Higher Savings for Fit Ones?
Hey everyone! HAPPY FRIDAY! Hope you have fun plans for the weekend 😀
We’re actually heading to Orlando this afternoon to be with family for the weekend. I’m pretty excited to see everyone- my MOM even made the trek from AZ. She hardly ever comes to this side of the world- I can’t wait <3
So remember last week when I stirred the controversy pot by discussing Jillian and her weight loss pills?
*Grabs gigantic blog-sized ladle*
Well it’s time to stir the pot a little again.. I’m really anxious to see what all of you think.
(Source)
So last night, I got an email from a reader (thank you, M T!) directing me to this article.
In an almond-shell, it says that Whole Foods Markets has announced it will offer steep store discounts to employees with healthier lifestyles and smaller Body Mass Indices.
From the article:
Here’s the deal: Employees who don’t smoke, and also have low blood pressure, low cholesterol, and a low BMI get up to a 30% discount on their purchases. All the slacker employees still get 20% off, and the program is optional; but the whole thing is likely to rub some people the wrong way (much like the uproar over Obesity 101 at Lincoln Univesity). My thoughts: First, Whole Foods is not the first company to go this route, or even the first grocer….
Lower weight, bigger savings??? Come again?
(Source)
So right now, if I had a Whole Foods less that 3 hours from me, I would be racing down there to become employed and get a sweet discount on all of my favorite goodies.
But on the other hand…
I think of myself 40 lbs heavier and how discouraged I might have felt to learn I wouldn’t get a sweet discount, had I been employed by heaven on earth (aka Whole Foods).
Maybe some of the employees are working there in an effort to be surrounded by new products and ideas and get healthier in the process?
Also, I believe that BMI is a bunch of mumbo jumbo. Don’t get me wrong, blood pressure, cholesterol and not smoking are very important factors, but BMI? BMI says hardly anything about body composition. Muscle weighs more than fat, so a perfectly fit person (with higher muscle density) could actually be considered unhealthy according to the BMI scale.
On one side, it’s a great idea. Why not encourage those who are already fit to keep doing what they’re doing? Since companies pay for health care, and an employee’s health determines the care they need and the amount of money spent, it makes sense that they would do this to reduce health-related costs.
At the same time, why discourage those who need the products the most? Back in the day, I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t be encouraged to purchase the same items for a higher price than some of my peers. What about employees with pre-existing health conditions?
I definitely have a mixed opinion about this…
What do ya’ll think?
I’m off to pack for Orlando <3
See ya soon!
G
120 Comments
Leave a Comment
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
I pretty much agree with everything you’ve said, again. While I agree it’s good to encourage the people who are in good health, I don’t think it’s right that in doing so they are also discouraging people looking to get healthier. I think there could be other better ways of achieving a similar goal but this isn’t it. Thanks for posting this!
Wow, Whole Foods, I love you, but this is a load of dookie! I feel as though this has to be some violation of one’s First Amendment rights. I don’t know exactly in which way, but it’s certainly a violation of something.
Advocating health is awesome, but not giving equal rights to those who aren’t as “healthy” (using quotes because BMI is peculiar) is ridiculous. It’s not going to boost morale and it could even create tension amongst employees. Sure, that sounds ridiculous, but it’s plausible.
Gahhh WF, I want to love you forever. Please don’t do this!
BMI is not an accurate measure of a person’s health. Instead of rewarding people inaccurately, why not, create a ‘healthy lifestyle’ group that involves themselves in a certain number of days of exercise and healthy eating…and then reward those people with 30% off.
Well I must say I do kind of agree with them. I know BMI is not at all accuate, I think if they do this they need to do a DEXA scan to see what the acctual precentage of body fat is. This could be used as a goal to help overweight employees to lose the weight so the discounts will be avaliable to them as well. I know the school I attend has a deal with the insurance company if they can pass a fitness test and are conciderd healthy they get a discount on their insurance. To me this could be usefull to better the health of some of thier employees.
