2024 Mileage rates:  The Internal Revenue Service issued the 2024 optional standard mileage rates used to calculate the deductible costs of operating an automobile for business, charitable, medical, or moving purposes.  Beginning Jan. 1, 2024, the standard mileage rates for the use of a car (also vans, pickups, or panel trucks) will be:

• 67 cents per mile driven for business use, up 1.5 cents from 2023.
• 21 cents per mile driven for medical or moving purposes for qualified active-duty members of the Armed Forces, a decrease of 1 cent from 2023.
• 14 cents per mile driven in service of charitable organizations; the rate is set by statute and remains unchanged from 2023.

These rates apply to electric and hybrid-electric automobiles as well as gasoline and diesel-powered vehicles.

Source:  IRS  12/14/23

What jobs are at risk because of AI?  A study by the U.K.’s Department for Education, reviewed by The Telegraph and The Daily Mail, determined which jobs are most likely to be "exposed" to—either aided or replaced by—AI and chatbots.  Interesting enough, it’s those jobs that require more education.  The top five at risk for replacement by AI are: management consultants and business analysts, financial managers and directors, chartered and certified accountants, psychologists, and purchasing managers and directors.  The five at risk for chatbox AI are:  telephone salespersons, lawyers, psychologists, further education teaching professionals, and market and street traders and assistants.  Jobs which require intricate technical skills and manual labor were determined least likely to be replaced by any sort of technology. Unsurprisingly, sports players topped this list. Roofers, plasterers, steel erectors, and parking valets rounded out the top five.  Source: Mens Journal 12/3/23

HSA automatic enrollments gaining traction: Nearly half (46.7%) of employers reported they automatically enroll eligible employees in health savings accounts (HSAs), up by more than 30% in just two years, according to recent research from the Plan Sponsor Council of America (PSCA). The 2023 HSA Survey found that there is an emerging trend in employers using a default or suggested savings rate to encourage greater account funding (11.0% of respondents, up from 9% last year and 8% the year before). PSCA noted that HSA programs are becoming more sophisticated and robust, although challenges persist. The top concern by employees is being able to fund their HSAs (indicated by a third of respondents, up from 20% the year before). The survey also found that the average participant contribution dropped by $150 in 2022, though more participants contributed (80 %, up from 72.8% in 2021).  Source: Plan Council Sponsor of America

Using EAP as part of the corrective action process:  As part of the corrective action process, some employers require employees to go to a company-provided Employee Assistance Program (EAP). To the extent that a mandatory EAP referral is related to an employee’s health, that can trip up employers.  The EEOC is suing Weis Markets for “unlawful use” of the company’s EAP because after an employee complained of sexual harassment by her supervisor, the company told the complaining employee that her coworkers had complained about her and that, as a result, she would be required to participate in its EAP.  In addition, a company official told the employee that the referral was to determine whether she should be placed on disability leave. When the employee refused to comply with the mandatory EAP referral, they were suspended without pay and then discharged. Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, employers cannot require employees to undergo medical examinations.  However, mandatory referrals to EAP do not necessarily violate the ADA if the referral is for non-health related counseling or if the referral is for a health-related evaluation (such as a psychiatric evaluation) without having previously discussed such concerns with the employee, based on an employee’s behavior in the workplace, it should be ok as long as it is both job-related and consistent with business necessity.   Source: Shawe Rosenthal LLP 11/30/23

Disability tester dismissed by Supreme Court: The U.S. Supreme Court overturned a lower court’s ruling that allowed a Florida woman, Deborah Laufer, to sue a Maine hotel for failing to disclose accessible features on its reservation website.  Laufer, who is visually impaired and uses a wheelchair, had no intention of making a reservation at the hotel. The justices unanimously found the case moot and dismissed it. Laufer claimed the hotel violated federal regulations mandating accessibility information in reservation systems under the Americans with Disabilities Act.  The case raised questions about legal standing to sue in federal court.  Laufer withdrew her lawsuit after a lawyer’s discipline and the hotel updated its website.  “We might exercise our discretion differently in a future case,” wrote Justice Amy Coney Barrett.  Source; State of the Union 12/8/23

COVID screening time not compensable: In an opinion issued on December 7, 2023, a federal district court in the Northern District of Illinois held that time spent in COVID screening activities was not compensable under federal or Illinois law.  In the underlying collective and class action, Johnson v. Amazon.com Services, LLC, the plaintiffs—warehouse employees whose job duties included moving boxes, stacking packages, and loading boxes—alleged that the defendant’s failure to pay them for time spent being screened for COVID violated the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and Illinois wage statutes.  With the COVID outbreak, the company began requiring its employees to undergo a ten- to fifteen-minute screening process consisting of a temperature check and answering health-related questions.  The plaintiffs alleges that the screening was necessary to the principal work performed by them and the class members and therefore was compensable under the FLSA and state law. The court in Johnson held that a COVID screening is neither integral nor indispensable to the plaintiffs’ principal activities of moving boxes, stacking packages, and loading boxes, and not integral to the functioning of the warehouse generally.  The court likened COVID screenings to security screenings for theft or safety, which are “concerned with aspects of society generally.”  Source: Proskauer 12/11/23

Weight loss drugs are wreaking havoc on healthcare costs:  The buzz about Ozempic, Wegovy, and other related weight-loss medications is everywhere. These expensive medications threaten the affordability of employer-sponsored health insurance plans. This class of high-cost drugs poses a unique challenge in that over 40% of the adult population is eligible for treatment. GLP-1 drugs are generally given weekly as a self-administered injection. They retail for between $12,000 and $15,000 annually, and employer-sponsored health plans pay around $9,000 annually after discounts and rebates. One analysis found that over half of those with new prescriptions for Ozempic and Mounjaro (56%) did not have a diagnosis of diabetes in medical claims. Nearly two-thirds of employers (62%) do not currently provide coverage for anti-obesity medicines, often because their plans were designed years ago when obesity was regarded as a “lifestyle” issue rather than a metabolic disease. These employers are reluctant to initiate coverage now, knowing the likely high costs. So, options to reduce costs include: cover GLP-1 drugs only after failure of other less expensive anti-obesity drugs or medical management programs, an approach known as “step therapy;” restrict coverage for anti-obesity drugs to a smaller group than recommended by specialty societies and approved by the Food and Drug Administration; and change benefit design to increase cost-sharing for GLP-1 medications.  Source: HR Executive 11/30/23