Red Rock Financial Group: Workers Compensation & Employee Benefits

Younger investors are reluctant to make new IRA contributions – Articles – Employee Benefit News.

Despite evidence that younger investors are well-positioned to benefit from long-term retirement savings less than half (45%) plan to contribute to an Individual Retirement Account for the 2011 tax year, according to research.

A recent T. Rowe Price prospectus cites that more than half, 55%, say they do not plan to fund an IRA or are unsure whether they will by this tax filing season. Meanwhile 71% of these investors made an IRA contribution for the 2010 tax year.

According to the research about IRAs and the investing practices of investors from Generations X and Y (ages 35-50 and 21-34 for this study), the decline in commitment to IRAs is being driven by five factors:

• A belief that participation in a 401(k) plan is adequate for now (42%).
• A feeling that they can’t afford it (32%).
• Economic uncertainty (23%).
• Market volatility (14%).
• Uncertainty surrounding their job (12%).

If respondents had an extra $5,000, 56% of respondents say they would pay off existing debt or add to a “rainy day” fund while 16% say they would contribute to an IRA.

“Given their economic fears, it is understandable why many younger investors might be unable or unwilling to fund all of their tax-advantaged accounts and are focusing primarily on their 401(k) during this tax season,” says Stuart L. Ritter, senior financial planner for T. Rowe Price.

“However, younger investors must remember that their investments may need to cover 30 years or more of living in retirement,” Ritter adds.  “They need to save consistently. There will always be some level of uncertainty and competing financial demands. The longer people wait, the more they will need to save later.”

Many younger investors have lost faith in stocks since they have experienced the subpar returns of equity markets over the past decade. Research finds that 22% of Gen X and Gen Y investors feel confident about the financial markets heading into 2012. Meanwhile 28% of investors who plan to fund an IRA this tax season will direct their contributions to more stable investments such as money market funds, the research shows, despite the historically low current yields and their lack of suitability as long-term retirement investments.

“Younger investors need to invest for growth,” Ritter says. “They shouldn’t focus on what the market did last year or what it might do this year. They are investing for decades and need to have an appropriate mix of stocks in their portfolios to have hope of achieving their long-term financial goals.”

Bank of America sees record growth in health savings accounts – Articles – Employee Benefit News.

Heath savings accounts are the hot ticket item in private sector benefits these days. Yesterday, Bank of America announced a record 34% growth in health savings accounts in 2011, adding more than 50,000 accounts last year. The growth is attributed to increases in account use among employees of existing corporate clients, and new relationships with individuals and employers.

Among 600,000 BoA accounts, HSAs are the fastest growing, approaching 200,000 user accounts and more than $300 million in account balances.

“The use of HSAs is rapidly increasing, based in no small part on the rising cost of health care to employers and employees alike,” says Kevin Crain, head of Institutional Retirement and Benefit Services for Bank of America Merrill Lynch. “We see more and more companies, including many of our corporate clients in the large and middle markets, adding consumer-driven health plans to their broader benefit offerings.”

HSAs are designed to work together with a high deductible health plan. The account is owned by the employee or individual, earns tax-free interest, can be carried over from year to year, and moves with an employee wherever the employee goes — to a new job, when changing health plans, or into retirement.

“In addition to the tax benefits, these accounts offer individuals more control over their health care spending and the option to accumulate longer-term health savings,” says Crain. “They also encourage more responsible use of health services and lifestyle decisions.”

Annual contribution limits for HSAs, set by the IRS, rose slightly in 2012 for individuals and employees with single coverage, from $3,050 last year to now $3,100, and from $6,150 to $6,250 for employees with family coverage. The average contribution to Bank of America HSAs in 2011 was $2,016, with employers contributing more than 20% of this total average to their employees’ accounts last year. During the last two years, since the beginning of 2010, the average account balance has grown more than 10% (now exceeding $1,600 per account), demonstrating that users are saving more in these accounts and also carrying balances forward year to year.