I think its crap when companies do this!! Why not offer free gym memberships, free weight watchers, get rid of the vending machines and soda machines, and change the company lunches to healthy lunches. Quitting smoking and losing weight are really important things, however they are EXPENSIVE. Why not pay for a portion of a quit smoking plan or bring in guest lectures on nutrition and exercise… I could go on and on.
I disagree,these changes don’t need to be expensive, I quit smoking and am saving $$. I spent $0.00 on quitting, it wasn’t easy but it can be done. Also you don’t need to be a member of a gym to lose weight, there are plenty of options (rent free fitness dvds from the library , mall walk, use your own body weight for weight training) I hate to be the devils advocate but…..
I think you missed my point. Instead of Discriminating against people who don’t meet “their” qualifications they could offer these types of alternatives to ALL their employees.
I also wasn’t just referring to exercise as the only expensive part of losing weight, and yes some people only have the option of working out in gyms due to various things including but not limited to weather and safety.
Again, my response was on Whole Foods, not what I do personally.
If it were a policy, one might argue that it is unfair, perhaps even discriminatory. But it’s an incentive program, and even if the guidelines are flawed, I’m happy to learn of it. I wish there were more such programs, in more companies (discounts on gym memberships, etc.) because healthier employees are generally better employees.
I don’t get the uproar either. Skinny people get hit in other ways. In most cases we’re paying more for health insurance we’re not even using to cover the costs of treating a whole host of obesity related illnesses.
what about the people that are working to get healthier, but are not quite at that point? It’s so discouraging for them I’m sure! It’s a tough choice to make…but I don’t think it’s right to allow whole foods or any other company or the government to decided if one individual is healthy or not. I don’t can be overweight and healthier than an skinny person.
Also, last night i was looking through the cookbook Living Raw and i was astonished to see a picture of a girl smoking!!!! I just couldn’t believe that this book is preaching ultimate health and how to get ther and yet had some girl smoking….if you smoke thats your choice…but its not a healthy one! I just couldn’t believe it!
I think it’s discriminatory and won’t shop there, not that I ever did because they’re 30 mins. away and I value ‘value’. A lot of that criteria (BP, cholesterol) is or is potentially genetic. And they’re doing it to lower their own insurance costs, as has been mentioned.
They’re not a private company, they’re public. The stock is WFMI. The shareholders (you and me, if you have a 401k) elect the board of directors who oversees the management. If we don’t like management’s choices we can sell. But most people are more into maximizing the wealth in their 401k, which is how and why companies can do this stuff.
Their stock hasn’t been doing well during this recession, which you’d expect. They’re probably scrambling for ideas to cut their costs.
Right on Mary!!! I’ve been boycotting Whole Foods since they came out against the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA).
There was a GREAT article in the new yorker about the Whole Foods founder:
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/01/04/100104fa_fact_paumgarten
What gets to me is that just because someone has a lower BMI or weight doesn’t mean that they are healthier than someone else. WFs should be promoting health, not size.
also there is a lot of junk food at whole foods too, is there any control over what items the discount can be applied to?
PS- I’d much rather spend my money on *actual* local products at an *actual* local store, not a giant chain that doesn’t value its employees!
Wow. People can come up with all sorts of ideas to keep their employees motivated. It’s a mixed bag for me, and I can certainly see how this could rub some people the wrong way.
I really don’t like that this puts all the emphasis on weight rather than overall health. I especially dislike the inclusion of BMI, which is pretty much bunk, in my opinion. A person can be healthy & “fat” just as s/he could be unhealthy & “skinny.” I would agree with giving discounts for working out X times per month, and additional discounts for not smoking, and maaaaaybe for certain dietary choices – but not strictly because of weight. I think this is discrimination, plain & simple, and it really upsets me.
