Title
Matters relative to wellness program
Body
SUMMARY:
Councilman Souza requests that this matter be discussed further. He makes the following comments:
"In formulating a paper and considering all factors relative to this program, I have attempted to take a comprehensive look at the concept, benefits, and cost to taxpayers. While this view towards employee fitness is new for Crossville, it has been around for a long time. Countries with a higher productivity rate than the US, for example, have long since had programs that caused other nations to take it for a model. Russia, who has one of the poorest productivity levels, has not embraced fitness as an element of their work program. Any basic student of psychology of management or any experienced foreman will tell you that morale and productivity go hand in hand. I believe that the employee morale is at the highest level in recent years. Morale of employees goes hand in hand with their perception of how well we look after their interests. This is not an argument to adopt this, but rather an element to consider.
What is a given is there was an unpredictable interest by city employees in participating in this program. I was surprised at the unsolicited enthusiasm presented to me over the possibility of this program.
The cost is unknown and could be as high as $50,000 with an insurance savings of $14,000. That puts the top end at $36,000. The breakdown is as follows: $4,000 for a gym, 75 members ($11,700), 25 members Cooper test $18,750, 15 standard fitness $6,700, 25 people at weight loss $500, 45 people at weight management total $47,500. Today 80 to 85 percent of our work force is obese or overweight. The question or use and justification of tax money is 'Are we investing in the future productivity of the city work force?' I do not feel the wellness program will succeed without incentives.
Given all factors involved, I will support this to be added to next year's b...
Click here for full text