You are on page 1of 46

Minnesota Emplo y ee Benefits Surv e y

Spring 2005

Labor Market Information Office Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development & State Society of Human Resource Managers www.deed.state.mn.us/lmi/ publications/benefits/2005.htm

MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005
Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................4 Major Findings: ..................................................................................................................................................4 Section 1: Medical Benefits....................................................................................................................................6 Frequency of coverage ......................................................................................................................................6 Qualifying for coverage....................................................................................................................................10 Cost sharing.....................................................................................................................................................11 Section 2: Dental and Vision Benefits..................................................................................................................16 Frequency of dental coverage .........................................................................................................................16 Dental cost sharing ..........................................................................................................................................18 Frequency of vision coverage..........................................................................................................................20 Vision cost sharing...........................................................................................................................................22 Section 3: Retirement Benefits ............................................................................................................................24 Frequency of coverage ....................................................................................................................................24 Cost sharing by type of plan ............................................................................................................................27 Section 4: Life and Disability Benefits..................................................................................................................29 Frequency of coverage: life insurance.............................................................................................................29 Firm characteristics: life insurance ..................................................................................................................30 Cost sharing: life insurance .............................................................................................................................31 Frequency of coverage: short-term and long-term disability insurance...........................................................31 Firm characteristics: disability insurance .........................................................................................................32 Cost sharing: disability insurance ....................................................................................................................33 Section 5: Paid Leave ..........................................................................................................................................36 Frequency of coverage and median hours offered: full-time workers .............................................................36 Frequency of coverage and median hours offered: part-time workers............................................................38 Section 6: Other Fringe Benefits..........................................................................................................................39 Frequency of other fringe benefits: full-time workers.......................................................................................39 Frequency of other fringe benefits: part-time workers .....................................................................................40 Section 7: Employer Costs...................................................................................................................................41 National cost trends .........................................................................................................................................41 Minnesota survey results .................................................................................................................................41 Methodological Note ............................................................................................................................................43 Sample Design.................................................................................................................................................43 Survey Instrument and Results........................................................................................................................44

1

MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005
Table of Figures

Table 1: Percent of full-time and part-time employees offered medical insurance and percent of all full-time and part-time workers participating in a medical plan ..........................................................................................7 Table 2: Percent of full-time and part-time employees participating in single and family medical coverage ........8 Table 3: Percent of firms with medical insurance plans.........................................................................................9 Table 4: Medical waiting period ...........................................................................................................................10 Table 5: Median number of minimum hours worked to qualify for medical coverage.........................................11 Table 6: Medical insurance premiums, percent paid by employer at the median...............................................12 Table 7: Percent of full-time and part-time employees offered dental insurance and percent of all full-time and part-time workers participating in a dental plan...........................................................................................16 Table 8: Percent of full-time and part-time employees participating in single and family dental coverage .........17 Table 9: Percent of firms offering dental insurance .............................................................................................18 Table 10: Dental insurance cost-sharing .............................................................................................................19 Table 11: Percent of full-time and part-time employees offered vision coverage and percent of all full-time and part-time workers participating in a vision plan ...........................................................................................21 Table 12: Percent of firms offering vision coverage.............................................................................................22 Table 13: Vision coverage cost-sharing...............................................................................................................23 Table 14: Percent of firms with retirement plans, by type....................................................................................24 Table 15: Percent of full-time and part-time employees offered a defined benefit or defined contribution plan, and percent of all full-time and part-time workers participating in a plan ....................................................26 Table 16: Cost sharing for retirement plans.........................................................................................................27 Table 17: Percent of full-time and part-time employees offered life insurance and percent of all full-time and part-time workers participating in a plan......................................................................................................29 Table 18: Percent of firms offering life insurance ................................................................................................30 Table 19: Premium cost sharing for life insurance...............................................................................................31 Table 20: Percent of full-time and part-time employees offered disability insurance, and percent of all full-time and part-time workers participating in disability insurance (by type)...........................................................32 Table 21: Percent of firms offering disability insurance (by type) ........................................................................33 Table 22: Premium cost sharing for disability insurance .....................................................................................34 Table 23: Frequency and usual hours of paid leave by type ...............................................................................37 Table 24: Percent of firms offering other fringe benefits......................................................................................39