I think Whole Foods got it backwards – I think the so-called unhealthy group with higher BMIs etc could benefit from the deeper discount. One thing that’s always annoyed me about trying to maintain a healthy diet is the COST of healthy food! A deeper discount for this group could help them get on the right track by lessening the blow of a change to a healthier diet. Yes, I think it’s good to reward your “healthy” employees – but you also need to encourage those that could use a little help. I know if I worked there I would honestly be PISSED that the “skinny” or “healthy” people get cheaper healthy food. Would only make me wonder “what’s the point?”. Giving the so-called unhealthy group a bit of incentive to make smarter/healthier purchases may even bring WF’s costs (for health insurance, etc)down in the long run by encouraging more people to live a healthier lifestyle.
i really hate how there’s so much emphasis placed on BMI…i don’t agree with it because I’m one of those people who, if you look strictly at BMI, would be considered way overweight. but, if you look at body fat %, i’m completely normal and healthy. PLUS, it’s discouraging for those people who need to eat better the most.
i think this was implemented to be a good thing, but i can’t imagine that it will be…
Yikes, I don’t know what to say about this. I can definitely see both sides of the coin, but my instinct is that it’s just going to ruffle too many feathers to be sustainable. It’s a great incentive, but just as likely to spark UNhealthy behaviors as healthy behaviors in those who don’t meet the fitness criteria (food restriction, comparisons to the fitter employees, etc.). That defeats the purpose, IMO.
The exact people who they should want to be buying more healthy products are the ones who are going to have to pay more! What a silly idea. I think every employee should get an awesome discount AND maybe a class or two on choosing the healthiest product in the hopes of an overall healthier and happier workforce. Maybe they should just give everyone 25% off. Then they should work with the heavier employees who want extra help in losing weight.
This is discrimination that doesn’t make sense, HOWEVER, health insurance is different. Some companies choose to impose higher premiums on those with higher risk- smoking, obesity, etc. This represents an actual higher cost to the company and it is reasonable they would be charged more, BUT should only be acceptable after a reasonable grace period is given to achieve the goal and support is offered. If someone flat out refuses to quit smoking they can pay the higher cost. If someone is working on losing weight through a company program they should not be subjected to the higher cost.
There is not a lot of space since this is a comment so I may not have explained everything as thoroughly as I should have but this is the idea. Overall companies should SUPPORT employees as they try to get healthier.
I definitely think it’s a great idea MINUS the BMI mumbo jumbo. They should know better.
I love Whole Foods – but that is an awful idea. BMI is inaccurate and most likely anyone that wouldn’t qualify for the extra discount would feel ostracized and probably look for other employment.
I think it is a very sticky situation they are setting up there. What about the employee who is severely underwieght and has a dangerouse BMI on the low end. It really upsets me when company and schools single out people because of there weight. I believe educating individuals on a healthy balanced life style is great but not singling people out because of thier size.
Gina,
Thanks so much for commenting on this. I am appalled at Whole Foods for this action. I agree with everything you mentioned. In addition, I’d like to say that I think this incentive could do more harm than good by instilling the wrong values about weight loss and healthiness in general. I think some people may be inclined to seek less than healthy methods in order to fit in in some way. I think WF could have gone a much better route and I am wholly disappointed.
As I was reading this, my husband asked what I was grinning about… I told him what your post was about and he said… “you should go get a PT job at WF!” (It’s only 2 miles down the road. YAY) …and then I quickly let him know that bc I carry a lot of muscle mass (and need to lose another 5 pounds of fat, according to my BMI), I wouldn’t get to enjoy the discount bc my BMI says I am in the ‘over weight’ category at a BMI of 25.5, even though I would meet all of the other requirements. He looked at me kinda weird and said, “really?!”… really. So even though I qualify in all the other categories, I wouldn’t get to opt for the special discount bc I have lots of muscle… Um … ok.. I guess I can accept that… I suppose if I stopped lifting weights, I would lose muscle mass and then be able to take my flabby self down and fill out the appication ;P I think not!
