As health insurance premiums have sky-rocketed over the last decade, employers have begun to implement some creative changes in the office.

This NYT article has shone the light on somewhat controversial practices and programs.

I believe employer sanctioned and sponsored wellness initiatives are a wonderful idea on the surface. It’s no surprise that over-stressed, under-nourished, and overall unhealthy employees perform more poorly than their health-conscious peers; likewise, it’s understandable that companies large and small will adopt practices and policies that cut their expenses and increase profits.

Programs like WellNow or facility-wide “Biggest Loser” competitions seem like harmless ways to offer incentives for weight loss and other health-related goals for those who choose to participate. Even the opportunity to pay lower health insurance premiums in exchange for improving or maintaining health seems beneficial to both employees and companies.

On the other hand, implementing policies that punish employees who do not make healthy choices or measure up to specific expectations seems like a dangerous precedent.

As a young person who eats well, stays as active as possible, and cares deeply about nutrition and health, I don’t need my boss holding me to some standard that doesn’t directly tie to my job. My day-to-day office duties are often stressful enough; though I don’t smoke or have high blood pressure or weight issues, I can only imagine the added stress that weighing in or undergoing scheduled medical tests would cause.

I applaud the growing number of “smoke-free” campuses (particularly with hospitals and health industry-related companies), and I think encouraging employees to give up unhealthy habits is respectable. Requiring such an attempt, however, goes too far, especially if noncompliant employees are forced to pay fees or endure some other penalty.

There’s also little proof on such programs’ success. As the article mentions, a hospital system in St. Louis saw decreased hospitalizations for its employees, but it didn’t see any cost savings at overall.

It’s an interesting topic. The global economy is competitive, and with fewer jobs in many industries, employers are inevitably seeking employees who cost them less money and risk. In my opinion, companies should always remember that their success is a direct result of their employees’ efforts. And, of course, their physical and mental health.

• Why not build offices that provide ample fresh air and sunlight?  
• Encourage employees to participate in walking meetings in an on-campus courtyard or nearby walking trail?
• Facilitate access to water coolers rather than vending machines?
• Operate in a manner that encourages productivity while simultaneously reducing mandatory overtime? 
• Offer adequate lunch breaks as well as vacation and sick leave so that employees can nourish themselves and properly heal before exposing their coworkers to an illness?

No matter what, companies should remember that healthy employees (in both body and mind) are an asset rather than a liability. When individual employees function at their best, the company as a whole will perform its best in turn.