Cover:PLANSPONSOR 2009 Ultimate Buyer's Guide: Survival Instincts

Illustration By Shout

Many things shape and influence the composition of workplace benefits. Long established as a kind of "partnership" of employers, the government, and individual workers, the types of benefits provided, the incentives for providing them, and the perceived benefit in receiving them has varied over time, and between employment sectors.

The concept of retirement, much less saving for that retirement, is a relatively recent development, of course. Meanwhile, employment-based health insurance is something of a standard in today's marketplace, but the foundation of that shift in presumption dates back only to the Second World War, and then as a way to work around government-imposed wage controls. Certainly, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) brought about major changes in how workplace benefits were viewed and administered, while major legislative initiatives have continued to reframe and reformat the essence of those programs ever since its 1974 passage.

In normal times, the market's tumultuous path, a shaky economic underpinning, and looming budget deficits would doubtless converge to forestall any significant change in the status quo of such programs. Changes in workforce benefits traditionally have been slow to come on line, reflecting the sensitivity of workers and employers alike to the delicate­ balance between cost and value, not to mention "promise" and practicality.

However, these are not normal times and, if rhetoric becomes reality, change could well be the order of the day, with the potential for seismic shifts in the responsibility, costs, and characteristics of benefits long associated with today's workplace. With that in mind, as we compiled this year's Buyer's Guide, I kept thinking about how much—and what—things could change.   

Health Care

The Obama administration has kept health-care reform near the top of its agenda, not just as a matter of policy, but also as an economic imperative for the nation. Not that the current proposal is designed to replace workplace-sponsored benefits­. "Under the plan, if you like your current health insurance, nothing changes, except your costs will go down by as much as $2,500 per year," remains the watchword of the proposal. On the other hand, the administration asserts that those who currently lack coverage will "have a choice of new, affordable health insurance options."

Of the roughly 47 million said to be without health ­insurance, roughly 19 million of those are drawing a paycheck (of those, 14% were not eligible for coverage under their workplace plan, 30% declined coverage, and the rest had no workplace coverage at their place of employment). More significantly, even the 162 million who do have health insurance—and roughly 61% owe that reality to insurance made available through their workplace—are struggling to keep up with soaring health-care costs (see " Political Partings ").

President Obama proposes to build a parallel system to the current one, similar to the program available for federal employees. The question for many is, will that system complement the existing employer-sponsored version—or compete with it? Moreover, in recent weeks, members of the Obama administration have intimated that the notion of taxing those employer-sponsored benefits could be on the table as part of a broader discussion, though the President has not embraced that position publicly. All this at a time when surveys indicate that employers are reexamining their commitment to these programs publicly—despite the reality that they continue to be highly valued by workers.