Comments

1
Christ, people.

This is a VOLUNTARY program where people can get SLIGHTLY MORE of an employee discount for agreeing to give up some health info, and try to be healthier. I really, really hope there's no legal problem with that.

It's not at all like it's being presented here, as if overweight employees will be fired or held back for advancement or whatever else.

No good deed from a batshit-crazy right-winger CEO goes unpunished, eh?
2
Smirk, this is muck raking tabloid "journalism" at its worst. How could a program be bad if one woman in the PR department is excited about it? The mind reels.
3
@atomic: Pat Coleman wrote this post. Read your bylines.
4
Wouldn't Whole Foods save more money by lobbying for health care reform? Jus' sayin'.
5
“Rewarding people on very specific health issues can run afoul of the law, state and federal,” Klare explains. “Personally identifiable health information is protected under state and federal law,” Klare adds, noting how collecting and sharing health information could violate federal health privacy laws laid out in the 1996 Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act

So these health issues can apply to smokers, alcoholics, drug addicts and prostitutes, right? It's only fair. And banning trans fats.

Watch out fatties - the control freaks are coming for you now.



6
That is really funny. Although I am very fit, I have genetically high cholesterol (my entire family on my mothers side has it). I am slim, vegetarian, regular exerciser, et cetera but my cholesterol is 305. Even with meds it goes down to 250 (I don't take meds as they are not very good for you). Cholesterol is not the only indicator of health.
7
CC, I find it hard to believe you'd endorse creating a climate where privileged and/or confidential information can be bartered away for financial gain. The "good deed" here is that the batshit-crazy right-winger CEO can gather incredibly private information about his employees under the auspices of... um... reducing his own overhead?
8
HAHAHAHAHA! Oh this is great... So let me break it down for you. Not too long ago, Mr. Whole Paycheck himself (John Mackey) took a proverbial crap on health care reform and how he is against it. Well, chew on your $7.99 a pound pasta, Mr. Mackey, because if you supported health care reform, you wouldn't have this problem! .."$150 million Whole Foods Market spent on health care in 2009 is expected to rise significantly in the coming years". Ah, Karma comes in all shapes and sizes my friend.
9
@atomic: The information is only confidential until you willingly waive that confidentiality in a bid to snare an extra 10% employee discount.

No one is twisting anyone's arm here, there's no huge imbalance in information or bargaining power - if you don't want it, don't fucking do it. That's the kind of bartering I love and endorse.

Mackey is trying to reduce the overhead of the company by giving employees a totally voluntary financial incentive to be more fit. Company makes more money, and those-who-are-so-inclined get more fit. Everyone else just goes along as they did before, not having any protected health information disclosed (although it still may be easy for the non-expert to observe them being fat).

I fail to see the downside here.
10
Davis: if you expect me to "read" articles before I metaphorically yell about them on the internet, you expect too much.
11
BMI is a terrible measure of obesity, or of health in general, unless coupled with other factors. Based on BMI alone, someone like Terrell Owens is flirting with morbid obesity.
12
Hello, Whole Foods Market here. This is a voluntary program for people who are ready to make healthy changes. There are four measures - smoking, cholesterol, blood pressure and BMI. We're all very excited about this program and we're providing tools and incentives for people to help them with their healthy lifestyles.
13
I think for people who don't meet the requirements set for the extra discount, they should implement a program that rewards employees for improvements in health from when they sign up, even if those improvements don't take them to the level of the currently proposed system.

It's one thing to reward people who are healthy and saving the company on health care charges, but the biggest savings for the company are going to be made by getting the most at risk employees healthier, even if they're not taking down to the most optimal levels.

If I'm 300 pounds and a smoker, and I'm taxing the system, and you tell me I have to cut down to 150 and drop all my vices, I'm not even going to think about trying. If you tell me that there would be incentives for making a certain % of improvement, I might bite.

This is like companies that offer incentives to employees who ride their bike to work. Same premise, but no one complains about that.
14
Sounds like more goofiness from the Whole Foods space ship. But, then again, they do still sell homeopathic products, and that means they're selling what the faith healers are selling, only Whole Foods gets a bigger profit out of it.
15
My on-again, off-again boycott of Whole Foods is BACK ON LIKE DONKEY KONG.
16
The "it's voluntary" argument falls apart when it impacts compensation.
17
Did everyone notice that I got BIG UPS?
18
Whole Foods shouldn't be punishing people like C who have genetic factors. The only other factors they're really measuring are the effects of nicotine use, animal product consumption, and exercise.

If they could somehow track it, it would make more sense to have something like a 3% discount for not using tobacco, 4% for being vegan, 3% for not using a parking space or attending exercise classes, etc.

Or, they could have an option of a 20% flat discount or a 30% discount only on vegan foods.

They should reward good behavior, not good biology. That said, their current policy makes a whole lot more sense than regular employers who pay the same for people who eat bacon & eggs every morning and people who eat healthy and exercise.
19
I knew it was only a matter of time before a delusional vegan piped up.

