Hrm 531 Week 2 Case Study

1. Costing out these packages has resulted in option 1 being the biggest cost saver. It cuts more benefit costs than option 2. However, seeing the benefit preference, option 2 seems more likely to be accepted by employees. In option 1, the total cost savings from adding copay, benefit reductions, and the Lightning Industries pension plan comes to an estimate of $1,173 in savings.
Option 2 has improved claims processing for unemployment compensation, workers’ compensation, and long-term disability. Improved claims processing can save about $33.26. Option 2 also has a required probationary period of one year, which totals up to a saving of $51; and a deductible of $100 per incident for life insurance, death benefit, hospital, etc. and dental insurance, which totals up to $200. In all, option 2 saves $634.26 on benefit costs.
Comparing the two packages for cutting benefit costs, it seems that option 2 incorporates
It is the option that does not affect employees as much as option 1. Option 1 would probably increase employee dissatisfaction, while Option 2 would just cut cost off of some benefits that employees don’t care much about. This would, in the long-run, keep employees satisfied, and keep experience workers on the job. Option 1 would also possibly result in employee turnover, which would result in a loss due to the need to train new employees.
3. From the cost-saving strategies of Lightning Industries, the one year probationary period would require less input from employees because they do not prefer discount on goods, paid meals, or contributions to employee thrift plans. They will not be highly affected by this cost-saving strategy, therefore they will not react to it as much. The pension plan, on the other hand, would require more input from employees because that particular benefit is preferred and important to