Penn State Forces Staff to Reveal Medical Habits or Face Steep Fine
$1,200 if you don't inspect your balls, gentlemen
Matthew Woessner, associate professor of political science at Pennsylvania State University, doesn't smoke, spends an hour every day on the elliptical trainer and eats (mostly) healthy food. But he draws the line at new "wellness" steps required by his employer, such as filling out a form that asks whether he examines his testicles every month - and paying a $1,200 penalty if he doesn't comply.
An open letter Woessner wrote protesting the university's 2014 wellness requirements has sparked a protest by more than 2,000 faculty and staff employees at Penn State who argue that it is coercive and unethical and ask that it be stopped.
Studies show the $1,200 annual penalty is one of the most severe to be imposed by a U.S. employer, only 2 percent of which use fines alone, rather than rewards, to push staff to undergo medical testing, provide data on their health and otherwise participate in wellness programs.
Most of the opposition to the program focuses on what Woessner calls "the ethical ramifications of coercing employees to turn over private health information" to companies running the wellness program. But he and other faculty members have recently been contacted by experts in workplace wellness, pointing to studies showing that such programs, on average, save employers little, if anything, in healthcare costs and may even increase spending by forcing workers to undergo extra testing and schedule additional doctor visits.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Without any medical training, what exactly would I be examining them for? Presence???
Hard lumps.
The best part? Once you give your employer this data the government can require it be turned over to them.
Seeing as how you are probably more likely to die in a car accident than because of lumps on your testicles (I think I found two round ones, BTW), shouldn't they be requiring health questionnaires about their employees cars?