2

MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005

Acknowledgements and Contributors

Acknowledgements Thank you to all the firms who responded to the 2005 Minnesota Employee Benefits Survey. Your responses allowed us to produce reliable information on employee benefits that can be used by businesses, lawmakers, workers, and the general public. We hope to continue to partner with Minnesota employers in our effort to produce and provide useful and timely labor market information. The State Society of Human Resource Managers (SHRM) partnered with DEED on this study. We want to thank them for their support of this survey and acknowledge their help in increasing response rate by publicizing the survey. The employee benefits survey instrument and methodology used for the Minnesota survey were developed by the National Employee Benefits Consortium, which consisted of staff from 15 state labor market information offices, the Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, National Compensation Survey. The Minnesota survey was paid for by the Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration via the National Employee Benefits Consortium. For more information on this Consortium, please see http://benefits.dol.state.ne.us Contributors Survey coordinator Annie Tietema Report author Jennifer Ridgeway Technical support Oriane Casale Jim Friedl Mustapha Hammida Rachel Hillman Mary Moe Administrative support Denise Kalis Jeanne Nelson Robyn Frank Debbie Morrison Julie Ollig Jackie Terry Barb Valento 3

as well as the proportion of costs they represent compared to wages and salaries.1 percent. Major Findings: Employers offer a wide range of benefits. These are two very different populations and therefore the resulting rates of coverage will differ. 63. Different audiences will have an interest in different tables. retirement. In other words. 4 . Of the 5. These amounts were then considered in terms of the firm's reported average total employment. For example. The Minnesota Employee Benefits Survey provides information on a wide range of employee benefits offered by private sector firms in Minnesota during the first three months of 2005. only information on whether or not the costs are shared is available. vision. Firms were asked for their total cost of wages. as well as information for both full-time and part-time workers. Survey results are available for eight industry sectors. • • • • About 53 percent of firms offer medical insurance to full-time employees and 45 percent offer family coverage. This is because larger firms are more likely to offer benefits. About 46 percent of firms offer retirement benefits to full-time employees with the vast majority offering defined contribution plans. Benefits covered by the survey include medical. for Minnesota employers. The 2005 Minnesota Employee Benefits Survey provides a detailed look at the provision of these benefits.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Introduction Employee benefits. The final section of the report presents information on overall employer costs for health insurance and retirement benefits. and some fringe benefits like tuition assistance. 80 percent of full-time employees in Minnesota are offered coverage. For less expensive benefits. state. This distinction is important to understand when looking at the tables in this report. This report presents information on: • • • the percent of firms that offer various benefits to any or all employees. five employer size classes. benefit data was captured for both firms and employees. Therefore. 3. while 53 percent of firms say they offer medical insurance to full-time employees. were surveyed. or federal. many segments of America's workforce have come to count on the voluntary benefits that their private employers sponsor. with 62 percent of firms offering this benefit to full-time workers. This report also presents information on premium cost sharing. paid leave. insurance. dental. but rather the share that these two benefits represent relative to the cost of wages and salaries. Now. so results only represent employee benefits in the private sector of the economy. became more and more common after World War II.345 firms that were surveyed. Survey results cover only private and most nonprofit firms: no government agencies or organizations. Paid holidays are also very common. these benefits have grown to claim a larger and larger share the budget that firms spend on total worker compensation and therefore represent an important consideration for firms. the percent of employees who are offered benefits and the percent of employees who choose to participate in those benefits. whether local. At the same time. and retirement. the result is not a premium cost for employees who qualify for the benefit. About 29 percent of firms offer dental coverage to their full-time employees and 25 percent offer family coverage. and the six Planning Regions. The most popular benefits are paid vacation. For major benefits the percent paid by the employer is presented. including health care and retirement.374 firms responded.