“Future health care costs and funding retirement consistently rank among individuals’ top financial concerns, with health and wealth becoming two sides of the same coin,” says Justin Raniszeski, health benefit solutions executive for Bank of America Merrill Lynch. “Approaching your financial life in this integrated fashion, and using multiple tax-advantaged saving vehicles in the workplace, can help chip away over time at what may seem like insurmountable savings needs.”

Woman: Court ruling on pumping breast milk unfair – Articles – Employee Benefit News.

HOUSTON | Fri., Feb. 10, 2012 1:50pm EST (Reuters) – A woman whose firing from her job over a request to pump breast milk was supported by a Texas judge said last week the decision was unfair and discriminatory, and her lawyer said an appeal was under consideration.

Donnicia Venters, who worked at a debt collection agency called Houston Funding, gave birth to a daughter in December 2008. When she told a vice president of the company on Feb. 17, 2009, that she wanted to make arrangements for a private place to pump breast milk she was told her position had been filled.

She received a termination notice in the mail a week later, back-dated to Feb. 16 citing “job abandonment,” said Tim Bowne, a lawyer for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, who represented her.

Venters sued the company but Judge Lynn Hughes last week dismissed the case, saying the complaint was not covered by a provision of the Civil Rights Act that prohibits discrimination because of pregnancy.

“She gave birth on Dec. 11, 2008. After that day, she was no longer pregnant, and her pregnancy-related conditions had ended,” Judge Hughes said in the ruling.

“I don’t understand the judge’s decision,” Venters told Reuters in a brief interview. “A child needs a mother and mother’s milk. It really isn’t fair and it is discrimination. I just hope the law will be changed.”

Venters’ firing happened before a March 2010 amendment to a separate law that requires employers to provide reasonable break time for a mother to express milk for a nursing child for one year after the child’s birth. It also says employers must provide a private place for this activity, other than a bathroom.

But companies with fewer than 50 employees are exempt from this law if allowing breaks would impose an undue hardship.

© 2010 Thomson Reuters. Click for Restrictions.

Here is a great summary of information on ladder safety provided by Gateway Insurance Company. This form illustrates how short falls and minor ladder malfunctions can result in major financial losses. The document goes on to provide tips on how to prevent such losses:

Gateway Ladder Safety

NLRB issues new report on social media cases – Articles – Employee Benefit News.

On January 24, 2012, the Acting General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board issued a second report on social media cases, just six months after the GC’s last report on the subject. In this latest document, the Obama Board continues to refine its analysis of the two most common issues presented to it in social media cases: whether the employer’s policy itself is overbroad and thus violates employees’ right to engage in concerted and protected activity under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act; and whether the employee action at issue is truly concerted and protected by the NLRA.

In sum, the Board remains highly critical of most broadly worded policies seeking to regulate online comments that disparage employers, supervisors or co-workers, but recognizes that employee postings not clearly part of, or looking toward, group action are unprotected and the proper subject for discipline. Thus, the report delivers something of a good news/bad news message for businesses.

First, the (relatively) good news: Consistent with established case law, individual “griping” is insufficient to invoke NLRA protection. Thus, for example, a Facebook posting of a purely individual complaint, made with no intention to induce co-workers into group action and not resulting from a group discussion of terms and conditions of employment, is not protected group or “concerted” activity. In the same vein, online expressions of personal anger or irritation with co-workers or an employer, made solely on the posting employee’s own behalf and not involving the sharing of common employee concerns, are not protected, concerted activity. Conversely, group discussions of workplace concerns generally will be protected.

Next, the bad news: the Board continues to view as impermissibly overbroad policies that generally prohibit “disparaging” or “inappropriate” comments, “disrespectful” conduct or the disclosure of “sensitive” or “confidential” matters. The inclusion of a “disclaimer” or “savings clause,” which pledges that the employer will not enforce its policy in violation of law, is insufficient to rescue an otherwise overbroad rule.

Only policies that provide specific examples of prohibited conduct, or other “contextual limitations,” will be approved. For example, a policy that proscribes the use of social media postings that are vulgar, obscene, threatening or intimidating, or which violate other specific employer policies, will be lawful because the prohibitions are sufficiently detailed. A policy that requires compliance with securities regulations and other laws prohibiting the unlawful use or disclosure of confidential or proprietary information is lawful, because contextual limitations within the policy adequately define the prohibited conduct.

