The labor journal. [volume] (Everett, Wash.) 1909-1976, 1919-08-01
BUSINESS, NOT
PHILANTHROPY
american Association for Labor
Legislation.)


Health insurance legislation for
wage earners to provide a cost in
centive to sickness prevention, as
workmens compensation has slim
ulated accident prevention, was dis
cussed by Prof. John R. Commons,
of the University of Wisconsin,, in
an address on health programs, a
leading feature of the fifteenth an
nual meeting Of the National Tu-
berculosis Association.
81 do not see a health program
effective and on sufficiently large
SCALE" he declared, until sickness
prevention is made a source of fl
nancial profit to business men.
This is what is intended in the pro-
gram of health insurance. There
does not seem to be any other way
of reaching all of our business men,
as we'll as working men,"
Many big corporations have be-
gun to take hold of sickness pre-
vention, according to Prof. Com
mons. "One corporation which
furnishes physicians and nurses
free to its employees" he said,
finds that where, six years ago,
% of their time was spent in
curing sickness and only 800 in
preventing it, now they spend 1870
of their time in preventing sickness
and only $3.50 is needed for the cure
of it. The difficulty, however, is
that it is not individual and they
do not put enough business ability
into it. One reason is that it is too
easy to shift the entire cost of
sickness over to the workingman
and his family.
ut is now more difficult" he
added, Ito persuade the average
doctor to become a health expert
and to prevent sickness than it was
under workmen's compensation
laws to convert the claim agent
into a safety expert to prevent ac-
cidents."
Referring to the probable heavy
cost to industry of compulsory
health insurance, Prof. Commons
said he is willing to accept the fig
ures as presumably based on the
existing amount of sickness, al
though the same commercial in
surance experts turn around and
say there is not much sickness
anyhow"
: Health insurance is not philan-
thropy but good business, he assert
= ed. ut is a follow-up proposition.
The employer cannot shift the en-
| tire cost over to the workman, but
must share the cost of doctors and
nurses and hospitals and medicines,
t and must continue to pay part or
t the workers wages even when alb
sent from work. 1t is a sickness
t tax on industry, coupled with an
= insurance scheme in order to spread
= the tax over the industry and over
= a. period of time. But, since the
= industry is not solely responsible
n for sickness, the workman also is
required to contribute to the In
e surance fund. and a part of the tax
S is thereby spread out over his
S wages"
S Cooperative legislation that Of
# fers the inducement of profit to
a business men if they will take 6
n hand themselves in preventing sick.
IS ness, he stated, will strengthen the
: demand for efficient health depart
ments free from politics. Instead
y of starting a public health program
l. in defiance of business instincts, We
e start it by building up a business
n demand for It,"
s Compulsory health insurance was
0 also favorably discussed here a
j. meetings of the American Medica
e Association, which adopted a re
e port on the subject, the Nationa
Conference of Social Work, thu
Il American Academy of Medicine, ant
l. the National Convention OF STATE
a Health Authorities.