Full-time workers are more likely to be offered benefits than part-time workers. The Twin Cities region has the highest rates of medical. The Central region led the state in offering fringe benefits such as tuition assistance. • Only 12 percent of firms offer medical benefits to part-time staff versus 53 percent for full-time staff. • Seventy-three percent of firms require a medical waiting period for full-time employees. • Of employers who offer retirement benefits to their employees. • Paradoxically. The leisure and hospitality industries are the least likely to offer benefits. dental and retirement benefits.7 percent of the combined cost of wages and salaries and retirement benefits is spent on retirement benefits. • Manufacturing. Very large firms and manufacturing and education firms were most likely to offer part-time medical coverage. when smaller firms did offer medical. • Employers are more likely to pay the full cost of life and disability insurance than of medical. and education and health services sectors are the most likely to offer medical benefits and most other benefits as well. • Benefits vary depending on the firm’s size class. 2. dental or vision benefits. Cost-sharing and medical waiting periods are common. 8. with larger firms more likely to offer benefits than small firms. 5 . • Of employers who offer health benefits to their employees. • • • There are differences in benefits between regions of the state.3 percent of the combined cost of wages and salaries and health benefits is spent on health benefits. financial. Over 53 percent of employers either split dental insurance costs or pass the entire cost to the full-time employee and that percentage climbs when we look at family dental coverage. Benefits. which likely reflect differences in the mix of firm types and sizes by region. especially health benefits. childcare assistance. represent a significant cost for employers in Minnesota. tuition assistance and flexible medical spending accounts. dental and vision benefits when they are offered these benefits. dental or vision benefits. • In terms of retirement benefits.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 • The most commonly offered fringe benefits are non-production bonuses. and non-production bonuses. they are also somewhat more likely to pay the full cost of that benefit. Benefits vary depending on the industry and firm size. • Cost-sharing is more typical for part-time workers. and a higher percentage of part-time workers are required to pay the full cost of medical. contribution plans are usually jointly-paid while pension plans are often completely employer-funded.

as are workers in very small firms. This figure includes workers and their families as well as an increasingly smaller number of retirees.) Employer-based health insurance started to become very common after WWII. The private employment based provision of health insurance is used both to protect employee health and as an incentive for employee recruitment and retention. and 64. Poverty and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2003.9 percent) of full-time workers and 15.” U. Workers in manufacturing firms and large firms are the most likely to be offered benefits. Participation rates are also high in these areas. and today many sectors of the labor force have come to rely on it.9 percent of part-time workers in surveyed industries are offered some type of employer-sponsored medical insurance plan. Issued August 2004.S. Part-time workers are much less likely to be offered medical coverage or to participate in such coverage.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Section 1: Medical Benefits Frequency of coverage Healthcare issues are closely tied to employment in the U. Census Bureau’s Current Population Reports. about 60 percent of people nationwide are covered by employment-based health insurance. (Source: “Income. 6 . which could be indicative of better plans with lower employee costs being offered.S.6 percent of part-time workers participate in these employer-sponsored medical plans in Minnesota (see Table 1).8 percent of full-time workers and 8. Almost four-fifths (79. Workers in the leisure and hospitality sector are least likely to be offered or to participate in coverage. While some people are uninsured and others are covered by a public insurance program or a policy that they purchase individually.

1% 0.9% 81.9% 25.7% 14.8% 4.2% 7.6% Percent participating 64.7% 3.5% 66.5 percent of full-time workers participated in single coverage plans and 34.5% 4. transportation.6% 84.5% 78.0% 13.1% 9.3% 10. 7 .6% 7.7% 73.5% 14.2% 75.8% 59.9% 10.7% 61.7% 17.1% 75.8% 5.9% 76.2% 65.0% 48.7% 7.4% 14.0 percent participated in a family coverage plan.9% 68.6% 88.5% 4.1% 76.3% 10.9% 3.8% 61.3% 57.2% 59.4% 7.9% 39.5% 5.6% 91. because they are covered by another household member’s plan.6% 63.9% 60.5% 51.2% All respondents Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade.4% 63.7% 7.6% 77.1% 70.4% 17.5% Part-time workers Percent offered coverage 15.7% 87.6% 10. which may include other full-time or part-time workers.4% 61.6% 29.0% 88. or because costs are too high.0% 20.6% 21.5% 67.4% Percent participating 8.3% 17.3% 13.9% 37.5% 75.7% 82.7% 1.5% 17.7% 83.7% 74.4% 39.3% 77.3% 18.3% 64. and utilities Financial activities Professional and business svcs Education and health services Leisure and hospitality Other services Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) Very large (250+) Planning Region Central Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Twin Cities Table 2 shows that 31.1% 10.0% 80. This suggests that many full-time workers are carrying the coverage for their family.1% 20.0% 4. Full-time worker rates also exceed those of part-time workers who seldom enroll in single or family coverage because their employer does not offer it.1% 12.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Table 1: Percent of full-time and part-time employees offered medical insurance and percent of all fulltime and part-time workers participating in a medical plan Full-time workers Percent offered coverage 79.