Social media under the NLRA remains an emerging area of the law and employers must tread carefully when drafting workplace policies that address employee participation in Facebook, Twitter and other online forum. Because the NLRA protects the right to take action for “mutual aid and protection” in both union and non-union workplaces, the NLRB’s ongoing social media analysis will have a far-reaching impact on workplaces across the nation.

For more information, please contact Denise M. Keyser, Partner at Ballard Spahr LLP, at 856-761-3442 or keyserd@ballardspahr.com, or Associate Mary Cate Gordonat 856-761-3464 or gordonmc@ballardspahr.com.

EBRI finds rapid growth of target-date fund usage among 20-somethings – Articles – Employee Benefit News.

A growing number of recently hired participants in 401(k) retirement plans, particularly those in their 20s, are investing in target-date funds, according to an analysis by the nonpartisan Employee Benefit Research Institute.

EBRI finds that the percentage of 401(k) participants — those with two or fewer years of tenure —  holding TDFs increased from 43.6% in 2008 to 46.6% in 2009, and to 47.6% in 2010. New hires in their 20s are especially likely to hold TDFs: 52% of them did so in 2010, compared with 41.7% of recent hires in their 60

When will the Exchanges be open for business? What’s the difference between a bronze plan and a platinum plan?

Check out this podcast for answers: http://unum.com/images/media/audio/UNUM_Exchanges_Podcast_1_011212.mp3

What do you need to know about the Exchanges? What will your clients need to communicate to their employees?

Check out this podcast for answers: http://unum.com/images/media/audio/UNUM_Exchanges_Podcast_2_011212.mp3

What will it be like for individuals and small businesses to shop for coverage using the Exchanges? Will brokers have a role?

Check out this podcast for answers: http://unum.com/images/media/audio/UNUM_Exchanges_Podcast_3_011212.mp3

Study uncovers opportunities to improve vision benefit education efforts – Articles – Employee Benefit News.

Today’s aging workforce isn’t fully taking advantage of its vision benefits, and is therefore missing out on a critical preventive care opportunity and leaving itself at higher risk for age-related vision problems, eye diseases and chronic conditions that affect eye health and compromise productivity. This is according to a new study by Transitions Optical, Inc.

Baby boomers are only slightly more likely than younger employees to enroll in their vision benefit (79% vs. 75%). Similarly, 34% of baby boomers and 23% of those ages 65+ who enroll do not use their benefit to receive a comprehensive eye exam. The survey was conducted among 2,011 full-time, adult U.S. employees whose employers offer vision benefits.

“A quality vision benefit is important for everyone, but especially for employees ages 45 and older, who are more likely to experience vision problems that hurt job performance. This age group also has a higher risk for developing costly eye diseases and whole body conditions

such as diabetes and hypertension, all of which can be detected through comprehensive eye care,” says Pat Huot, director of managed vision care at Transitions Optical. “With ongoing medical cost concerns among employers and employees alike, our survey findings have flagged a serious lost opportunity to help lower potential health care expenditures and boost productivity.”

Awareness of vision and aging

Nearly all employees (94%) agreed that they felt their vision benefit would become more important to them as they grew older. However, while the survey confirmed that employees’ actual experiences with many vision-related issues do increase with age, even older employees had limited awareness of these changes, many of which can be addressed with the right eyewear. For example, half of baby boomers were unaware that they may have more trouble seeing far away or seeing well in dim lighting as they grow older. Similarly, three in 10 were unaware of the increased risk for eye diseases such as cataract, glaucoma and macular degeneration.

Opportunities to increase education

The research findings suggest that employees, including at-risk, older employees, need further education from their employers on the value of the vision benefit, and identified several missed opportunities to provide this education. Thirty percent of employees felt that their employers do not take appropriate steps to make sure employees understand their vision benefit. In the latest survey, only 18% of employees reported that their employers do not communicate to them about their vision benefit, a small improvement from 25% in the 2011 survey. However, nearly 60% of employers provide only basic vision plan information during the open enrollment period. Just 13% of employees said their employers also include information on the importance of eye health, and only 11% do so regularly throughout the year, a slight increase over the previous survey finding.