Twenty percent is still a lot! The details might be a bit wonky, but I like the concept, why shouldn’t a healthy place encourage it’s employees to be better examples of their business model?
It’s great that stores are trying to get “healthier” employees, but because a low weight DOESN’T necessarily mean a person is healthier, that does create some controversy… I think they would be better off encouraging people to get healthy by giving their employees the opportunity to go to health seminars and speak to dietitians/personal trainers etc.
Hi Gina,
I have never commented before, but feel really passionate about this! First, after reading extensively on the subject and watching food inc., I really think if we didn’t have govt subsidies on corn and soy, etc. then our nation wouldn’t be so bent on “cheap” unhealthy foods. I have lived in Japan and it is MUCH cheaper there to purchase fruits, veggies and meat/fish than it is any type of packaged food…the opposite of us!
Secondly, and more to the point, I actually don’t have a problem with this idea. Please don’t hate me for saying this, but our country needs to work on our health. When I lived abroad it was stressed to get your waist size down to appropriate levels (goes by waist size there, not necessarily weight or BMI) and companies must pay more money for health-care for employees with waist lines that are considered too high (above 33″ for men, and 35″ for women). This is very motivating for them to get healthier. They are not afraid over there to say someone is unhealthy (generally overweight). I wish we would do that here, so we could be healthier…not vanity, just health.
Sorry this was so long winded!!!
hey meg,
happy first comment! 😀 thanks so much for stepping in
i think you have amazing points! loving this discussion
xoxo
It should be for all if you ask me. Fitter healthier people could keep up the good work and maybe thats why unhealthier people want to work there in the first place, to get healthy!! Why cant it be universal!!!
I’m a little up in the air on this particular issue. While I think it’s great that this company is encouraging their employees to become healthier, I don’t think this should discriminate those who don’t have “healthier” BMIs. Like many of the other people who have commented here have had, a lower BMI doesn’t necessarily make you healthy. BMI should not be the basis point here. Maybe they could give discounts by having their employees log down their exercise activity? Just an idea…
You could also say, the overweight do not have the funds to shop at Whole Foods. We all know how expensive they can be. How about offering them a huge discount to try and get it right. Obviously the skinny winnies already know how to eat right and apparently can afford it. A great amount of people think eating healthy is very expensive. You are right, just because you have a lower BMI does not mean you are or that you eat healthy. My daughter is a perfect example. She is an athlete and SOLID. People are “SHOCKED” when they hear how much she weighs. She sure does not look it. I just wish they would give more information and offer more help to those who need it!
I’m torn over their offer too. Hmm
Have a great weekend! I’m heading to Miami for work on Sunday.
As an overweight person on a journey to health, this just sucks. Every time I go to the gym, I get “the stink eye” from some of the super-worker-outers. You know what I mean, the stink eye while they’re waiting for a machine, washing their hands, waiting to use the scale . . . but here’s the crux of the issue. That’s where fat people should be — the gym. And Whole Foods! That’s what you SHOULD be eating — Whole Food! Instead of passing on savings to healthy people, why not pass on a discount on healthy FOOD? (we all know that EVERYTHING at Whole Foods isn’t super for you . . . )Focus on supporting healthy food choices, not healthy people. Try a 30% discount on produce, not on skinnies.
I agree with Mary’s post. The corporation is toeing a very fine line boarding punitive and discriminatory employment practices. They are in essence singling out individuals and adjusting bonus compensation based on physical attributes, and for a publicly traded (or any) corporation this should not be tolerated.
This is not about BMI’s accuracy as a weight or health measurement tool. If all that this information does is makes people feel good about themselves for being so skinny that they too could join the elite and get a bigger employee discount at what is essentially an over-priced glorified Costco, that’s their own personal self-absorption problem.
