Most of us can recall suppressed memories of the childhood angst we experienced when our parents forced us to eat foods we hated. They swore up and down that broccoli was “good for us” and, despite our whiny pleas, we could absolutely not have dessert before we finished all of our vegetables.
Now that we’re adults, all of the sage advice given to us can be thrown to the wayside. If we want Ding Dongs for breakfast, no one is going to stop us. Our arteries might hate us for it later, but as the hip saying goes, “you only live once.”
Unfortunately, new trending tactics by employers might change this. According to a recent article by The Wall Street Journal, some employers are tracking more than just employees’ medical records—they want to know where we shop, what we eat and just how healthy we really are overall. They’re doing this in an effort to reduce the cost of providing health care and insurance, or so they say.
The act of employers and insurance companies sifting through our personal records is nothing new. Browsing workers’ social media profiles is becoming commonplace and something we should all expect when going into an interview. These types of background checks are typically not a problem and are often necessary when weeding out potentially troublesome candidates. But using the example given by The Wall Street Journal article, a candidate who often shops at plus-size stores or frequents fast food could be flagged as overweight, and therefore a liability to the company, even before he or she steps into the interview room.
Some businesses have taken this investigation a step further. According to an article on mobilehealthnews.com, insurer Cigna had 1,600 employees of four different companies wear armbands that tracked their vital signs and exercise habits as part of a diabetes-prevention program. Other companies are considering utilizing other tracking devices to monitor workers 24/7, according to the article.
“Changing technology is making this more accessible,” head of San Diego State’s Division of Health Management and Policy for the Graduate School of Public Health Robert Seidman said in a recent phone interview. “We’re going to have to address this (ethical) question sooner or later.”
Seidman emphasized the importance of creating awareness of the problems these investigations can cause.
The possibility of discrimination—both prior to and during employment—based on what we choose to buy and eat is something not to be taken lightly. The idea of your boss having an influence on your diet and spending habits is only going to create unnecessary tension in the workplace. If we want to gorge ourselves on pizza and beer on a Friday night, we should have the right to do so.
More often than not, workers already have plenty of hoops to jump through in order to maintain even the most basic health care through employers. Adding another hurdle is going to hinder collaboration and improvement rather than encourage it. An employee who is concerned about job security because he or she is on the company’s “at-risk” list might not feel the need to work harder to improve the situation. One could even argue such monitoring could cause even worse problems, such as anxiety or depression.
We simply cannot assume companies will use their investigative power for good. Because we can’t always control how much of our personal information is distributed and used online, it’s important for us to be aware of the reality that our behaviors are being observed. That shouldn’t mean we have to forgo the occasional cheeseburger in favor of a salad just because we feel Big Brother is constantly looking over our shoulders.
Monitoring employees’ health doesn’t have to be a problem. If employers choose to use this information constructively, improvements can be made for both individual and company morale. Many corporations already offer company-sponsored wellness programs, such as health fairs or discounted gym memberships. This approach of encouraging staff to remain healthy and productive is much better than furtively snooping into private records and conjuring labels based on what is found.
Creating assumptions about workers’ health will only cause animosity in any work environment. We should be free to choose where we eat and what we buy without fear of it affecting our current or future employment opportunities. It’s the employers responsibility to act sensibly with the information they gather and to use it for the benefit of not only the company, but the employee. Creating a relationship based on trust is one of the most important things a company can do, and that begins with treating its workers like adults.
