Differential in pay if not taking benefits?

[smkat]

What is the name of your state? CO

*I'm not sure if this should be here or in Benefits... I'm sorry if this is the wrong place*

I just found out something that disturbs me a bit. I have elected to received medical benefits through my company, but was just told (by another co-worker who just started) that she is being given an additional $3 PER HOUR for not taking benefits. That sounded a little odd, so I checked around and sure enough, that's what's happening.

Several co-workers and I are very upset... we were never told about this option. We pay for our own benefits pre-tax, so we're actually getting paid less per hour than our official wage. Whereas employees who've chosen NOT to receive benefits are getting paid an additional $3 per hour on top of the official wage.

Is that legal?

 

[CheeseBlotto]

It's perfectly legal.

 

[pattytx]

Not only is it legal, it is common, although I admit that $3 per hour seems high (for a 40-hour per week employee, that would be about $500 per month). One of our unions here provides for $2,500 per year and that's the highest I've seen in many years. Although it appears unfair that you were not told about this option, it was not illegal not to tell you about it. Also, it's very possible (and common) for the employee to have to certify that he is covered under other insurance in order to get the waiver payment.