This is indicative of a myriad of societal problems that America faces, the least of which is disordered eating among the elite. If people were willing to forgo their 20 or 30% discounts on flax and put them towards improving our public schools and health and human services systems, the benefits of society as a whole would be much greater. Unfortunately most people don’t care about others that much.
This is probably very controversial, and it is just my opinion, but I think if John Mackey had a different political viewpoint–one maybe more similar to many of his customers at WF, his every move wouldn’t be picked apart.
My feelings on this particular issue: I hate the way America has turned to a country that vilifies the hard working. Being healthy is hard work and people should be rewarded for it. Whole Foods is trying to do exactly that. The overweight/unhealthy employees are still getting the standard discount and those who choose to be healthier are being rewarded. If more companies took matters into their own hands to contribute to health (by rewarding the good, not by punishing the bad) maybe the healthcare system wouldn’t be failing miserably due in part to the burden of expenses from preventable diseases (for many) like type 2 diabetes, hypertension, etc. JMO of course.
that is an excellent point
I completely agree with you! I’ve managed to lose over 100lbs without major surgery or a Whole Foods discount. I’ve worked hard (and continue to work hard) to lose/maintain my weight.
Lots of people are just looking to blame other people for their problems. Instead of whining about not getting the extra discount, use it as motivation to hit up the gym. Because in all honesty, the fellow healthier coworkers probably already spend more money due to gym costs, workout clothes and cost WF less money in benefits due to preventable diseases.
But BMI really is a horrible indicator. Though the idea is a good one!
That is RIDONKULOUS! BMI is the most useless tool for calculating health.
It doesn’t take into consideration
1-gender
2-age
3-lbm (lean body mass)
4-pregnancy
5-overall health or cardiovascular endurance
I agree with what you say in your blog about having mixed feelings. The discount isn’t a right, it’s a benefit and both groups ‘healthy’ and ‘unhealthy’ are offered the benefit (there’s just a bigger incentive to be ‘healthy’) – so I don’t think any rights are violated (GINA/HIPPA). You could probably opt out of this benefit if you didn’t want to give the information or get the lower benefit and still be getting a VERY NICE benefit (and Whole Foods isn’t the only place to get healthy food). Now the classification of healthy regarding the BMI isn’t the best standard, and yes some people even on cholesterol medication may be unable to reach certain criteria deemed normal. I don’t know Whole Food’s complete employee wellness package, though. This may be just a small piece of the puzzle.
I’m also pretty mixed on this. I feel like we have such a warped and convoluted view of healthy living as a society, and making distinctions based on sometimes arbitrary measurements and requirements without taking in the whole picture. At the same time, it’s a sa-weet discount and incentive. So..yeah.
Gina, I just wanted to say that I’ve been reading blogs for many years and I found your blog a few months ago when you were featured in a magazine and I’m so happy I did. While many blogs have inspired me in different ways, I think your blog has had the most impact in inspiring me on a path towards better physical fitness. Yesterday after watching your Zumba video I remembered I have a friend who is actually a Zumba instructor! I got in touch with her and I’m going to take a class, and I would have *never* done it if it weren’t for you! Thank you so much for all your work.
All in all it’s voluntary so they don’t have to do it.
I think it’s a great incentive to motivate people, WF has an image to maintain just like any other public place of business.
And as many of you know , your body is your temple.. almost everything in your body can be prevented or reversed with a little healthy eating and hard work. So everyone has the chance to do it.
and unfortunetly in our country Im sorry to say that many many people use their “health” issues as a reason for being over weight.
You gotta be a lean grean RAW machine to live long. Lastly I think it’s really sad that the people that do not care for their own health, drag down all the health care and make the healthy people pay more.. how is that “Fair”
Personally, I think anything that uses BMI as a gauge of health is full of it. I do support the idea of “getting healthy”, but how about giving higher discounts for particular items bought – like actual whole foods, versus processed products (because Whole Foods has a lot of those as well). I think the emphasis should be on healthy living, not on some arbitrary measurement that wasn’t even intended for its current use.
