Posted on 03/10/2017 8:10:21 AM PST by MarchonDC09122009
House GOP would let employers demand workers' genetic test results
https://www.statnews.com/2017/03/10/workplace-wellness-genetic-testing/
House Republicans would let employers demand workers’ genetic test results
By Sharon Begley @sxbegle
March 10, 2017
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, HR 1313, 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 be 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.
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 30 percent, and possibly 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.
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 long as they complied with the ACA’s very limited requirements for the programs. As a result, employers could demand that employees 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.
Sharon Begley can be reached at sharon.begley@statnews.com Follow Sharon on Twitter @sxbegle
Privacy Policy | Comment Policy Steve March 10, 2017 at 8:18 am I’m sorry, but why do we need someone’s genetic information in order to execute a workplace wellness program? What if the employee is screened and determined to have a variant that has a high likelihood of causing cancer in the near future.
The employer would know that would increase their payouts, so they could find a way to terminate the employee.
There are all sorts of ethical dilemmas that could play out if employers have the genetic information of their employees.
I see this from the other side. If you work for me and the law requires me to pay for your medical insurance, you can be damn sure that I want to know about all your defects.
For what purpose do you “damn sure” want to know?
From what I read, the information is supposed to be limited to use in wellness plans...
Would you be using it for termination purposes?
Boy will we old cranks have fun telling future youngsters how things got to be so Eff’ed up on our watch...
I don’t think it will be limited too workforce usage either...
Every time I see one of those DNA-results commercials for 23andMe or Ancestry.com, I cringe because (as I asked my sister-in-law), who has access to the information? What will they do with it?
Sadly there are folks here that don’t seem to see the danger...
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/1313/all-actions?overview=closed#tabs
___________________________
Why would you call it fake news?
If you read thru the posts, you will see it was posted on Congress.Gov HR1313 and there are several sponsors—tho not the 22 GOP that the article mentions.
I have healthy DNA & healthy buying habits. Willing to sell DNA.
on the road to 666
F them.
They nor employers do not understand genetic test results. This will be used against people. Explain to me why you can’t discriminate against employees because of the color of their skin. BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE BORN THE WAY THEY ARE BORN. How are your genetic fingerprints not as out of your control?
This would be the height of discrimination.
This would also be a lack of privacy EQUIVALENT TO requiring open leg “doctor view” naked crotch shots on job applications.
How DARE some Republicans think this is even worth a suggestion in the chamber?
The legalese doesn’t explain that this would immediately MAKE HIRING MALE HOMOSEXUALS VERY DIFFICULT, if they really mean it re “wellness.” It would also follow that you shouldn’t hire people who drink much alcohol. We all know these things will never happen. So it’s BS.
People’s health should be their own business. We need to stop requiring any employer from any health coverage for their employees. Switzerland has solved this problem perfectly. A Swiss employer covers all accidents of their employees. That is the only thing they cover. Not the rest of health care. Just all accidents, whether they happened on the job or on the ski run. It’s very simple and takes up little time in HR (I used to run an HR dept there). No investigations needed. Just bring us your accident Med bill and we pay.
I think whoever sponsored this needs a firing squad.
The Republican party has a serious “enemy within” problem that needs to be rectified if there’s to be any hope of progress.
I see this from the other side. If you work for me and the law requires me to pay for your medical insurance, you can be damn sure that I want to know about all your defects.
GET MANDATED HEALTH INS OUT OF EMPLOYERS. If a company wishes to offer it as a perk, fine, but no laws about this at all. If a company wants to offer health insurance as a perk to employees who give permission to be genetically tested, fine also, but let them get sued if the employee isn’t willing and the company will lose. It’s like saying you can work here if you never engage in anal sex, so we will keep cameras in your bedroom. You can’t demand things like that. Your genes are the most unique and personal things about you.
I didn't. I asked a question, hence the question mark! :(?)
Look at people sending off their DNA to find out their heritage. American health records offshore in electronic format. Your phone basically tracks everywhere you go.
What could possibly go wrong with any of that?
Sounds cool. At first....
Why would you call it fake news?
I didn’t. I asked a question, hence the question mark! :(?)
Oh, ok well, apparently it is not fake news as it is listed on congressional website.
Yes, the world is well on the road to 666.
Sorry for a few double-pinged to this thread.
No damn body has a “right” to my genetic information, nor will they be getting it. Not until EVERY HIV or AIDS patient has to disclose they’re viruses. Not until EVERY person with an STD has to give up there lifestyle up publicly, and not even then. A person’s genetic make up is wholly out of their control, lifestyles that lead to AIDS or STDs is another matter.
Who ever thinks this a viable idea is EVIL.
***I wonder if this is ok under HIPAA ?***
Of course it isn’t. I guess they’ll have to scrap that.
Good luck getting anyone who cares about freedom to work for you.
Do you all realize how many people this would affect? If your mother has heart disease you are genetically predisposed to it. Same with cancer, diabetes, I could go on. Genetically speaking, everyone has a “flaw” somewhere in their DNA.
Anyone for this is NOT a freedom lover. I can’t believe what I’m reading. I bet some you pushing this garbage are furious to know you can be spied on by your smartphone. Unbelievable.
What you said.
The more I think about this the angrier I’m getting. You cannot discriminate based on race, and rightfully so. But it has been proven that blacks have a higher likelihood, based on genetics, of having diabetes and heart disease. And let’s not forget sickle cell, so your going to penalize people based on their genetic makeup, something they have no control over, but not based on race, again something you have no control over.
This is nothing more than greedy Republicans doing the bidding for insurance companies. I can’t believe I’m saying this, but I stand with every Democrat who voted against this. F the Republican’s!
Lili, its worse than that. Epigenetics is a thing, and just because you have 20,000x more of a chance to have anything (heart disease, any cancer, Alzheimer’s, etc), your employer has no idea what lifestyle changes you may have made since childhood to prevent it.
No one should LOOK at someone else’s genetics (other than their doctor if asked). Too many false decisions could be made.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.