Considerations for 2022 Health and Voluntary Benefit Offerings

There are new ways to think about benefits offerings and cost negotiations following the experience of the pandemic.

As open enrollment season nears, many plan sponsors are considering costs and employee needs before renewing contracts with health and voluntary benefit providers.

During last year’s open enrollment window, many employers leaned into remote-friendly benefits and virtual care as employees worked from home. Although offices across the United States are reopening or making plans to reopen, plan sponsors and providers alike are still more accepting of virtual care, experts say.

Get more!  Sign up for PLANSPONSOR newsletters.

“We’re seeing a significant increase in telemedicine and telehealth, both in [self-funded] plans that are offered by employers and with most health providers embedding telehealth in,” says David Reid, CEO and cofounder of Ease, a human resource (HR) and benefits software solution.

Reid notes that virtual care and telehealth address employee needs and reduce costs. When virtual care took off during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, many in the benefits industry realized its potential, Reid says.

“There are so many illnesses that can be diagnosed this way. A lot of the drivers of cost, including time, can also be handled much more differently in this environment,” he says, adding that “these factors have been impetuses to adopt this kind of change.”

The pandemic has also highlighted the need for flexibility, whether that’s flexibility in where employees are working, their choice of benefits or where they can receive care, says Kim Buckey, vice president of client services at DirectPath, a benefits education, enrollment and health care transparency firm. She relates this newfound desire for pliability to a potential expansion in voluntary benefits.

“We are going to see more interest in voluntary benefits than we ever saw before,” Buckey says. “Employees are going to be looking for how their employers are supporting them, whether it’s with mental health benefits, additional resources for child care and elder care support, hybrid work situations, or even full-time remote work.”   

Consider an Array of Benefits

Among the voluntary benefits Buckey anticipates seeing in 2022 are contagious disease riders, critical illness plans, hospital indemnity plans, expanded employee assistance programs (EAPs) and increased mental health support. 

Reid expects employers will transition away from trying to simplify or personalize the benefits menu with what they think their workforce needs to offering a wider array of voluntary benefits. Due to the combination of varying employee needs and an evolved marketplace with a wider range of products, not every employee will use or even need the same benefits, he says. Coming out of a pandemic, employees are more conscious of their health care needs, especially when making decisions that significantly weigh on their health. They’re going to be picky when it comes to the benefits they want, he says.

“It’s becoming more challenging for an employer to pick five or six benefits and expect that to meet all of the potential employee needs,” Reid explains. “Instead, [employers] need to pick core benefits, then include a very broad selection of additional offerings for employees that cover a range of different things.”

Such benefits can range from accidental policies and critical illness plans to pet insurance. Reid says employers should consider not only what benefits to offer but also the level of affordability of those benefits for their workforces.

Overwhelmed with more than a year’s worth of dodging competing hurdles, employees are physically, emotionally, mentally and financially drained. They want holistic well-being programs, Reid says. “They’re more tuned in to what offerings are going to be of interest and value to their family.” 

Cost Considerations When Negotiating Contracts

In terms of negotiating health insurance contracts with providers, a new transparency law that went into effect on January 1 now requires hospitals and health care systems to publicly display charge-master pricing and negotiated pricing. This may cause some shifts in carriers and could raise negotiating pressures as contracts are renewed for the year, Buckey says.

Leah Vetter, area assistant vice president of the Iowa, Nebraska and South Dakota regions of Gallagher, encourages plan sponsors to focus on data and transparency with regard to medical and pharmaceutical benefits. Vetter argues that because health care services and procedures were likely delayed or skipped throughout 2020, a number of employers likely paid more in premiums than in actual claims.

Because of this, Vetter recommends employers review their claims utilization data for 24 ongoing months or more, and estimate potential target loss ratios, which she says are typically 80% to 85% for fully insured plans.

“If your plan ran below the target loss ratio, these unused funds should be applied and rolled forward and future premium rates should be set accordingly,” Vetter says. “If your loss ratio is at 80% or higher, it is important to understand where the cost is coming from.”

Vetter urges plan sponsors to ask questions such as: Were there a handful of or even one or two high-cost claimants? Was it pharmacy cost, and specifically specialty pharmacy cost that led to a discrepancy? In this case, it’s essential to know the pooling point or specific/individual stop-loss level being applied to your plan and if that level is appropriate for your plan size, she says. This data can be crucial in ensuring the plan is priced appropriately.

Buckey also says the impending Supreme Court ruling on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) could impact employers and employees. Depending on the outcome, this could shift employers’ priorities in the next year, as the court has until June 30 to determine its ruling. “The potential impact of reversing the health care marketplace can cause a huge ripple effect with more members of the workforce uninsured or underinsured, which can in turn drive up prices and ripple down to employers,” she says.