Hello!
I read this article a few weeks ago.
I have to say that I work at a co-op, Whole Foods is one of our biggest competitors. I love my job and the group I work with and for. I also have food intolerances and being around alternative choices is my life, no soy or wheat for me! I also am fascinated by food politics. We as employees save 15% everyday and 25% on one other day of our choice. I have worked for them, at various locations, for almost 8 years. For the first 6 years I was pretty overweight and my BMI said I was obese, yuck. I’ve lost 45 pounds and my BMI now says I’m overweight. 2 years ago I changed the way I ate and started exercising more. Nothing in my discount changed the whole time. No one pressured me, I changed the way I was eating and the way I thought about food. I think I look way better at 190 and 5’8 than I did prior, I’m still working at it… but at this weight I wouldn’t be eligible for a better discount if I worked at Whole Foods.
Waving extra discounts in someone’s face won’t make them change their habits. People have to want to do it for themselves. Also, some people only work there to have a job, insane! There are plenty of people who work where I work or probably at Whole Foods that run to McDonald’s for lunch and some 3 cigarettes while they’re out. Peer pressure works for some, but I don’t really think it works for lifestyle changes.
Sorry this was so long, just my 2 cents.
Cheers!
I at first thought it sounded like a neat idea, and I get where they’re coming from.
But then I read this articulate note written by an acquaintance of mine:
http://flavorvegan.blogspot.com/2010/01/boycott-whole-foods-market.html
It’s a pretty intense issue.
i applaud the direction they are trying to go, but…
i agree, BMI is crap. i’m almost 5/10 and when i was in the best shape of my life, playing college basketball etc, the BMI still told me i weighed too much.
ALSO, not sure if it would work but how about something more like NIKE (which as a sidenote, is the DREAM employer in Portland)… you get paid for your lunch and get an extra long one if you go use their gym.
that makes perfect sense to me!
Well this is a controversial approach… I don’t believe that it will help anyone wanting to loose weight… and it will give some UNHEALTHY pressure on EVERYONE (fit or not) working there. I believe it can lead people to become obsess with their weight and feel ashamed, comparing each others… ultimately develop or enhance eating disorders. I think that there is already a lot of pressure on people in general and that will not do any good. So I am totally against this and if I was a Whole Food employee I would totally been against this practice and would contest it, fit or not!
I don’t like the idea, because I do think it’s very discouraging to people who don’t make the mark- not just because they are paying more, but because they will feel like failures before they even begin. In a way, this policy can actually have the opposite effect for overweight employees by dipping their motivation down even further.
WF could approach incentivizing health this way: Earn an additional percentage point off goods, (up to 30%), for every 1% change in BMI, or maybe for every 10% decrease in starting weight. This would be motivating for everyone. The only ones who wouldn’t benefit would be the ones who were already at their ideal weight. Maybe these guys could get the add’l 1% discount for every 6 months they maintain their healthy weight, again, up to 30%. American thinking is so unnecessarily puritan/punishment oriented- with a little creative brainstorming, this company and others could find much more affirming ways to get folks healthy.
I’m starting to think of dozens, but here’s one more: work out a gym membership deal for employees, then give them discounts on store goods when they log 5 30-min cardio workouts per week for at least 40 weeks in the year.
Affirming!
Maybe they’re hoping this “incentive” will encourage their overweight employees to get healthier… but I’m pretty sure that’s NOT the best approach! Since many overweight people are emotional eaters, this “incentive” may just send them into a downward spiral of binges! Plus, who needs any more discrimination in the work place?
I think if they wanted to encourage a healthy lifestyle change in their employees, they could host a fun fitness competition, or weight-loss challenge. Maybe everyone who participates is eligible for the increased discount? That sounds more fair, in my opinion. Especially since BMI is a terrible way to asses someone’s fitness level!