5% 28.5% 3.2% 3. and utilities Financial activities Professional and business svcs Education and health services Leisure and hospitality Other services Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) Very large (250+) Planning Region Central Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Twin Cities This survey also gathered medical benefits information by industry.7% 33.2 percent offered family coverage.8% 3.5% 34.5% 21.5% 8.2% 38. (See Table 3) Manufacturing firms are most likely to have medical coverage in most cases. accommodations.8% 28.3% 0.7% 26.6% 34.4% 3. Medical coverage is least frequent in firms in the leisure and hospitality sector.8% 30.6% 2.9% 4.4% All respondents Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade. 8 . and region to determine which types of firms are more likely to offer coverage.7% 3.1% 2.2% 33.4% 12.3% 30.3% 32. size class.9% 0.5% 35.8% 35.6% 7.1% 0.2 percent) of the firms offer a medical benefits plan for full-time workers.1% 3.2% 2.4% 30.1% 3.1% 3.8% 28.3% 7.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Table 2: Percent of full-time and part-time employees participating in single and family medical coverage Full-time workers Participating: single coverage 31. transportation.1% 2.2% 3.7% 18.7% 43.4% 34.5% 2.6% Part-time workers Participating: single coverage 5.6% 1.7% 17.3% 9.5% 30.4% 32. which includes entertainment.6% 4.9% 35.0% 33. and 64.4% 40.3% 0. there are clear differences when industry and size class are considered.1% 29.2% 3.0% 33.1% 25.1% 7.0% 33.8% 6. While only about half (53.0% 33.7% 2. Three-fourths of firms offered coverage for full-time workers.1% 32.5% 4.8% 32.0% 42.6% 3.7% 36.4% 26.8% 9.0% 38.8% 6.4% 29.6% Participating: family coverage 34.5% 28.2% 3. and food service businesses.1% Participating: family coverage 3.8% 2.8% 1.9% 10.

9 percent of very small firms offer medical coverage to full-time workers. Overall only 12.2 percent for full-time workers.0% 5.2% 49.1% 57.0% 7.5% 9.0% Family Coverage Full-time workers 45. and only 30.5% 7.0% 18.4% 13.9% 6.5% 15.4% 49.7% 54.3% 90.4% Part-time workers 9.2% 11.7% 64. Only 39.7 percent of them have family coverage.5% 51.6% 18.8% 98. the frequency of plans for part-time workers is well below that for full-time workers.2% 12.2% 15. The Southeast region.1% 4.7% 48. education and health services.0% 37.1% 41.4% 53.7% 30.2% 39.2% 6.1% 45.9% 23.2% 5.5% 52.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Table 3: Percent of firms with medical insurance plans Single Coverage FullParttime time workers workers 53. including family medical coverage.5% 13.4 percent when family coverage is considered.0% 27. As expected.0% 46.3% 39.3% 49.7% 2. and utilities Financial activities Professional and business svcs Education and health services Leisure and hospitality Other services Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) Very large (250+) Planning Region Central Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Twin Cities In terms of size class large firms are much more likely than small firms to offer medical coverage.7% 34. although manufacturing.7% 17.5% 56. Large firms again are more likely than small firms to have medical coverage available to parttime workers. noted for its reputation in healthcare and for the presence of a few very large employers. The seven-county Twin Cities area reported the highest rate in all categories of medical benefits (medical and family coverage for full-time and part-time workers).3% 39.7% 65.1% 95.8% 98.0% 37.6% 74. and that figure drops to 9.4 percent of firms offer medical coverage for part-time workers versus 53. The rates of medical coverage also vary slightly between regions of the state although most hover around state averages.6% 40.9% 73.4% 8.0% 26. Rates are lower for part-time workers than full-time workers in all industries. and financial activities respondents exceed the average.0% 27.9% 47. ranked lowest in frequency of medical insurance plans—a 9 .8% 8.5% 86.2% 10. transportation.2% 22.1% 53.1% 9.1% 8.3% 52. only about half have coverage for part-time workers.5% 12.0% All respondents Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade.1% 6. although while almost all very large firms (250+ employees) have coverage for full-time workers.4% 2.8% 5.0% 6.3% 7.8% 10.4% 46.6% 8.8% 51.5% 28.5% 60.4% 5.2% 48.9% 44.5% 94.

