Should Employers Pay for Weight Loss Surgery?
Instinctively, this question will likely generate a resounding "no way" from most people. Shockingly though (perhaps not so much?) this question isn't hypothetical.
An Indiana court has ruled that a pizza shop must pay for a 340 pound employee's weight-loss surgery, to ensure the success of another operation for a back injury he suffered at work.
Boston's, The Gourmet Pizza, must pay for lap-band surgery for cook Adam Childers. Childers, who was then 25, weighed 340 pounds in March 2007 when he was accidentally struck in the back by a freezer door. Doctors said he needed surgery to ease his severe pain, but that the operation would do him no good unless he first had surgery to reduce his weight, which rose to 380 pounds after the accident.
The employers agreed to pay for the back surgery, but argued that they should not have to pay for the weight loss surgery, as Childers was obese at the time of the accident.
The board and court, however determined otherwise, deciding that his weight and his accident had combined to create a single injury. The employers reluctance is understandable, given the $20,000 - $25,000 price tag of the surgery.
Evidently more and more of these cases are reaching similar conclusions. Most recently, the Oregon state Supreme Court ruled that the state workers' compensation insurance must pay for gastric bypass surgery to ensure that a man's knee replacement surgery was effective.
A Bad Precedence?
Cases like this will certainly make employers think twice about hiring someone overweight, or otherwise prone to injury. Legally, however you are not allowed to discriminate based on size in any of the 50 States.
I think employers should strive to maintain a workplace conducive to health (admittedly, a pizza joint isn't easy to make into a "healthy" workplace).
In my opinion, companies should offer healthy food options, and larger organizations should perhaps offer gym membership subsidies, host health seminars, and have "healthy living" contests, and other incentives.
It's a sensible investment as healthier employees are generally more productive, take less sick days, and are more likely to stay with a company which has health-driven values.
Do you think there are any circumstances in which an employer should pay for weight loss surgery? Do you see this type of ruling becoming commonplace?
Source: Associated Press
23 Comments
Add Your Comment
ADVERTISING
New
- FROM DIET BLOG
- On-Off Fasting: Does It Work?
- 400 Calorie Fix
- 5 Factor World Diet
- Quick Giveaway: Powerhouse Weight Loss Game
- FORUM
- Low Carb Atkins Diet- Tips to Cut the Carbs.
- How Can I Gain a Healthy Weight and Keep it?
- How Do I Eat Healthy at University?
- Starving Myself and Exercising, But Not Losing an Ounce?
Categories
| Body Image Celebrities Diet Pills Diets Exercise |
Fast Food Funny Stuff Success Stories Teens and Kids Tips and Tools |
RSS Feed
Follow @DietBlog on Twitter
Short answer: No, I do not think this employer should be forced to pay for weight loss surgery, but it would be in their best interests to do so.
Long answer: Why is this employee unable to lose weight via diet and exercise? Certainly his back injury makes exercise more difficult, but not impossible. I would rather see this company pay for a nutritionist, a personal trainer, a gym membership, and physical therapy. Surgery, for both the back injury and the weight loss, should be the last result. Losing weight healthily, while building up the core muscles that support the spine, would likely severely reduce the pain this man is experiencing as a result of the injury.
However, all that said, for the time and resources it would take to get this man in shape physically, the company would be better off financially to just pay for the weight loss surgery. Nutitionists, trainers, physical therapy, and lost wages until he is able to work adds up pretty quickly. If I were this company, I'd just bite the bullet and pay for the weight loss surgery.
ReplyNo way. He was obese before the injury. That's ridiculous.
ReplyThe obvious solution is to just avoid hiring fat people. If as an employer I am responsible for their own self induced health problems, why would I or anyone give them a job, discrimination laws be damned?
ReplyOf course, weight is a far better indication of employability than possible skills, makes perfect sense.
ReplyThat was a bit tongue in cheek, but as the article itself points out, if this were to turn into a trend employers certainly will avoid hiring obese people if precedence indicates they will be responsible for the employees pre-existing and self-inflicted health conditions.
ReplyIts not as far fetched as you think; if this trend keeps up.