Wow, reactions here are so vindictive towards Whole Foods. I find it troubling for anyone to consider what the employees deserve, as well as the assumption that this must violate their First Amendment rights in some way. The First Amendment protects freedom of speech, freedom of the press, religious freedom, freedom of assembly, and the right to petition, none of which are violated by an employer choosing to set up a voluntary incentive program that would provide an additional discount on top of their 20% employee discount.
My understanding is that any employee who joins the program will receive a percentage discount above the standard percentage discount for all employees. So, an obese employee could join the voluntary health program as a bronze level (22% discount) member and work towards a goal of moving up to the silver level (25% discount), and so on. http://www.nydailynews.com/lifestyle/health/2010/01/26/2010-01-26_whole_foods_to_give_greater_employee_discounts_to_workers_with_lower_bmi_cholest.html
Sure, currently slim and healthy employees who choose to enter the program would instantly receive the 30% discount. Yet, I don’t find that problematic. They are incentivized to maintain their health, while overweight/obese/unhealthy are incentivized to get healthier.
One can disagree with the logic behind this optional employee health program, but claims that John Mackey is violating the law are simply not valid.
Perhaps employees could suggest that the optional health program rewards demonstration of improved health by monitoring %fat loss or something else instead of, or in addition to, BMI.
Mackey has acknowledged that BMI is not a perfect measure of human health, so I bet he’d be willing to improve upon this new voluntary employee health program.
I have a total off topic question. I’ve been doing a lot of research on body recomposition. In order to burn fat/build muscle, do you think it is necessary to cut your carbohydrate intake? Most plans I’ve read suggest no more than 30% of calories should come from carbohydrates in order to achieve an optimal level of fat burning/muscle building. What are your experiences and thoughts on this?
I’m for it, really. I think that people should be rewarded for taking care of themselves. It is healthier to be leaner. There is no way around that. Incentives to people who are making the effort to be as healthy as they can be are no bad thing. I’ve often thought that insurance should work that way, too.
I think it is a good incentive, but perhaps they could come up with another way to measure who gets the bigger discount?
Where I work, we get a discount on our health insurance if we participate in a health management program. This does require filling out the “numbers” but no one gets more for being healthier than the rest. It goes across the board. But those who choose not to participate don’t get a discount at all.
At the risk of getting mauled by the village mob, I think this is a good idea. Yeah it sucks if you’re overweight and don’t get the discount but guess what? That’s just another excuse for you to remain unhealthy. Everything worth fighting for and good comes at a price-it’s hard work to be healthy! I bust my butt 3-5x a week working out and eat unprocessed foods consistently every day to look/feel the way I do! Why not reward good behavior? I think Whole Foods has an ideology (well the brainchild behind it anyway) and it says “hey we stand for something, healthy living! let’s be good to those who get “it.” Look, John Mackey is prone to controversy but I think this is a step in the right direction. Taxing cigarettes decreased overall consumption. If they have to pay more for food, perhaps it’s time to adjust the lifestyle a bit no?
Awesome discussion. I think that this is a flawed initiative. It’s one thing to encourage healthy employees by offering employee discounts to EVERYONE and perhaps some group initiatives towards fitness and wellness. This is a clear statement that Whole Foods believes in having fit and health-conscious employees. But to divide based on BMI is discriminatory and also bound to be susceptible to major flaws; there ARE people whose BMIs are on the higher side, yet who are, or are en route to being, healthy.
And who the hell is going to tell the truth about whether or not they smoke?
Great post for discussion! I’m all for this. For everyone who is upset that BMI is an unfair indicator, read the whole article. BMI is one of *several* indicators that Whole Foods will use. Also, this is not affecting anyone’s pay or current benefits. It merely increases the benefit to those who meet the criteria that the payer determines (and it’s optional, to boot!) And how this could be seen as discouraging to people who don’t yet make the cut-off is beyond me. To me, it looks like just what it is – an incentive. What a great reason to get a little healthier! I would love to have such a program where I work.