<p>@dstark - health insurance coverage for a company is based only on the average age of all of the employees. I’m guessing if it came down to two similar people a company could certainly be tempted for the younger person. Or at least companies could be tempted to hire a very young receptionist, etc to get one very young person in to lower rates. </p>
<p>Also - business owners can’t have an HSA, found that out the hard way. </p>
<p>“health insurance coverage for a company is based only on the average age of all of the employees. I’m guessing if it came down to two similar people a company could certainly be tempted for the younger person. Or at least companies could be tempted to hire a very young receptionist, etc to get one very young person in to lower rates.”
<p>Small businesses are going to be especially hit with the impact of the cost of their insured employees (assuming its still true with the ACA implementation). Its not a matter of being self funded or buying a small group policy.</p>
<p>I believe as an employer, I’d prefer an employee who has already raised his or her family than one who will be doing so while working for me. Older employees can be great, if they are fairly healthy. They tend not to have to take off juggling kids health and schedules. Most of my employees were in their 50s and very reliable and healthy. They all had insurance thru their main jobs. </p>
<p>I’m pretty sure it is illegal to request health records or ask former employers about health issues. I doubt they could even ask you about your sick days. Unless someone is obviously unwell, I don’t know how they could figure our your health history.</p>
<p>.</p>
<p>From this thread I think people are learning some areas have some good medical care with a program that in another area of the country would not.</p>
<p>H’s aunt and uncle retired at 60, and they loaded up a medical plan through his electrician’s union so that his insurance premiums were covered until eligible for MC at 65. Union was helpful with this as it could open his job slot for another union member.</p>
<p>At any of the places I have ever worked, we have not considered anything related to a person’s potential health care costs when making the hiring decisions. </p>
<p>I have not heard of any companies of any size ever considering that. .</p>
<p>At every place that I have worked we have just wanted to get the right person for the right position.</p>
<p>Whether a younger person might have children that could increase health care costs or an older person could develop health care issues that would increase our medical costs has never been mentioned in any decision that I have been involved in (and if someone did mention them, they would get some very strange looks)…</p>
<p>Might be different at small employers.</p>
<p>We were only asked when I was hired at my last job if we had any health condition that could affect our ability to perform our duties.</p>
<p>When I was a law student, I was asked many illegal questions during interviews, including whether I was going to have a family and other personal matters. </p>
<p>I did not hire or reject employees based on their age if health but it turned out that those without young children at home were my most reliable staffers, since they weren’t juggling as many obligations. </p>
<p>I don’t think its legal to ask those questions in an interview or hiring practice.</p>
<p>Wow! That’s terrible that you were asked those questions. What makes it worse was that it was lawyers asking those illegal questions.</p>
<p>I think you can be asked about conditions that might interfere with your ability to perform the specific job duties; thus, for example, I suspect airlines can make pilot applicants take a vision test. You can’t be asked about your general health, though.</p>
<p>“I believe as an employer, I’d prefer an employee who has already raised his or her family than one who will be doing so while working for me.” - I used to assume that too. But… now that I have older friends I realize that there can be long term distraction due to health of self or spouse or parent. So pros/cons to every age range. </p>
<p>My nonprofit only had folks work as the demand and funds were available, more of an on-call situation. The workers in their 50s were still quite healthy and able to work when their primary job had openings in their schedules. </p>
<p>I think its reasonable to know if there is a health condition which would interfere in the performance of your work duties, and have employees elaborate if there was, also accommodations can be made where appropriate. </p>
<p>Large corporations typically don’t take health concerns into account in the hiring process. As others have noted, it’s illegal to ask. In addition, though, interviews for professional positions don’t start at HR, they just end there after the decision is already made. The person doing the hiring is interested in having a profitable team/department. If there are medical costs incurred, that’s not the hiring person’s concern since medical costs usually don’t get tagged back to the department level. It’s all about the money. </p>
<p>I know of a couple who are both in the same medical specialty. They are in their 30s and had been married about 2 years when both looked for the exact same jobs in the same location. Husband was offered a few jobs, the wife, not. She is equally qualified (top undergrad/Medical school/ same internship/ residency as husband). Doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure out why he was offered positions and she was not. And yes, they were right. She is now a mom.</p>
<p>In larger companies, medical costs are usually allocated back to the department, but it is usually just part of a benefits allocation (such as, add $20,000 to your budget for benefits for each employee).</p>
<p>But, yes, if someone you hire has medical issues, those costs are not your department’s concern.</p>
<p>My niece was one of the top two candidates for a job she REALLY wanted. She was intereviewed by the president and all the top brass in a full day interview as the last step. Ultimately, they hired the older woman, who was done bearing and raising her children instead of my obviously pregnant niece. Fortunately, niece got a job offer for a state job that is a better fit for her role as a mom of a young baby and requires a lot less travel than the other job she nearly got. </p>
<p>
And he is now a dad. Maybe things would be different if… Nah, never mind. </p>
<p>Agree, Ixnay. Companies should offer decent maternity and paternity leave (yay Google for doing this), and in the ideal world, dads should share equally in parenting (now if we could only work on that lactation part…) </p>