DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... House Republicans would let employers demand workers’ genetic test results

what the hell is this?

House Republicans would let employers demand workers’ genetic test results

https://www.yahoo.com/news/house-republicans-let-employers-demand-100034946.html

A little-noticed bill moving through Congress would allow companies to require employees to undergo genetic testing or risk paying a penalty of thousands of dollars, and would let employers see that genetic and other health information.

Giving employers such power is now prohibited by legislation including the 2008 genetic privacy and nondiscrimination law known as GINA. The new bill gets around that landmark law by stating explicitly that GINA and other protections do not apply when genetic tests are part of a “workplace wellness” program.

The bill was approved by a House committee on Wednesday, with all 22 Republicans supporting it and all 17 Democrats opposed. It has been overshadowed by the debate over the House GOP proposal to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, but the genetic testing bill is expected to folded into a second ACA-related measure containing a grab-bag of provisions that do not affect federal spending, as the main bill does.

“What this bill would do is completely take away the protections of existing laws,” said Jennifer Mathis, director of policy and legal advocacy at the Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, a civil rights group. In particular, privacy and other protections for genetic and health information in GINA and the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act “would be pretty much eviscerated,” she said.

Employers say they need the changes because those two landmark laws are “not aligned in a consistent manner” with laws about workplace wellness programs, as an employer group said in congressional testimony last week.

Read more: Top wellness award goes to workplace where many health measures got worse

Employers got virtually everything they wanted for their workplace wellness programs during the Obama administration. The ACA allowed them to charge employees 50 percent more for health insurance if they declined to participate in the “voluntary” programs, which typically include cholesterol and other screenings; health questionnaires that ask about personal habits including plans to get pregnant; and sometimes weight loss and smoking cessation classes. And in rules that Obama’s Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued last year, a workplace wellness program counts as “voluntary” even if workers have to pay thousands of dollars more in premiums and deductibles if they don’t participate.

Despite those wins, the business community chafed at what it saw as the last obstacles to unfettered implementation of wellness programs: the genetic information and the disabilities laws. Both measures, according to congressional testimony last week by the American Benefits Council, “put at risk the availability and effectiveness of workplace wellness programs,” depriving employees of benefits like “improved health and productivity.” The Council represents Fortune 500 companies and other large employers that provide employee benefits. It did not immediately respond to questions about how lack of access to genetic information hampers wellness programs.

Rigorous studies by researchers not tied to the $8 billion wellness industry have shown that the programs improve employee health little if at all. An industry group recently concluded that they save so little on medical costs that, on average, the programs lose money. But employers continue to embrace them, partly as a way to shift more health care costs to workers, including by penalizing them financially.

Read more: Do workplace wellness programs improve employees’ health?

The 2008 genetic law prohibits a group health plan — the kind employers have — from asking, let alone requiring, someone to undergo a genetic test. It also prohibits that specifically for “underwriting purposes,” which is where wellness programs come in. “Underwriting purposes” includes basing insurance deductibles, rebates, rewards, or other financial incentives on completing a health risk assessment or health screenings. In addition, any genetic information can be provided to the employer only in a de-identified, aggregated form, rather than in a way that reveals which individual has which genetic profile.

There is a big exception, however: as long as employers make providing genetic information “voluntary,” they can ask employees for it. Under the House bill, none of the protections for health and genetic information provided by GINA or the disabilities law would apply to workplace wellness programs. As a result, employers could demand that employers undergo genetic testing and health screenings.

While the information returned to employers would not include workers’ names, it’s not difficult, especially in a small company, to match a genetic profile with the individual.

That “would undermine fundamentally the privacy provisions” of those laws,” said Nancy Cox, president of the American Society of Human Genetics, in a letter to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce the day before it approved the bill. “It would allow employers to ask employees invasive questions about … genetic tests they and their families have undergone” and “to impose stiff financial penalties on employees who choose to keep such information private, thus empowering employers to coerce their employees” into providing their genetic information.

If an employer has a wellness program but does not sponsor health insurance, rather than increasing insurance premiums, the employer could dock the paychecks of workers who don’t participate.

The privacy concerns also arise from how workplace wellness programs work. Employers, especially large ones, generally hire outside companies to run them. These companies are largely unregulated, and they are allowed to see genetic test results with employee names.

They sometimes sell the health information they collect from employees. As a result, employees get unexpected pitches for everything from weight-loss programs to running shoes, thanks to countless strangers poring over their health and genetic information.

