That depends on the basis on which the decision is made. Employees in the same "class" (as defined in the employer's Group Health Plan Document) must be treated the same. However classes of employees can be defined in many different ways - office vs. shop, management vs. non-management, exempt vs. non-exempt, executive vs. everyone else, more senior vs. less senior, etc.What is the name of your state? Alabama
Is it legal for an employer to pay premiums for family insurance coverage on one employee and make the another employee to pay the difference between single and family coverage?
My question would be which employee is the exception? If all other employees get the difference paid and they are refusing to pay it for one, I see a problem.
But if most employees do not get the difference and as a matter of hiring negotiation, the employer offered fully paid insurance to a single employee as an exception, I don't see any legal issues with that.
NO that is not what cbg is saying, re-read beth's post:So in other words, what Beth said is wrong.
That depends on the basis on which the decision is made. Employees in the same "class" (as defined in the employer's Group Health Plan Document) must be treated the same. However classes of employees can be defined in many different ways - office vs. shop, management vs. non-management, exempt vs. non-exempt, executive vs. everyone else, more senior vs. less senior, etc.
If classes of employees are defined in a non-discriminatory manner and everyone within that class is treated the same, then yes, what your employer is doing is legal.