Columnist calls employers ‘helicopter parents,’ mid-market companies are drawn to Mercer exchange, and attorneys assess whether an ACA delay is legally possible: 3 things you need to know in employee

Blog post scolds employers for ‘helicopter parenting’

“Why do American employers act like helicopter parents when it comes to their employees’ health care?”

That was the question posed by health care marketing exec Deborah Gordon in a blog post for the Harvard Business Review. Just like typical helicopter parents “hover” over their children’s every move and decision, U.S. employers hover as well by providing “a very small number of health-plan options, with the result that workers don’t have to—and never learn to—make significant decisions about coverage.”

Stats show that the majority of Americans can’t correctly define simple health insurance terms like premium, copay and deductible, and that even more don’t care about containing health care costs. Could employers’ helicopter parenting be part of the problem?

Scores of mid-sized employers sign on to send employees to Mercer exchanges

Given the enrollment problems at healthcare.gov during the last two weeks, we think the federal government would envy how smoothly the exchange sign up has gone for Mercer. Employee Benefit News reports this week that 52 employers will participate in Mercer’s private exchange, effective Jan. 1, 2014. Some 33 employers will offer Mercer Marketplace to active employees, and 19 more will make the platform available to retirees.

The companies range in size from 100 to 30,000 employees—including Petco, Kinder Morgan and the Addison Group—apparently making the exchange a sweet spot for the mid-market. Mercer President and CEO Julio A. Portalatin says the clients will have a variety of medical, dental, life, disability and other voluntary options, and expects to cover 200,000 lives (including dependents) on Jan. 1.

This week’s hidden gem: Persistent ACA glitches and/or legal delay could lead to litigation

Congressional lawmakers were willing to shut down the federal government over whether or not to delay key provisions of the Affordable Care Act for one year. So, just for the sake of argument, Kaiser Health News this week asked: Is such a delay even feasible? If so, is it legal?

Yes and yes, attorneys responded, but not without messy consequences.

KHN quotes Timothy Jost, a Washington & Lee law professor, who said stalling some or all of ACA would result in “a high political price to pay. And delay could result in litigation.”

While the site also notes a Congressional Research Service report that states “courts are more deferential to the agency's priorities [in the event of a lawsuit], if a delay becomes egregious, courts will compel an agency to take prompt action.”