Starbucks Finds Doing the Right Thing is Hard

By George Anderson
Starbucks’ Howard Schultz says even companies such as his that are trying to do the right thing by offering healthcare coverage to employees have come to the conclusion they simply cannot keep it up.
According to the chairman of Starbucks, the coffee chain has seen its insurance costs increase in the double-digits for four straight years and the escalating costs are not something it or any other company could continue to sustain.
Mr. Schultz was in Washington, D.C. yesterday to meet with Congressional leaders and urge them to put healthcare at the top of their legislative agenda. Other retailers attending the meetings including Jim Sinegal, chief executive of Costco, and Dawn Lepore, president and CEO of drugstore.com.
While he did not endorse specific legislation, Mr. Schultz told The Associated Press that whatever law was finally passed had to achieve a bottom line goal. “Every single American needs to have access to health insurance – full-stop,” he said.
Moderator’s Comment: Do you agree with Howard Schultz that businesses can no longer sustain the annual increases they are seeing related to employee
healthcare? Do you also agree that every single American needs to be insured? What is the answer to his national crisis?
A study by the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation found the average annual premium for family health insurance coverage rose to $10,880 this year. Employers,
on average, were picking up $8,167 of the tab. The amount employees pick up is now $2,713 compared. This figure is up from $1,094 five years ago. –
George Anderson – Moderator
- Crisis in health care brewing, Schultz says – The Associated
Press/The Seattle Times - Employer Health Benefits 2005 Annual Survey – Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation
Join the Discussion!
19 Comments on "Starbucks Finds Doing the Right Thing is Hard"
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Mr. Schultz, being a stellar consumer advocate, and having a culture that makes its personnel love to work at Starbucks, is trying to blow the whistle for help, for all Corporations.
Don’t know what the Govt. should do, or can do, but somebody better talk to Health Corp. to look at overhead, and be more efficient, without ridding personnel.
Look what Wal-Mart did in its distribution and inventory area…. but how poorly they’ve acted for medical coverage to its employees.
Sure working people should have it easier to secure health insurance. But, probably, they should help to pay. Hmmmmmm
The single most urgent need is for Americans to share in the payment for their healthcare on a per-use basis. Simply sharing the cost of insurance delays a solution, and adding more people to the insurance system just makes the problem bigger.
The only solution I see on the table is the Health Savings Account (HSA) option. With this, the employer essentially puts “X” amount into an account that the employ can use to buy a high deductible policy, using the balance of the account to pay lower cost expenses themselves – or roll any balance at the end of the year into a personal retirement account.
This works to save money for two reasons. (1) It can remove a lot of day-to-day administrative cost by having the user make payments for the services they use – usually with a special HSA debit card. (2) It provides an incentive to NOT spend, or to seek lower cost options – savings go straight to the users retirement account.
Mr. Schulz’ message should be heard loud and clear. When a company pays more in health insurance than they do for the raw materials to make their product, something is wrong.
On the other hand (and I rarely take the side of the insurers), we also have way more products in the health care arena than ever before. We have more drugs, more testing, more sophisticated equipment, more medical specialties.
Those with health insurance have access to more benefits while those without it can barely buy BandAids.
The division between the “haves” and the “have nots” is too wide to be sustained much longer.
Perhaps the solution lies somewhere in the middle where insurance covers a minimum base of services but is affordable to all.
David Livingston’s on the right track. What’s needed is personal responsibility. All those in favor of gov’t nationalizing health care only need to see how well it’s working in Canada, England, etc. The care is terrible, the waits are long, and the system is going broke – which will require more taxes paid into it by the citizens.
This argument always ultimately comes down to whether health care should be a privilege or a right. The purpose of a society in the first place is to come together for common benefit: should law enforcement be a private matter? Apply David Livingston’s libertarian argument to that realm: We should only have enough police officers to track down murderers. For thieves, everyone should hire their own private security force.
All I know is that something is definitely broken. Our health insurance costs have increased by double digits every year I’ve been at Coupons, Inc. For a small company whose primary costs are labor-related, it hurts. It means that even if I don’t give anyone a raise, my labor costs go up dramatically every year. Do my employees understand that if they get a 2% raise and their health care contribution does not rise, their compensation actually went up more like 12% in some cases? Not really.
I just wanted to comment on my experience with nationalized healthcare while working in the Czech Republic.
I didn’t have to wait forever for appointments, etc.
The customer service was poor, but it is in every industry in Eastern Europe. Most, importantly, the care was very good. It was a pleasant surprise to go to the dentist and get my dental work done the same day without a half dozen unnecessary visits.
My experience is that the US is the place to be for a catastrophic illness, but we don’t get the small stuff right.
The answer to the first half of this question – should the businesses absorb the cost of Health Insurance – in my opinion is yes. As an individual, my career choices have been based as much on benefits as it has on salary. While the job satisfaction is important, sustaining my family is the highest need.
Changes in the way companies are taxed and/or incented can help insure every American. Health insurance is indeed a cost of doing business. Healthy workers add to the bottom line, not a cost. Controlling the high costs and abuses within the medical field (including costs associated with our litigious society) need to be addressed simultaneously. It’s a much larger question than should only the business bear the burden of the health of our country. The health of American workers, exempt and non-exempt alike, is in the best interest of our country as a whole. I’m not at the point of advocating a National Health Plan, but I am getting very close.
I think if companies got realistic and just raised deductibles to $2500 per person, it would lower the cost of insurance. Then consumers would spend their health dollars more wisely. HEB has opened some clinics in some of its stores and provides a menu with prices for common medical procedures. I think most of us are too spoiled to put up with insuring everyone in a single payer system. The fear is, if everyone got health insurance, it would be abused and the waiting rooms would be clogged up with abusers. However, I think everyone should be insured but only for catastrophic events.
Ron Margulis for president.
Promoting wellness is cheaper than paying for illness. Our whole mega-pharma-medical complex is geared up to be as profitable for the stockholders of the hospital chains, pharmaceutical and medical equipment companies as possible, and to keep the money machine going, the interested parties have to de-emphasize simple things that the average person can do to prevent the need for frequent doctor visits, expensive tests, etc.
Eating well, getting adequate exercise, and avoiding addictions are choices every person makes or does not make–we can’t penalize those who make the wrong choices, but we can’t all pay for all of their mistakes either. What we can do is reward those who make the healthy choices–much lower rates and much smaller individual co-pays and deductibles for non-smokers and people without DUIs or drug offenses on their records. Economic incentives won’t work on 100% of smokers, heavy drinkers, or drug addicts, but lower rates would provide a positive impetus for change.
If a lie gets told often enough, people begin to believe it’s the truth.
One such lie is that the U.S. has the best healthcare in the world. The real story is that America ranks behind Singapore, the United Kingdom, Switzerland, Germany, Australia and Canada in the quality of healthcare delivered to its citizens, according to the World Health Organizations and others.
Herb, the single most urgent need in healthcare cost containment is not “for Americans to share in the payment for their healthcare on a per-use basis.” Instead, the most urgent need is the elimination of provider middlemen and the streamlining of paperwork. In our work in the California Workers Compensation system, we’ve accomplished both with several large clients (including the City Of San Francisco), resulting in annual savings of up to 50%.
Further, Jeff Weitzman, healthcare has nothing to do with privileges or rights unless you have a stake in socialized medicine. Rather, it’s about availability and affordability. Historically, as healthcare becomes more available and affordable, concerns about privileges and rights subside.
Before we go “total Canadian” on healthcare, we need to educate America regarding the actual layers of cost involved in the average doctor visit or prescription. The pork (and lobbyists) is everywhere.