The problem is that insurance companies deal in averages. And while many fat people are perfectly healthy, you're getting averaged in with those who are not. Being fat is still correlated with various diseases, in the same way that being male is correlated with various diseases (and mortality in general), despite the fact that there are many perfectly healthy men. The discrepancy in insurance rates between fat and non-fat people is what is driving those companies' desire to create a discrepancy in pay.
Now, the question is: Should companies be able to charge less based on these things? Should it only be those things that we can affect (smoking, weight), or should it also be for things that we can't change (sex)?
Now, I'd say that's crazy, that of course they shouldn't. The problem there is that it creates a quiet disincentive for companies to hire such people. The cost of a smoking worker is higher than the cost of a non-smoker. Why hire the smoker at all? Same thing for the cost of a fat worker versus a non-fat worker. Why hire the fat worker? The only real possible solution here is to legislate that insurance companies can't pro-rate based on such factors, but that's not likely to succeed, and also somewhat unfair to the women/non-smokers/etc.
Anyway, long story short, it's a lot more complicated than it seems at first blush. They're not wanting to give the fat people a pay cut because they hate fatties.
Also, like most of the asshole things that employers do to employees, this is likely to hit those in shitty jobs hardest. If you're a high-value, highly mobile employee and someone starts telling you they're going to cut your pay because they don't like how you live your life, you can tell them to fuck off and go on to a different company. It's the people who are working crappy jobs who really get the short end of the stick here.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2007-08-20 06:38 am (UTC)Now, the question is: Should companies be able to charge less based on these things? Should it only be those things that we can affect (smoking, weight), or should it also be for things that we can't change (sex)?
Now, I'd say that's crazy, that of course they shouldn't. The problem there is that it creates a quiet disincentive for companies to hire such people. The cost of a smoking worker is higher than the cost of a non-smoker. Why hire the smoker at all? Same thing for the cost of a fat worker versus a non-fat worker. Why hire the fat worker? The only real possible solution here is to legislate that insurance companies can't pro-rate based on such factors, but that's not likely to succeed, and also somewhat unfair to the women/non-smokers/etc.
Anyway, long story short, it's a lot more complicated than it seems at first blush. They're not wanting to give the fat people a pay cut because they hate fatties.
Also, like most of the asshole things that employers do to employees, this is likely to hit those in shitty jobs hardest. If you're a high-value, highly mobile employee and someone starts telling you they're going to cut your pay because they don't like how you live your life, you can tell them to fuck off and go on to a different company. It's the people who are working crappy jobs who really get the short end of the stick here.