I don't think I like that at all..

I see nothing wrong with this.

Imagine the embarrassment of hiring a fantastic White manager only to later find out he is actually....

Ahhh, never mind. Carry on.

Me either.

I read it with a "WTF?" look on my face.

Maybe there is more to the story than what is portrayed in this one article but I see absolutely no reason, zero, zilch, nada, that any company needs the genetic information of its employees.

I can only think of a handful of uses for it.... and they are all bad.

I don't like this at all. What do they use the results for? Do they screen out potential employees because they might have a genetic pre-disposition to an illness, or other problem?

Man, this seems Orwellian to me.

On the other hand ..... who knows if Elizabeth Warren would have received the opportunities she did if she had been forced to take a genetic test that disproved her claims of being a Native American?

Heck, with genetic testing, she might be a cashier at McDonald's right now.

Genetic information might be used to factor into preventative wellness programs and that might actually be beneficial if you were oblivious to the fact that you are genetically predisposed to have a specific health issue.

But with that said, there are a whole lot of evil uses for this information and since we are talking "bottom line" corporations wanting it, I'd say it's a bad thing.

If it's best for corporations than it's probably best for the consumer.

Technology.

I often times think/feel that the more tech we get, the worse off we are (in certain situations, ok?)

I could cite many examples.

And please, don't anyone take it like I'm against technology.

Maybe other employers have much more intensive wellness programs than ours... our wellness programs involve tracking how much time you spend exercising, sleeping, or how much water you drink a day... those are the kinds of wellness program competitions we have.. Collecting DNA would do nothing for that.

If the company really just had the best interest of its employees at heart, then it would pay for genetic testing, allow the results to be shared only between you and your doctor... and from there come up with a PERSONALIZED plan for you...

Is your company's wellness program like my wife's company's program? A take home, self answered questionnaire?

No, there is no questionnaire. We have these competitions about once a quarter that are optional to participate and they have an exercise theme or a sleep theme or a healthy eating theme and, on the honor system, you self-report your habits and if you accumulate enough points, you win a prize like a $100 gift card or something.. really very simple.

Then once a year at our company-wide function they do these biometric screenings for free. Again, optional and the information is only shared with you if you want it.

I only asked because, if it's just a take home question thing, then turn it in - who wouldn't cheat a little?

My wife doesn't cheat/lie. She has no reason to.

"do you drink alcohol, if so, how much?" She's honest.

Do you use any tobacco products? She's honest.

How often do you exercise? She's honest.

Last time you went to a doctor? She's honest.

Q's like that, that are 100% non verifiable (other than going to a doctor. I suppose that could be verified, but then again, possibly not.)

They take her blood pressure - and obviously, that's verifiable.

And that's pretty much it.


Now, imagine the person that drinks a 6 pack a night. Is he/she going to admit that?

"Do you exercise?" Yea, says the guy that can't walk out to get the mail without huffing and puffing.

I read that with a WTHF face...WHAT THE HELL FOR? This ain't right. The only reason a corporation would want this information would be to determine what kind of future health problems you might have and determine hiring based on that.

Being susceptible to something is no reason to discriminate against a potential employee.

A company should have this information.

It can be used to help employees and the company.

The employee can start to change they life style to reduce their genetic risk or pay the true cost of their health care.

Or even better a company should be able to let them go for violating company policy

IE (if an employee shows a genetic risk of alcoholism and they don’t stop using alcohol the company should be allowed to let them go)

A company can already test employs for nicotine and let them go if they test positive

In fact they need to do more; a company should have the right to discharge employees who don’t get there weight, type2 diabetes, cloistral and PTSD or other health issues under control.

It’s not the companies fault employees won’t take personal responsibility for their own lives

While removing all the unnecessary overregulation on companies,Such as coal companies dumping mining derbies contaminated with heavy metals and such into streams and rivers.

Hey Eric, welcome to the Boards!

I pretty much completely disagree with your post but around here that is considered a good thing.

IMO, the company hires me for the money I can make them. They provide healthcare and other benefits so I come there and not the company down the street.

Tell me what I must do, what time I start and finish each day but stay out of my personal life.

I can understand drug testing because that is for their safety, knowing they don't have impaired employees on the job but everything else about me is my business and not theirs.

Good question,, Maybe they want to purify America? I'm sure Steve Bannon, President of the USA would love that.