Vegan diets CAN be healthy if they're done right, but they're not automatically more healthy than omnivorous diets, and most times are actually less so.

Rewarding a person specifically for eating only vegan foods could be pretty counter productive.
20
@ Smiley: actually, it doesn't break down at all. An employee discount ISN'T compensation. We don't have company stores anymore; Whole Foods employees aren't paid in scrip. Personally, I'd be interested to meet many WF employees who can actually afford to shop at WF, regardless of a 10% disparity in discount.
21
BMI is an absurdly inaccurate method of measuring overall health and well-being. Weight divided by height, what could go wrong? Except, uh...

http://fabulousfifties.files.wordpress.com…

Oh yeah. Muscle also contributes to weight, and is much more dense.

The previously-mentioned Terell Owens has a BMI of 28.

Mike Tyson, in his young prime, would have been 30.1 (obese).

Muhammad Ali, at the Rumble in the Jungle: 27. And he actually avoided doing heavy lifting as part of his training.
22
Consumption of animal products doesn't affect everyone the same way (genetics again). I'd qualify for a platinum discount, and I eat a lot of bacon and cheese. And I am old.

Are they going to test for nicotine use? Who does the measuring and examining? Is it self-reported?

I am thinking of my alcoholic chain-smoking friend who is a long-time WF employee. i doubt that he's as excited as Vicki Foley.
23
Gratz on the BIG UPS, Reymont.

I don't know, this seems like a decent program that they've taken sane steps to implement, and it's only rewarded by a discount and not tied to compensation. It's not like they're firing you for smoking. I agree with CC, I don't think anyone's being penalized so I don't see a downside.
24
I work at the Portland VA Medical Center and my job entails working closely with our IRB and the FDA to make sure the data and PHI (Protected Health Information) collected in my research conforms to HIPAA laws.

This program, of all the things about it that sound fishy, to me the HIPAA issues sound the most likely to open WF up to a law suit. It's true that I already hate the WF CEO for his Op-Ed piece, but even if I didn't I would be worried about this program.

Having your staff sign HIPAA waivers does not necessarily protect an organization from being sued should PHI be released. How will they be protecting PHI? How many people will get to see the PHI? What accountability will there be should there be an illegal (that is to say ANY) disclosure of PHI?

Protected health information isn't just some thing that people whine about. It can cause serious, life-altering changes and problems to people if it is disclosed improperly. Having my PHI collected by any non-medical entity, especially my employer, would cause me deep concern.
25
@CC I think it is generally poor form for any employer to ask employees to waive their legal rights under any circumstances, even voluntarily, and even with compensation. Obviously there are exceptions, but it's the sort of thing I cringe hearing about.

My reasoning is thus:

A) People are idiots, and would probably waive all the amendments save the second in exchange for a fresh toffee apple.

Laws like this exist to protect people from themselves.

B) People are idiots, and when they do idiotic things like giving their employers unnecessary medical information for a 10% discount on fancy cheese, it damages the laws which I tend to enjoy, like medical privacy protections.

Laws like this exist to protect me from other people, and if they are only selectively enforced (on a fancy cheese by fancy cheese basis) then they will be less effective when I want to avail myself of them later.
26
Who do I have to make out with to get a toffee apple?

(IS THAT A REAL THING???)
27
For a chance to make out with Kiala, I'd invent the toffee apple, if it doesn't exist. I wonder if he meant a candied apple?
28
I think you just ruined your chances calling her a 'he'.

But I digress.

Whole Foods gives you tiny portions for neck breaking prices, that alone should make their employees lose weight.
29
I'm a personal trainer and BMI is a very poor indicator of overall fitness. It's almost never used as a tool in assessment or testing by anyone good at their trade. Cholesterol shouldn't be used, either. Fasting blood glucose and blood lipid count would be better.

If only WF would put a few of those old 80's motorized, vibrating exercise belts that work the belly region in their breakrooms, none of this would be a problem.

They just jiggle, jiggle jiggle the fat away!!
30
Austin, when I said he, I was referring to PAC, not Kiala. I've met Kiala and I am aware that she is a woman.
31
Can Amy Klare not say the word "Hell"?
32

Japan was proposing a similar government run program with fines.

Though the CEO of WF is a Republican, that doesn't mean he is wrong that most health problems in the US are chosen by lifestyle. Our health care system, public or private, cannot and is not affording our "rock and roll lifestyle". Genetics plays a role, of course, but in the most common diseases it's activated by lifestyle. WF is an ideal company for a pilot program because the business draws a health-oriented demographic of young employees and has enough of them to measure the results with statistical significance.

The other ideal pilot program site would be the Portland Mercury. Why? You can report the hell out of the experience. Maybe mix it up with percent improvement incentives rather than uniform targets. That would be unless its is a conflict of interest with your advertisers...
33
After reading the post at Jezebel, I realized that if you meet some but not all of the requirements of a certain discount level, your discount is based on your lowest-scoring metric. For example, I meet all the requirements for Whole Foods platinum level, except for the BMI. I'm a non-smoking fatty with great blood pressure and cholesterol. So even though I meet some of the metrics, I only get 20%. Also, if you had "Silver" cholesterol and BMI but "Bronze" blood pressure, you would only be eligible for Bronze. This still seems like a kick in the face - isn't there a better way to reward healthy lifestyles? I wish there were more incentives aimed at physical activity, whether it's biking to work, taking a yoga class, starting a walking club at lunch time, etc.
34
"They should reward good behavior, not good biology."

