How does this reconcile with the current system for more established firms where employers typically contribute a substantial amount towards subsidizing employee healthcare plans? Not to be a downer, but this feels like an offramp from our current system down to an even worse one, one where employers can now substantially cut back on employer contributions towards health insurance. It may be great for your success, b…
We are really focused on providing this as an "on-ramp" for small employers. Providing large employers an "off-ramp" isn't a use case we have seen much interest in. However, there is an interesting historical precedent with retirement plans, which suggests that there can be systemic benefits that come when employees have more control. Pre 1978, employers offered pensions as a retirement benefit, and like health insur…
Pensions were an actual benefit to employees, largely subsidized by employers and taking into account various employment factors e.g. length of employment, salary, etc. With the advent of 401k, that expense was shifted almost entirely to the employee save for a remaining "match" benefit that the employer still covered.
Retirement and healthcare are two areas where people are generally unable to operate with sufficient foresight, opting for plans and financial decisions that make less long-term sense.
Hopefully you see my concern. It's not in your investors' best interest for you to cap out the size of businesses that can buy into your service, but (and this is me dreaming) if you re-charter as a public benefit corporation toward this end, you may successfully build a supportive grassroots coalition to drive you forward within your target market (small businesses).
---
Beyond that, there might be value in your team offering collective-bargaining-aaS on behalf of your growing small business clients. That way you're extracting value not from employers/employees but from the insurance industry instead.