The survey also delved deeper into employers’ vision benefit education methods, and revealed that only 58% offer clear written materials about the costs and benefits of their vision plan, and only 34% include a presentation on what the plan covers. Other employee education methods – such as one-on-one employee benefit discussions, bringing in a benefits broker or health professional, or educating on vision benefits during a time other than open enrollment (such as during a health fair) – were also largely underused.

Workplace refreshments serve as tax deductions – Articles – Employee Benefit News.

 Sat Jan 28, 2012 2:14am EST (Reuters) Coffee and donuts are somewhat common workplace perks. But for small business owners, those simple daily indulgences can also add up to a significant tax deduction.

Reuters reports that, according to a new survey, American workers spend on average about $1,000 a year on coffee. But if you’re picking up the tab to keep your workers content, your coffee costs could be much higher.

This may just be the caffeine talking, but three overarching questions come to mind when considering small business tax deductions for coffee and donuts:

1. Is it a business expense?

Small business owners are generally entitled to deduct the costs of refreshments and similar fringe benefits for their employees, one tax attorney advised in the San Francisco Chronicle.

“To qualify, the expenses must be small and furnished by the employer merely as a means of promoting the health, goodwill, contentment or efficiency” of workers, the tax lawyer wrote.

The key test: Are your coffee and donut expenses “ordinary and necessary” for carrying on your business? Lots of legal challenges hinge on this question, so it may be best to consult a local tax attorney before trying to come up with your own justification.

2. Is it fully deductible?

Many small business expenses are subject to a 50% deduction limitation, but the tax code provides exceptions that may cover coffee and donuts, one tax accountant explains for Inside Tucson Business. In general, small businesses can deduct 100% of the following costs:

- Providing an office coffee bar. Employer-provided coffee, donuts, snacks and soft drinks that are consumed at work are generally fully deductible.

- Refreshments at employee functions. Coffee and donuts offered at work-related parties and meetings for the benefit of employees can be fully deductible.

- Refreshments provided to the public. This can include coffee and donuts offered to customers in your lobby.

3. Are receipts sufficient to prove business expenses?

Receipts are required, but they may not suffice to establish a valid business purpose, the Tucson tax accountant warns. Again, check with a tax attorney to see what else you may need to deduct coffee and donuts from your small business taxes.

© 2010 Thomson Reuters. Click for Restrictions.

Benefits are becoming vital to budgets, inviting more involvement from senior management – Articles – Employee Benefit News.

Benefits decision-making continues to gain importance in corporate America, with 40% of plan sponsors saying that the employee benefits decision-making process in their company has changed to some extent over the past five years, according to a recent study from Prudential.

The influence of senior management has increased the most, with 45% of respondents saying they are more involved in these decisions. More than 20% of plan sponsors indicated that the boards of directors, finance/treasury and employees themselves are all playing a more important role in the benefits decision-making process. Twenty percent of plan sponsors noted employee benefits had an increased influence over this same period.

Brokers’ perception of changes to the decision-making process is even more marked, with more than two-thirds of those surveyed seeing changes in the areas and seniority of people involved in the decision-making process.

“Our research suggests that greater involvement throughout the employer organization may enhance the decision-making process and lead to more relevant benefit offerings,” says John DeLorenzo, senior vice president of sales and account management for Prudential Group Insurance. “Executives who believe there have been significant changes to the decision-making process are more likely to say their employees are satisfied with their benefits programs.”

Greater involvement by senior management and a more inclusive approach correlates with better communications, according to the study. Those reporting that they’ve seen greater change in the decision-making process rate the effectiveness of their benefits communications significantly higher (48% rate their benefits communications as highly effective) than those who have seen little or no change in the process (25% and 18%, respectively, rate their communications as highly effective.)

“Companies that are more focused on benefits tend to pay more attention to communications, which in turn leads to higher levels of employee satisfaction,” says DeLorenzo. “Workers want to understand their options fully before deciding how to allocate their hard-earned benefit dollars.”

