Aetna's CEO pays workers up to $500 to sleep • Hacker News Board

Re: Aetna's CEO pays workers up to $500 to sleep

#31

Post by jacalata » Sun, Apr 10, 2016, 6:29 AM UTC

thaumasiotes wrote: post #29

ma2rten wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Car insurance is worse actually. In the US if you have an accident with bodily injury the settlement can go in the millions, but the legal limit for car insurance is as low as 20k. They do the opposite of what insurance should do, hedge against a small risk and leave you unprotected from big risks.

> They do the opposite of what insurance should do There are a couple of points you seem to be missing: - This insurance works precisely as you say it should, but on a lower scale. In exchange for a fee, it protects you, the holder, from losses too large to easily absorb. If those losses aren't too large for you to absorb, you can post a bond instead of having insurance. - You don't have car insurance for your own be…

The point of insurance is to protect the person you hit by ensuring someone will pay their costs. If the legal minimum is far below the potential costs, then the insurance is failing at that purpose, because it doesn't matter how many millions you settle for, most people can't pay it to you and being owed by a deadbeat doesn't pay hospital bills.

Re: Aetna's CEO pays workers up to $500 to sleep

#32

Post by jacalata » Sun, Apr 10, 2016, 6:33 AM UTC

thaumasiotes wrote: post #30

JohnTHaller wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Medical insurance in the US is absurdly corrupt. Fun fact, health insurance companies are exempt from most anti-trust laws. Health insurance companies are free to collude on price and split up states between each other to limit competition.

> Health insurance companies are free to [...] split up states between each other to limit competition. Aren't health insurance companies legally prohibited from operating in more than a single state?

I think they are just restricted to selling each policy in one state - but they can have 50 policies, one for each state.

Re: Aetna's CEO pays workers up to $500 to sleep

#33

Post by sobellian » Sun, Apr 10, 2016, 6:50 AM UTC

Godel_unicode wrote: post #13

voodootrucker wrote: post #5

This seems like a creepy overreach into personal matters that's bound to continue, and likely end badly.

I'm curious how you see a voluntary program to pay employees to do something they should be doing anyway is creepy and/or overreach?

Economically, it isn't purely voluntary. Aetna will factor the cost of this program into their hiring decisions, so you're working for less than market rate if you do not let Aetna track your sleeping patterns.

Re: Aetna's CEO pays workers up to $500 to sleep

#34

Post by darawk » Sun, Apr 10, 2016, 6:51 AM UTC

sna1l wrote: post #17

MrTonyD wrote: post #7

I hate insurance companies. For one, they refused to pay for pre-approved claims when my wife had cancer and was being treated at Stanford (We were double-insured. Apparently, when you have two insurances, it is common for carriers to decline payments in the hope that the other insurance will pay it.) So my wife couldn't get out of bed and we literally had a stack of unpaid bills over a foot high and totaling over a…

Medical insurance in the US doesn't make any sense. Insurance is supposed to be a hedge against a large risk, but in the US we use our medical insurance to pay for common visits and prescriptions. Everyone is so used to this model that it doesn't seem weird. Imagine if you used your car insurance to pay for gas. That would be ludicrous. No other "insurance" is handled in this manner.

I wish I could upvote this more than once. In my view, this is one of the fundamental problems with the healthcare system in the US. People may not love car insurance - but it's a far cry from the vitriol reserved for medical insurance. And I think this issue is the fundamental cause of that problem.

I want to be insured against rare, ultra high cost events that would otherwise wipe me out financially. I don't want to be insured against the price of my yearly checkup or an antibiotic prescription. I'm happy to pay for that out of pocket, and do my own price shopping for it.

Re: Aetna's CEO pays workers up to $500 to sleep

#35

Post by pmiller2 » Sun, Apr 10, 2016, 7:10 AM UTC

atomical wrote: post #24

Godel_unicode wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious how you see a voluntary program to pay employees to do something they should be doing anyway is creepy and/or overreach?

Voluntary work from home policy (required for work from home): We can visit and photograph your desk at home any time we want. I have seen contracts like this and it's becoming more and more popular.

Where?

Re: Aetna's CEO pays workers up to $500 to sleep

#36

Post by MrTonyD » Sun, Apr 10, 2016, 7:22 AM UTC

epicureanideal wrote: post #20

MrTonyD wrote: post #7

I hate insurance companies. For one, they refused to pay for pre-approved claims when my wife had cancer and was being treated at Stanford (We were double-insured. Apparently, when you have two insurances, it is common for carriers to decline payments in the hope that the other insurance will pay it.) So my wife couldn't get out of bed and we literally had a stack of unpaid bills over a foot high and totaling over a…

The people who cry when telling work stories from insurance companies should seriously quit and preferably go to the media about why. I really don't doubt that if they asked for $1 on the media they'd get much more than their salary back for exposing this nonsense.

