the country. His employer was dropping all medical plan PPO options for the coming year and switching to a high- and higher-deductible option. He was sent an e-mail that provided few details but explained the action was due to high health care costs. There was no indication that more information was forthcoming, and the communication as a whole was insufficient because he couldn’t find answers to the questions he needed, the most important being, “what does this mean to me and my family?” I explained recent trends and how a high-deductible health plan (HDHP) with a health savings account (HSA) could be advantageous to him, but as we all know, not everyone is knowledgeable about their benefits or has friends in the business to explain their options.
When employees aren’t engaged in good benefits decision making, they can misunderstand or underuse their plans. Our recent survey showed that while employees are becoming more aware of changes in their medical plans, 54 percent still don’t know their out-of-pocket maximum, and 33 percent don’t know their deductible.
Employees are, however, concerned about their financial risks, and most do not have emergency savings or a cash flow to handle unexpected medical expenses. Moreover, research from the Federal Reserve shows that some people actually choose to forgo needed medical care simply because they cannot afford it.1
While these data point out employee challenges, our research does provide some encouraging feedback that shows how we might be able to help employees become knowledgeable about their benefits choices.
For example, though employees understand the benefits gap, 62 percent of those surveyed say they need additional coverage. We also learned that 70 percent were not familiar with the term “voluntary benefits,” but once they understood what voluntary products are, 63 percent agreed that these benefits are helpful in filling the gaps in health care coverage, even if they have to pay for these benefits themselves.
The real kicker is that 87 percent say more customized benefits choices that fit their specific lifestyles would help them make the right health plan choices.
This is where strategic benefits communication can play a vital role. In addition to ensuring that employees really understand the value of all of their benefits, including true total compensation, a well-planned communication effort engages employees by empowering them with information so they are confident in their open enrollment decisions.
How will you know whether you have been a successful communicator? In subsequent posts, we will talk about gathering employee feedback.
Over the next few months, this blog series will examine the ways HR benefits professionals can achieve success—not just in offering voluntary products to employees, but more important, in their overall benefits communications.
By Kevin D. Seeker
Originally published by www.ubabenefits.com
by admin | Mar 2, 2017 | ACA, Group Benefit Plans, Human Resources
Last fall, President Barack Obama signed the Protecting Affordable Coverage for Employees Act (PACE), which preserved the historical definition of small employer to mean an employer that employs 1 to 50 employees. Prior to this newly signed legislation, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) was set to expand the definition of a small employer to include companies with 51 to 100 employees (mid-size segment) beginning January 1, 2016.
If not for PACE, the mid-size segment would have become subject to the ACA provisions that impact small employers. Included in these provisions is a mandate that requires coverage for essential health benefits (not to be confused with minimum essential coverage, which the ACA requires of applicable large employers) and a requirement that small group plans provide coverage levels that equate to specific actuarial values. The original intent of expanding the definition of small group plans was to lower premium costs and to increase mandated benefits to a larger portion of the population.
The lower cost theory was based on the premise that broadening the risk pool of covered individuals within the small group market would spread the costs over a larger population, thereby reducing premiums to all. However, after further scrutiny and comments, there was concern that the expanded definition would actually increase premium costs to the mid-size segment because they would now be subject to community rating insurance standards. This shift to small group plans might also encourage mid-size groups to leave the fully insured market by self-insuring – a move that could actually negate the intended benefits of the expanded definition.
Another issue with the ACA’s expanded definition of small group plans was that it would have resulted in a double standard for the mid-size segment. Not only would they be subject to the small group coverage requirements, but they would also be subject to the large employer mandate because they would meet the ACA’s definition of an applicable large employer.
Note: Although this bill preserves the traditional definition of a small employer, it does allow states to expand the definition to include organizations with 51 to 100 employees, if so desired.
By Vicki Randall, Originally Published By United Benefit Advisors