In the early 2000s, wellness was forecasted by national economists to be the next trillion-dollar business in the United States, and it’s scheduled to hit this mark in 2012. There is now evidence of a delivered return on investment from 2:1 to 6:1 of every wellness dollar spent, which makes it a serious economic business strategy. Gina Payne, national director of wellness at CBIZ, joins EBN Associate Editor Lisa Gillespie to talk about best practices to create a culture of health at your workplace to advance these goals.

Pod Cast Link: http://ebn.benefitnews.com/podcasts/gina-payne-cbiz-wellness-culture-health-roi-2721631-1.html?ET=ebnbenefitnews:e3094:2181784a:&st=email&utm_source=editorial&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=EBN_inBrief_020112

Several House Bills are under review that would provide WC carriers more tools to help manage the cost of claims in Arizona for your clients!  At CompWest we already have the structure set up to implement and use these new controls, if these bills pass, as some are  similar to California statutes/controls we already use there.   We will be ahead of the game!   I have attached the full articles from WorkCompCentral and am providing a brief excerpt below in case you don’t have time to read them in their entirety.

“Bills Would Require Treatment Guidelines, Allow Directed Care”

• ·        House Bill 2365 -   basically establishes evidence-based guidelines to determine the extent and scope of medical treatment necessary.

• ·        House Bill 2367 – would allow an employer or insurance company to form a contract with a WC healthcare organization to provide treatment for injured workers.  Employee would be required to receive all medical, surgical or hospital benefits from a contracted provider. Injured worker would be prohibited from changing providers from a network doctor without written approval from the employer or carrier.

“Arizona Bills Take Aim at drugs, Guidelines, and Medical Networks”

• ·        House Bill 2368 -  Allowing insurers and employers to access wage reports from the Department of Economic Security to identify cases of possible fraud when an injured worker is not reporting wages earned from another job

• ·        House Bill 2155 -  Allow independent medical examiners to access the Controlled Substances Prescription Monitoring program and report information about multiple prescriptions to an employer, carrier and the Arizona Industrial Commission.

WASHINGTON | Fri Jan 27, 2012 4:59pm EST (Reuters) – The Obama administration told the Supreme Court on Friday that nearly all of the health care overhaul can survive if the court declares unconstitutional the law’s centerpiece provision requiring health coverage.

Administration attorneys argued in a written brief that all but two provisions can be separated from the requirement that Americans buy health insurance or pay a penalty by 2014, the law’s cornerstone known as the individual mandate.

They said the 26 states and the independent business group challenging the law have failed to show that Congress would have wanted the entire law to fall in the event the individual mandate was struck down.

“Many provisions of the act, focused on controlling costs, improving public health and other objectives, have no connection to insurance coverage at all,” Solicitor General Donald Verrilli wrote in the brief.

“And Congress directed that much of the act take effect several years before the minimum coverage provision’s effective date, further demonstrating that Congress intended those provisions to operate independently,” he added.

The Supreme Court has scheduled three days of oral arguments on the health care law for March 26-28, with an election-year ruling expected by the end of June.

The question of whether the rest of the law survives is one of four the court will consider, including the issue at the heart of the legal battle — whether Congress exceeded its powers in adopting the mandate.

The states and the business group have challenged the law as an unprecedented move that exceeds its constitutional powers and argued in written briefs filed last month the entire law must fall if the court strikes down the mandate.

Those provisions bar insurers from refusing to issue coverage to a person because of a pre-existing medical condition and from charging higher premiums based on a person’s medical history.

But the government’s attorneys said those challenging the law failed to show one instance when the Supreme Court in modern times has struck down a comprehensive law like the health care overhaul based on a finding that one provision exceeded Congress’ authority.

Karen Harned of the National Federation of Independent Business said in response to the administration’s filing that the group still believed the entire law must fall if the mandate is struck down.

“To argue otherwise would be like arguing a house can stand after its foundation has crumbled,” she said.

The administration last month filed a separate brief with the high court defending the mandate as a constitutional attempt by Congress to address a crisis in the national health care market.

© 2010 Thomson Reuters. Click for Restrictions.