Free Eye Tests and Opting Out of Employer Health Insurance

silver_badger

My employer provides health insurance as an employee benefit.

As a DSE (Display Screen Equipment) user at work, my employer is legally required to pay for eye tests (and glasses too if they are only required for DSE).

My employer currently provides free eye tests and glasses via the employee health insurance.

If I were to opt out of the employee health insurance (e.g. because I didn't consider the benefits worth the extra tax paid on the Benefits In Kind), would my employer be required to pay for eye tests and glasses another way, or could they argue that in offering health insurance which covered eye tests, they had fulfilled their obligation, and that by opting out of the benefit, I had effectively declined the offer of a free eye test?

MyRealNameToo

Not really an insurance question but dont believe that they get excused from providing a free eye test because you have declined the PMI. 

Glasses are uncommon for anyone given its only if they are required exclusively for DSE use and most need glasses for more than just that. Plus the glasses they do provide to the minority are the cheapest of the cheap which most wouldn't want. 

Isthisforreal99

They would still need to pay but you may find any glasses choice a lot more restrictive and legally only have to provide glasses "if the test shows an employee needs special glasses prescribed forthe distance the screen is viewed at. If an ordinary prescription is suitable, employers do not have to pay".

Personally, with the state the NHS is in I'd jump at the chance of private medical cover but won't happen in my public sector job.

TELLIT01

How much is the tax liability on the private health cover.  I made use of it twice for knee surgery when I had it and certainly couldn't have afforded to take out my own private health insurance.

MyRealNameToo

TELLIT01 said:

How much is the tax liability on the private health cover.  I made use of it twice for knee surgery when I had it and certainly couldn't have afforded to take out my own private health insurance.

It's inevitably a cost/benefit analysis... some schemes are cheap and cover next to nothing, some are very expensive and extensive coverage. Cost and quality arent always linked either, have seen others paying much more for the same cover we had at my last perm role. 

flaneurs_lobster

MyRealNameToo said:

 Cost and quality arent always linked either, have seen others paying much more for the same cover we had at my last perm role. 

That's often down to the way that Group PMI schemes are priced by the underwriters.

A heavy engineering company employing 100 mainly men in their 30s-40s-50s will be priced more expensively than an internet startup of 100 m/f in their 20s and 30s.

There are other demographic factors too, just as with any insurance product but Group schemes can also benefit from larger organisations being able to haggle for bigger discounts.

MyRealNameToo

flaneurs_lobster said:

MyRealNameToo said:

 Cost and quality arent always linked either, have seen others paying much more for the same cover we had at my last perm role. 

That's often down to the way that Group PMI schemes are priced by the underwriters.

A heavy engineering company employing 100 mainly men in their 30s-40s-50s will be priced more expensively than an internet startup of 100 m/f in their 20s and 30s.

There are other demographic factors too, just as with any insurance product but Group schemes can also benefit from larger organisations being able to haggle for bigger discounts.

You also get those backed by a health bond provided by the employer and so the insurer is really just an administrator. 

I'm just comparing a scheme by a Specialist insurer which would have been nearly 1,000 people weighted towards male 30-60s with a mass market consumer insurer which probably had 3,000 people probably a little younger and more blend of gender. Former was any hospital, all pre-existing conditions covered, £200 excess, fixed price. Later was limited hospitals, all pre-existing excluded, £300 excess and only covered if NHS waiting was over 12 weeks also fixed price. Despite everything pointing to the later should be materially cheaper in reality there was only about £5 gross difference. 

TELLIT01

"It's inevitably a cost/benefit analysis... some schemes are cheap and cover next to nothing, some are very expensive and extensive coverage. Cost and quality arent always linked either, have seen others paying much more for the same cover we had at my last perm role."

Cost of private cover through the employer was peanuts for me, although I've just realised it was over 20 years ago.  How time flies!

Cover then was extensive including scans, a number of appointments with the consultant, the operation and aftercare plus physiotherapy.  I suspect things may have changed with the increased costs of private care.                         

MyRealNameToo

TELLIT01 said:

"It's inevitably a cost/benefit analysis... some schemes are cheap and cover next to nothing, some are very expensive and extensive coverage. Cost and quality arent always linked either, have seen others paying much more for the same cover we had at my last perm role."

Cost of private cover through the employer was peanuts for me, although I've just realised it was over 20 years ago.  How time flies!

Cover then was extensive including scans, a number of appointments with the consultant, the operation and aftercare plus physiotherapy.  I suspect things may have changed with the increased costs of private care.                         

The full fat cover we had was circa £850 gross for wife and I and naturally you only pay the marginal rate so £340 per year in my case which would not change because of age or illnesses (and it included pre-existing). 

These days have private as no longer an employee and it's almost £300 per month with a higher excess. It is the identical coverage though including for pre-existing conditions. 

An associate has a good policy via work, with a moratoria on pre-existing conditions, but their gross charge is £3,500. Dont know if they are a higher or additional rate tax payer but its a massive increase over what we were paying