Thank you, just shop at the co-op. Eight words just summed up the entirety of my objections to this plan.

I wonder how excited Vicki Foley will be about it when her private health information and/or body are subject to workplace speculation and commentary with the tacit encouragement of HR. (I understand that there are forthcoming "contests" associated with this program; the mind boggles.)

I have already boycotted-up, and informed Whole Foods of same.
35
@Vicki Foley: Thank your CEO and board for making my friend - a Whole Foods employee who's a nursing mother - feel like absolute crap about herself (and under-compensated) while raising young children and working, too. This program unfairly rewards young, thin people with spanking new metabolisms, who disproportionately make up the workforce at Whole Foods. I'll be taking my fat, old dollars elsewhere.

36
@Vicki Foley: Thank your CEO and the board of Whole Foods for making a good friend of mine - a Whole Foods employee and nursing mother - feel horrible about herself with this program that unfairly rewards young people with spanking new metabolisms (who disproportionately make up most of WF's work force). I'll be taking my old, fat dollars elsewhere.
37
How do you work this 'internet' thing, anyways?
38
One of the (many) screwed up things about this is that their BMI requirements have a ceiling, but no floor. Most doctors and other health experts will tell you that being underweight is just as dangerous, and in many cases more dangerous, than being overweight.

So why is Whole Foods willing to give the max discount to people who have a BMI of 16, but not to those with a bigger frame who are still perfectly healthy? Do they really think someone who's anorexic is less of a health risk than someone who's healthy but has some love handles?

Also, if they think their food is so wonderful and healthy, doesn't it make sense to give their less healthy employees more access to such food, in an effort to increase their health?
39
Just so ya know, toffee apple = carmel apple.
40
I see a lot of excellent suggestions about how one would implement such a plan, but as presented here, this incentive program flies in the face of over 30 years of civil rights laws. The distinguished poster above nailed it:

Laws exist to protect people from themselves and each other, and

People will sign FUCKING ANYTHING if it seems good for their wallet.

Arbitration agreements, noncompete agreements, nondisclosure agreements, confidentiality agreements, appropriate internet use policies, training acknowlegments, payroll deductions, union membership, codes of conduct, sexual harassment policies - just SOME of the contracts you might sign on hiring day, IF you're lucky enough to have an employer who offers benefits and such. If your employer slips a HIPAA waiver into this pile, you might be very unpleasantly surprised later on when your employer confronts you about your depression or your Vicodin dependency or whatever and waves a piece of paper in your face saying "You signed an agreement that we can look at your medical records; can't take it back now!" The above-named agreements bite people in the ass all the time.

Your employers already have enough power over you. They hold pretty much all the cards; giving them any more leverage is absolutely crazy.

If you really want to discourage unhealthy eating, apply the discount selectively to produce, whole grains, etc, or better yet, tax junk food like we do other implements of undesirable activity, like cigs and alcohol.

But go ahead, Whole Foods! See you in court - sounds like an easy win.
41
I like how there's no minimum level of BMI to maintain. Go ahead, Whole Foods employees! Be as anorexic as you POSSIBLY CAN BE!
42
Dear Ms. Foley,

I hope you are continuing to read the comments made on this forum. I have a couple comments of my own. On the surface, your program seems reasonable. The healthier your workers are, the fewer insurance claims they will need to file, so you can afford to cover more of their overall expenses. However, there are some concerns as well. As some of the people responding to this blog have pointed out, every person has unique health needs -- for instance the very healthy "C" (posted on January 26, 2010 at 2:43 PM). Others have addressed concerns about PHI. Moreover, historically, personal information has frequently been used coercively or to the detriment of the employee. Furthermore, even though the program is voluntary, not participating might eventually be problematic.

If Whole Foods is so invested in having healthy employees, why not install employee gym facilities in every store? Or, as a benefit, give free gym memberships to every employee and their family members. If this is too costly, it is perfectly legal for you to require your employees to do exercise if it is included in their job description and they are compensated for their time. Does this sound ridiculous to you? It is not meant to be. It is a reasonable way for your store to achieve it's health aims for your employees while 1) not requiring employees to share personal health information, 2) by respecting their freedom to choose how they live their lives outside of work, or 3) by requiring them to meet restrictive criteria.

Respectfully,
A Whole Foods consumer
43
You fat smokers and whiners need to lose weight, give up your coffin nails, and quit pestering everyone about "health care reform" which simply transfers the costs of your bad choices to the taxpayers. If more employers gave employees incentives to live healthier lives, we'd dramatically lower our health care costs. And we should start with government employees, who are growing their wastelines as fast as possible by inventing new ways to promote the United States of Whining.


Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.