The insurance companies are careful not to do anything illegal. Declined reviews and firing people and "losing" paperwork can all be explained away. I spoke to an attorney after doing work for a couple of insurance companies -- and asked how they could get away with the things they were doing. He explained to me that their endless review process is really a way to stay out of court almost indefinitely. Apparently, there is some legal concept that if 2 parties are still in the process of working out a resolution (there are more reviews which can be done), then the case will be thrown out until the process is completed. So those reviews are really there to prevent you from ever getting a claim resolved. This is all legal (and I would argue created by our government which has been purchased by lobbyists.) So some low-paid claims adjusters losing their job for no reason really makes no sense. The corrupt insurance industry has been reported-on in books, movies, and articles for my entire life.

Re: Aetna's CEO pays workers up to $500 to sleep

#37

Post by nommm-nommm » Sun, Apr 10, 2016, 7:55 AM UTC

artursapek wrote: post #14

MrTonyD wrote: post #7

I hate insurance companies. For one, they refused to pay for pre-approved claims when my wife had cancer and was being treated at Stanford (We were double-insured. Apparently, when you have two insurances, it is common for carriers to decline payments in the hope that the other insurance will pay it.) So my wife couldn't get out of bed and we literally had a stack of unpaid bills over a foot high and totaling over a…

Two years ago my wife and I were unable to get Aetna to pay for a home birth, even though we got it approved ahead of time. After months of futile phone calls where they basically kept me on hold for 30 minutes and then told me to fuck off, what finally got them to pay up was an angry tweet I wrote. I thought it was silly, but was advised to try it as a last resort by the midwife's billing assistant. Amazingly, they…

Aetna's phone support is a joke. You call them up and ask them a question and they just answer randomly. I call ask a question, they tell me yes. I call again 5 minutes later and ask the same question and get no. Even simple straightforward stuff like "is this doctor in your network."

Re: Aetna's CEO pays workers up to $500 to sleep

#38

Post by lambertsimnel » Sun, Apr 10, 2016, 8:01 AM UTC

jevinskie wrote: post #2

Do you have to get all 20 days of 7+ hours of sleep in a row with no screw-ups? If so, seems rather unlikely to happen!

Bertolini is quoted as saying "up $500 a year". Assuming he meant "up to $500 a year", a run of fewer than twenty days would lead to a reward. Presumably only the longest run of the year counts.

Re: Aetna's CEO pays workers up to $500 to sleep

#39

Post by xtreme » Sun, Apr 10, 2016, 8:12 AM UTC

jacalata wrote: post #31

thaumasiotes wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They do the opposite of what insurance should do There are a couple of points you seem to be missing: - This insurance works precisely as you say it should, but on a lower scale. In exchange for a fee, it protects you, the holder, from losses too large to easily absorb. If those losses aren't too large for you to absorb, you can post a bond instead of having insurance. - You don't have car insurance for your own be…

The point of insurance is to protect the person you hit by ensuring someone will pay their costs. If the legal minimum is far below the potential costs, then the insurance is failing at that purpose, because it doesn't matter how many millions you settle for, most people can't pay it to you and being owed by a deadbeat doesn't pay hospital bills.

Should the legal minimum be close to the highest potential cost? You can cause massive damage if you hit a luxury car, or are involved in a multi-vehicle accident. Should you be forced to carry insurance that would cover these scenarios? That would drive up the premium of the legally required insurance, and likely increase the number of uninsured motorists. Considering most accidents result in rather small payouts, there must be a cost-benefit analysis done to determine the legally required minimum.

Re: Aetna's CEO pays workers up to $500 to sleep

#40

Post by nommm-nommm » Sun, Apr 10, 2016, 8:22 AM UTC

xtreme wrote: post #39

jacalata wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point of insurance is to protect the person you hit by ensuring someone will pay their costs. If the legal minimum is far below the potential costs, then the insurance is failing at that purpose, because it doesn't matter how many millions you settle for, most people can't pay it to you and being owed by a deadbeat doesn't pay hospital bills.

Should the legal minimum be close to the highest potential cost? You can cause massive damage if you hit a luxury car, or are involved in a multi-vehicle accident. Should you be forced to carry insurance that would cover these scenarios? That would drive up the premium of the legally required insurance, and likely increase the number of uninsured motorists. Considering most accidents result in rather small payouts, t…

I think a fair legal minimum is the average price of a new car.