2% 64. (See Table 4) Although few firms with less than ten employees offered medical coverage to full-time or part-time workers.4% In addition to requiring workers to wait a period of time before becoming eligible for coverage.3% 83. employers can raise the number of hours employees must work to be eligible as a way of containing costs.9% 74.2% 49.7% 76. they are also the least likely to require a waiting period.9% 91. waiting period results can appear counterintuitive at first glance. and financial activities sectors.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 reminder that regional results are confounded by both the industry and size class mix of the region and nonresponse issues. and utilities Financial activities Professional and business svcs Education and health services Leisure and hospitality Other services Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) Very large (250+) Planning Region Central Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Twin Cities Full-time 73.0% 59.5% 62.8% 76.5% 81.6% 78.1% 80.6% 72.3% 77.4% 74.6% 87.7% 97. 10 . Qualifying for coverage Survey results suggest that the majority of Minnesota employers are utilizing popular healthcare cost containment measures such as the implementation of waiting periods. Table 5 shows that at the median.8% 87.7% 68.2% 54. Manufacturing required the highest number of hours for full-time workers at the median (38 hours). For full-time workers waiting periods were most common in manufacturing and least common in the professional and business services.1% 71.8% 74.6 percent for part-time workers. This is likely related to the fact that few small firms offer part-time coverage at all. transportation. education and health services.4% 81.3% 84.5% 80.1% 97.6% 46. but those that do are in the smaller pool of employers with more generous benefits. and education and health services came in lowest at 30 hours.1 percent of employers require a waiting period for full-time workers. Considering work status. employers require full-time employees to work 32 hours a week to qualify for medical coverage.5% 60.9% 52.1% 73. In some industries waiting periods are more common for part-time workers.8% 78.8% 82.6% 50.8% Part-time 65.9% 56. that figure drops to 65.1% 87. but in others they appear to be less typical.7% 56.7% 88. Table 4: Medical waiting period All respondents Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade.3% 65. While 73.

employers usually split the bill. they also cover the cost for it. Table 6 shows that generally speaking. and utilities 35 25 Financial activities 32 24 Professional and business svcs 36 30 Education and health services 30 20 Leisure and hospitality 35 21 Other services 32 20 Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) 35 24 Small (10 to 49) 35 25 Medium (50 to 99) 32 20 Large (100 to 249) 32 23 Very large (250+) 32 20 Planning Region Central 32 20 Northeast 36 25 Northwest 35 20 Southeast 36 20 Southwest 35 20 Twin Cities 32 25 Cost sharing National data suggests that the percent of employees with medical insurance who are required to contribute toward that coverage has steadily increased over time. Shares when making contributions to family coverage were even higher over that period. if employers offer single coverage to full-time workers. When it comes to family coverage for full-time workers. (Source: BLS Employee Benefits Survey. but at the median all but one sector (leisure and hospitality) paid at least 82 percent of premium costs of single coverage for full-time workers.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Part-time workers are required to work about 24 hours to qualify for medical coverage when available to them.) Cost sharing—requiring that employees pay part of the expenses for coverage—is another measure used by employers to contain costs. Employers at the median also pay 11 . In 2004. Table 5: Median number of minimum hours worked to qualify for medical coverage FullParttime time workers workers All respondents 32 24 Industry Construction 32 20 Manufacturing 38 25 Trade. Between 1980 and 1997 the percent of workers in medium and large firms who were required to make contributions to their single coverage increased from 26 percent to 69 percent. There are some differences by industry. transportation. Professional and business services employers required higher hours for part-time workers in addition to being one of the sectors reporting lower offer rates for part-time coverage with a high incidence of waiting periods. 76 percent of workers in private industry were required to contribute to their single medical coverage.

