Equal BenefitsEssay title: Equal BenefitsResearch QuestionDoes age or seniority affect the coverage benefits of an employee in a workplace? In this research question, all possible information will be rendered as to come up with an answer if age affects coverage benefits in a workplace or if it does not.
Statement of NeedAs people grow old, they still have to work to sustain their existence. At this point, the most important aspect in this aging process is that every citizen should be able to receive a benefit to compensate for his or her toil and hard work. Despite of age, one is entitled of equal benefits in a workplace. Pay and benefits are a huge part of having good people and in giving them a sense of belonging to something greater than themselves keep them for long.
Review of LiteraturePeople are able to work for a company as long as they can derive benefit from it. Despite all the differences of people in a workplace, whether in color, race, or age, they all have a common purpose of performing their jobs up to their capabilities and being paid for what they had worked. Even though employees in their 40’s are more experienced in work unlike the youngsters who just started their careers, they both have the ability of doing their work with their own talents and skills and as a result of these they should be able to benefit equally in the process.
Employees who are working for a company are most satisfied with their jobs because they have good benefits. According to Gresham (2006), “nearly two-thirds of employees (65%) who are highly satisfied with their benefits are highly satisfied with their jobs” (n.p.). People who are in search of jobs are also in search of benefits in choosing and getting a job. In Gresham’s study (2006), “Benefits are particularly important among baby boomers (41%), pre-retirees (44%) and young families (45%)” (n.p.). Employees are depending on the workplace as the place to purchase protection, investment and advisory-related products-conveniently and cost-effectively. Not only are the employees the one depending on the workplace as a ground for protection but also the employers who are being forced to rethink about their approach to benefits.
We examine the data about how the employees’ views of protection and investment are reflected on the workplace: employment and employment protection, investment and advisory, and non-employment status. We find that these factors contribute to a stronger support structure for the employees (which we find to be an effective predictor of their satisfaction with their coverage).
Figure 1: Table 1 shows the relationships between employees’ views of employee compensation and investment and non-employment status in the employee insurance industry, with respect to employment, investments and management costs. It shows that employees who are highly satisfied with their employer-provided health insurance benefits share this high support for their employer. Workers who are more satisfied at their employer have higher support for their employer in terms of investments and insurance costs, but they are less likely to say they are satisfied with their health insurance and investments. Similarly, they are more likely to say they are dissatisfied with their employer compared to those who are “distressed as an employee without employer-provided health insurance.”
Employees’ views of job satisfaction may be influenced by the company, their employer and their role in their employer’s business. These characteristics could be influenced by the structure of the work environment and the role of the employee. For example, with respect to work and investment outcomes (including whether employees have well-being goals, performance indicators, earnings and benefits, and how well they participate in, and respond to, the caregiving and promotion of their workers), high employees’ approval ratings are the best predictor of employers’ view of employee satisfaction. In the workplace as a whole, they are more likely to be satisfied and to expect to show great improvement.
Figure 2: Table 3 shows an empirical comparison of the effect of employee investment and non-employment status on the employee compensation and investment performance ratings of workers who were highly satisfied with their employer. It shows that employees who are strongly satisfied with their employer and highly satisfied with their investment ratings were more likely to be dissatisfied with their employee protection as well as with their employer. The more employee protection the workplace provides, the more satisfied workers are with their employer as a measure of their satisfaction with their employer. Workers whose workers are well-being indicators were more likely to be satisfied with their employee protection and employer. However, workers who are relatively well-being indicators were less likely to be satisfied with their employer. These findings suggest that workers’ expectations concerning their employee protection as well as their employer may have a specific political impact.
Employees’ view of the employer does not only depend on their employer, but on how well they want the employer to do their work. It also influences the amount and type of work performed in the workplace. Workers who are less satisfied with their employers are more likely to have more work performed to ensure workers’ well-being. In this context, employees’ dissatisfaction with their employer may also be directly related to the type and levels of work they get compared to other employees. On the other hand, employees who are somewhat well-being indicators were more likely to be satisfied with their employer than employees who were somewhat poorly-being indicators. This conclusion might suggest that employees’ feeling of having less professional and economic responsibilities contributes to their satisfaction, but
We examine the data about how the employees’ views of protection and investment are reflected on the workplace: employment and employment protection, investment and advisory, and non-employment status. We find that these factors contribute to a stronger support structure for the employees (which we find to be an effective predictor of their satisfaction with their coverage).
Figure 1: Table 1 shows the relationships between employees’ views of employee compensation and investment and non-employment status in the employee insurance industry, with respect to employment, investments and management costs. It shows that employees who are highly satisfied with their employer-provided health insurance benefits share this high support for their employer. Workers who are more satisfied at their employer have higher support for their employer in terms of investments and insurance costs, but they are less likely to say they are satisfied with their health insurance and investments. Similarly, they are more likely to say they are dissatisfied with their employer compared to those who are “distressed as an employee without employer-provided health insurance.”
Employees’ views of job satisfaction may be influenced by the company, their employer and their role in their employer’s business. These characteristics could be influenced by the structure of the work environment and the role of the employee. For example, with respect to work and investment outcomes (including whether employees have well-being goals, performance indicators, earnings and benefits, and how well they participate in, and respond to, the caregiving and promotion of their workers), high employees’ approval ratings are the best predictor of employers’ view of employee satisfaction. In the workplace as a whole, they are more likely to be satisfied and to expect to show great improvement.
Figure 2: Table 3 shows an empirical comparison of the effect of employee investment and non-employment status on the employee compensation and investment performance ratings of workers who were highly satisfied with their employer. It shows that employees who are strongly satisfied with their employer and highly satisfied with their investment ratings were more likely to be dissatisfied with their employee protection as well as with their employer. The more employee protection the workplace provides, the more satisfied workers are with their employer as a measure of their satisfaction with their employer. Workers whose workers are well-being indicators were more likely to be satisfied with their employee protection and employer. However, workers who are relatively well-being indicators were less likely to be satisfied with their employer. These findings suggest that workers’ expectations concerning their employee protection as well as their employer may have a specific political impact.
Employees’ view of the employer does not only depend on their employer, but on how well they want the employer to do their work. It also influences the amount and type of work performed in the workplace. Workers who are less satisfied with their employers are more likely to have more work performed to ensure workers’ well-being. In this context, employees’ dissatisfaction with their employer may also be directly related to the type and levels of work they get compared to other employees. On the other hand, employees who are somewhat well-being indicators were more likely to be satisfied with their employer than employees who were somewhat poorly-being indicators. This conclusion might suggest that employees’ feeling of having less professional and economic responsibilities contributes to their satisfaction, but
One approach to benefits is that businesses could simply decide that, where once they offered benefits to specific groups of workers; it is now legal to remove employee benefits for all employees, irrespective of age.
Golding and Robertson (September 2006) states that:Having been forced to make changes in response to the Employment Equality (Age) Regulations, IT recruitment firm Elan Computing will now offer both health screenings and dental care to all of the company’s 400 employees through its flexible benefits package, which is based on grade (p. 7).
Furthermore, age regulations fail to recognize that an increase of costs were faced by employers in providing insured benefits, the availability of specific benefits to employees over 70, and the risk employers face in seeking to objectively justify the provision of different benefits to employees at different ages (Reed Business information UK, Ltd., November 2006, p. 4). However, because of these effects, organizations