DB Plan Funded Status Remains Stable in May

Consultants say now is the time to evaluate interest rate and equity market risk strategies, as well as whether and how to take advantage of pension funding relief legislation passed in March.

The aggregate funded ratio for U.S. defined benefit (DB) pension plans sponsored by S&P 500 companies increased by an estimated 0.1 percentage point month-over-month in May to end the month at 94.2%, according to Wilshire.

The monthly change in funding resulted from a 0.6 percentage point increase in asset values partially offset by a 0.7 percentage point increase in liability values. The aggregate funded ratio is estimated to have increased by 6.4 and 13.5 percentage points year-to-date and over the trailing 12 months, respectively.

For more stories like this, sign up for the PLANSPONSOR NEWSDash daily newsletter.

“May marks the seventh consecutive month of funded ratio increases, tying for the longest such streak since August 2016 to March 2017, when the funded ratio increased by 7.3 [percentage points] from 75.9% to 83.2%,” says Ned McGuire, managing director, Wilshire. “May’s funded ratio is at its highest level since Wilshire has been aggregating data for U.S. corporate pension plans on a monthly basis and since Wilshire’s 2007 corporate funding study on an annual basis.”

Insight Investment estimates a corporate DB plan funded status of 95% as of May 31. In May, discount rates fell approximately 4 basis points (bps), leading to a slight increase in DB plan liability, and modeled asset returns were flat, resulting in no material change in funded status, it says.

Northern Trust Asset Management (NTAM)’s May pension funded report shows a small improvement in DB plan funded status from April, from 94.8% to 95.0%. Positive returns in global equities–of 1.6%–offset the higher liabilities due to lower discount rates, where the average decreased from 2.77% to 2.73%.

“While rates declined during the month, funded ratios remained steady due to positive equity returns,” says Jessica Hart, head of the outsourced chief investment officer (OCIO) retirement practice at NTAM. “Central bank accommodation and recent solid economic data helped offset inflation concerns. The Fed remains clear in its view that inflation is transitory and that the U.S. economy is far from full employment.”

NEPC says that despite fears of rising inflation, it maintains its recommendation to adhere to plan hedge ratios and long-term strategic target allocations. The firm says it is keeping an eye on legislation that could increase the corporate tax rate, affecting tax-deductible pension contributions.

NEPC’s Pension Monitor says total-return plans with higher equity allocations may have outpaced liability-driven investing (LDI)-focused plans, depending on the plan liability duration. Based on NEPC’s hypothetical open- and frozen-pension plans, the funded status of the total-return plan increased by 0.4%, while the LDI-focused plan rose 0.6%.

LGIM America estimates that pension funding ratios increased approximately 0.3% throughout May, primarily due to strong equity performance. Its May Pension Solutions’ Monitor says that, overall, liabilities for the average plan increased 0.7%, while plan assets with a traditional “60/40” asset allocation rose approximately 1.1%.

Both model plans October Three tracks saw a second consecutive flat month in May. However, through the first five months of 2021, Plan A is up more than 11% while the more conservative Plan B has improved 3%. Plan A is a traditional plan (duration 12 at 5.5%) with a 60/40 asset allocation, while Plan B is a largely retired plan (duration 9 at 5.5%) with a 20/80 allocation and a greater emphasis on corporate and long-duration bonds.

Brian Donohue, a partner at October Three Consulting, notes that pension funding relief was signed into law in March. “The new law substantially relaxes funding requirements over the next several years, providing welcome breathing room for beleaguered pension sponsors,” he says.

Michael Clark, managing director and consulting actuary with River and Mercantile, says DB plan sponsors will want to consider how those regulations will allow them to optimize their contribution strategies for 2021 and the coming years. He adds that with the current funding stability, “now is a good time for plan sponsors to evaluate their overall funded status risk profile, including ways to manage interest rate and equity market risk.”

River and Mercantile’s U.S. pension briefing for May says it’s likely that DB plans with various liability profiles and investment strategies had a quiet month when it comes to funded status. “Most plans will have seen only modest excess liability growth, which will have been largely offset by asset performance. Whether the net impact is positive or negative will depend on the plan, but, in most cases, the changes will be small,” it states.

Aon’s Pension Risk Tracker shows S&P 500 aggregate pension funded status decreased in the month of May from 92.9% to 92.5%. “Given a majority of the plans in the U.S. are still exposed to interest rate risk, the increase in pension liability caused by decreasing interest rates offset the positive effect of asset returns on the funded status of the plan,” Aon says.

However, during 2021, the aggregate funded ratio for U.S. pension plans in the S&P 500 has increased from 87.9% to 92.5%, according to the Aon. The funded status deficit decreased by $119 billion, which was driven by liability decreases of $139 billion, partially offset by asset decreases of $20 billion year-to-date.

«