percent paid by employer at the median At the median. and they pay 50 percent of family coverage for full-time workers. and utilities Financial activities Professional and business svcs Education and health services Leisure and hospitality Other services Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) Very large (250+) Planning Region Central Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Twin Cities 12 . This is the same for firms of all size classes that offer medical benefits. percent of premium paid by employers for part-time workers Single Coverage 63% 81% 50% 100% 50% 77% 77% 50% 75% 50% 74% 55% 77% 75% 80% 80% 50% 60% 50% 75% Family Coverage 33% 33% 0% 0% 0% 50% 33% 10% 55% 0% 0% 33% 60% 68% 50% 70% 0% 50% 52% 33% All respondents Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade. Firms offering less generous benefits are more likely to offer only single coverage while those offering more generous benefits are more likely to offer both single and family coverage and pay a higher share of both. Table 6: Medical insurance premiums. transportation. In terms of size class very small firms that offer full-time workers coverage tend to pay the full cost of single coverage. 63 percent for single coverage and 33 percent for family coverage. but they pay a higher share of the cost for family coverage.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 a lower share of the premium for part-time workers. percent of premium paid by employers for full-time workers Single Coverage 100% 100% 90% 85% 82% 100% 100% 66% 100% 100% 80% 75% 79% 80% 80% 90% 100% 75% 79% 100% Family Coverage 50% 80% 60% 50% 60% 65% 24% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 64% 75% 50% 67% 50% 62% 50% 50% At the median. Large firms pay a lower share at the median for single coverage.

transportation.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Tables below: Percentiles for share of premium paid by employer Single Medical Coverage Premium for Full-time Workers All respondents Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade. and utilities Financial activities Professional and business svcs Education and health services Leisure and hospitality Other services Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) Very large (250+) Planning Region Central Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Twin Cities 10th 50 50 50 50 0 65 50 0 50 50 50 50 50 60 50 50 50 50 50 50 25th 62 80 75 50 63 80 80 50 50 100 50 53 68 73 50 50 75 56 50 70 Percentiles 50th 75th 100 100 100 90 85 82 100 100 66 100 100 80 75 79 80 80 90 100 75 80 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 90 100 100 100 88 88 86 100 100 100 100 100 100 90th 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 95 100 100 100 100 100 100 13 .

MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Family Medical Coverage Premium for Full-time Workers All respondents Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade. and utilities Financial activities Professional and business svcs Education and health services Leisure and hospitality Other services Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) Very large (250+) Planning Region Central Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Twin Cities 10th 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 48 0 0 0 0 0 0 25th 0 0 42 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 45 65 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percentiles 50th 50 80 60 50 60 65 24 50 50 50 50 50 64 75 50 67 50 62 50 50 75th 100 100 84 80 80 100 50 70 80 100 75 75 78 80 80 100 85 100 75 100 90th 100 100 100 100 100 100 90 90 100 100 100 80 85 88 100 100 100 100 100 100 14 . transportation.

MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Single Medical Coverage Premium for Part-time Workers All respondents Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade. and utilities Financial activities Professional and business svcs Education and health services Leisure and hospitality Other services Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) Very large (250+) Planning Region Central Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Twin Cities 10th 0 50 0 0 0 0 44 0 50 0 0 35 0 50 0 50 0 50 39 0 25th 50 50 50 50 0 50 60 2 50 50 50 44 60 60 20 50 0 50 50 50 Percentiles 50th 63 81 50 100 50 77 77 50 75 50 74 55 77 75 80 80 50 60 50 75 75th 100 100 50 100 70 80 100 50 100 100 100 77 95 80 100 100 69 80 72 100 90th 100 100 60 100 100 100 100 50 100 100 100 80 100 90 100 100 100 100 80 100 15 . transportation.