Its like not hiring pregnant women, old ppl, ppl with major chronic diseases, etc.. if the employee is going to be on the hook for major expenses down the line, then all things being equal, you should hire the person with less liability. Makes sense to me.
ReplyWeight loss surgery is a bit much, but if they can't do the needed operation, why not do the compromise and pay for him to go on a drastic weight loss plan, like a supervised VLCD? That would be a hell of a lot more reasonable. I just think the fact that his injury was work related makes this a bit more complicated than just saying, "No, because he was already obese."
Replygreat info!thank..
ReplyI say no only because it is uncertain whether he had the back injury due to his already obese state. People are more likely to have injuries like this when obese & he was obese when he was hired... and the company hired him anyway so that is good. BUT, like the article said, I am worried that this might lead to "secret" discrimination against heavier & obese people with the right skills for a job.
Replyas if there isn't already secret discrimination against older workers, the obese, the disabled?
ReplyVery true!
ReplyThe employer is responsible to the extent of the treatment for the accident and not beyond it.
ReplyNo, they shouldn't have to pay for the weight-loss surgery. It's not like there aren't other ways to lose weight besides an operation; why couldn't the employer pay for the guy to do WW or something to that extent instead? I could see the pizza company changing their hiring practices in the future though...they'll probably avoid hiring overweight people entirely. It's not like working at a pizza joint is some highly-specialized field; you can train any old person to make a pizza.
Reply"Legally, however you are not allowed to discriminate based on size in any of the 50 States..."
Then why is it legal for an employer to pay for stuff that isn't their fault? It makes no sense.
If these types of settlements continue, expect to see thinner and more fit employees at the work place (Won't see me complaining about that one).
If I was someone who owned a restaurant and saw this post, I'd probably never hire another obese person... EVER. And therefore people who are "very obese" have only one person to blame...(no not the employers u doorknobs) the judges who awarded these settlements.
ReplyYeah, it may not be legal, but people do it anyway. If you are so fat that you can't get around to do your job efficiently, no one's going to hire you. They'll cite some other reason, but it's probably because you're fat; it's just that simple. When my husband was a mechanic, they were interviewing some guy for a position that was 300+ lbs. The guy was too big to be able to get around under the vehicles and handle all the physical labor involved and they didn't hire him because he was just way too fat. It definitely happens.
ReplyThat's insane! No, the employer should not have to pay for the weight loss surgery. This sort of case will lead to greater discrimation of people who are overweight. Not a good thing.
ReplyMany health insurance plans already pay for this surgery in HMO plans so employers and employees already do pay for this in many instances (their share of dues). The logic is probably that "fixing" the main problem will help with all of the ancillary health issues.
Now playing the devils advocate, I don't like the weight loss surgeries any more than I like the liquid diets but in this day and age if nothing else is working and as in these cases, if some percentage of culpability can be demonstrated on the employer’s part - I can see the logic here.
ReplyMy job stressors are giving me wrinkles. Maybe I can get my employer to pay for some plastic surgery.
ReplySo if this guys weight loss surgery isn't successful or he dies as a result of it or develops other problems, will he or his family continue suing the pizza company because they were forced to pay for it in the first place? This is a gross application of the law, in my opinion. This guy should own up to his choices and take responsibility for his actions. He should lose the weight naturally and healthily, then have the surgery to make the pain go away. Although I have to wonder how much of the pain is due to his obesity and not the injury?
ReplyIf an employer would be forced to pay for weight loss surgery this could result in a reluctance to hire/keep overweight people.
ReplyI would say no. As you say that might make an employers not wanting to hire an overweight. But if the court concludes that the company has some of the guilt it should. For example not offering healthy food options. But most of the time it is also the responsibility of every person not no gain so much weight that you need an operation. Fast food isn't the cheapest.
ReplyI'm just wondering where they got the "illegal in all 50 states". I found a lot of information that states if the decision is based only on weight (not using weight as an excuse to hide other forms of discrimination) then it is not illegal.
Replyif his employers supplied medical insurance they would have to cover it due to medical necessity.
Reply