4% 8.8% 38.9% 66.0% Percent participating 52.9% 16.5% 38.0% 7.7 percent of full-time workers and 8.8% 9.0% 14. Table 7: Percent of full-time and part-time employees offered dental insurance and percent of all full-time and part-time workers participating in a dental plan Full-time workers Percent offered coverage 67.5% 13.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Section 2: Dental and Vision Benefits Frequency of dental coverage While 67 percent of full-time workers and 15 percent of part-time workers in surveyed industries are offered some type of employer-sponsored dental coverage.1% 2.3% 59.0% 20.6% 58.1% 89.2% Part-time workers Percent offered coverage 14.4% 6.2% 12.6% 11.7% 53. but that medical and dental coverage rates are about the same for part-time workers.7% 60.3% 11.9% 49. as are full-time workers in large and very large firms.0% 70.7% 44.7% 17.5% 4.8% 33.2% 10.9% 9.2% 17.6% 60.8% 0.0 percent of part-time workers participate in an employersponsored dental plan.3% 62.8% 6.3% 37.1% 22.8% 57.8% Percent participating 8. Full-time workers in the financial services sector are most likely to be offered or to participate in coverage.3% 51.4% 57.8% 62.2% 49.6% 37.4% 44. only 52.3% 73.2% 7.9% 20.5% 1.2% 4.2% 44.7% 42.2% 5.6% 42.0% 6.4% 4.3% All respondents Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade.7% 2. either as a stand-alone policy or as part of their medical plan (see Table 7). Part-time workers in education and health services and in very large firms are most likely to be offered dental coverage.5% 78.0% 29. Comparison with medical benefits shows that dental coverage lags that of medical coverage for full-time workers.2% 86.7% 49.3% 4.0% 15.8% 11.2% 8.4% 68. transportation.0% 20.4% 63.1% 2.0% 16.7% 16.2% 76.5% 77.3% 50.1% 5.3% 49.7% 73.4% 47.2% 10. and utilities Financial activities Professional and business svcs Education and health services Leisure and hospitality Other services Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) Very large (250+) Planning Region Central Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Twin Cities 16 .

1 percent who participate in family coverage.6% 3.1% 0. but they are less likely to offer family dental coverage for part-timers.0 percent of workers participate in single coverage versus 12.1% 20.6% 21.0% 2. and the full-time family coverage participation rate is higher than that for single coverage.1% 25. and only about one in ten (9.1% 1.1% 9.9% 33.8% 22.5% 22.7% 0.9% 31.8 percent) offer coverage for part-time workers. they are more likely to be participating in single coverage.5% 8.0% 38.8% 31.5% 2.2% 0.4% 2.7% 4.1% 5.0% 25. and lowest among firms in leisure and hospitality (15.0% 11.4% 12.1% 25. A bold exception is part-time construction workers. although with dental coverage there is an even greater difference between the biggest and smallest size classes for full-time workers.3% 15.9% 3. Twenty-one percent of manufacturing firms provide dental benefits for part-time workers.7% 4.6 percent) offer dental coverage for full-time workers. full-time workers are more likely to participate in coverage than part-time workers.8% 3.5% 3.2% 4.7% 23.5% 14.4% 31.1% 26.6% 28.2 percent for single and family coverage respectively).2% 19.7% 7.1% 42.5% 1.7% 1.2% 4.8% 4.2% 17.6% 29.2 percent offer family coverage for full-time workers.5% 0.0% 27. As with medical coverage.8% Participating: family coverage 29.9% 23.0% 2.8% 6.1% 1.2% 2. Table 8: Percent of full-time and part-time employees participating in single and family dental coverage Full-time workers Participating: single coverage 23.4% 1.6% 13.6% 20. Only about one in four firms (28.7% All respondents Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade.9% 30.1% 19. Education and health services employers are among the most likely to provide plans for part-time workers.2% 25.5% 1.6% Participating: family coverage 3.3% 3. (See Table 9) Frequency of coverage is highest for full-time workers among manufacturing employers.7% 2.2 percent and 14.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 As with medical coverage. who are much more likely to be participating in family coverage.8% 22. (See Table 8) When part-time workers participate in their employer’s dental plan.9% 2. where almost half of firms offer single coverage and 37.1% 16. large employers provide coverage more frequently than small employers.0% 37.5% 2. and utilities Financial activities Professional and business svcs Education and health services Leisure and hospitality Other services Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) Very large (250+) Planning Region Central Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Twin Cities Overall. the share of firms that provide dental coverage is much lower than the share of firms that offer medical coverage.3% 2.3% 23.7% 20.4% 8.8% Part-time workers Participating: single coverage 4.7% 11.0% 2.2% 31. The greatest exception for full-time workers is in the leisure and hospitality sector where 23.8% 25. Firms provide single and family dental coverage to part-time workers about as often as they provide 17 .8% 30.4% 6. transportation.

5% 3.8% 1.8% 4.7% 4. transportation.3% 8.4% 11.8% 17. August 2004.pdf. 36. For part-time workers.2% 17.9% 24.6% 34. nationally.2% 27.7% 18.0% 7.9% 19.6% 35.8% 19.8% 21. 45.6% 22.4% 3.3% 88.3% 6.9% 23. but full-time workers in small and very small firms have a much lower incidence of dental coverage. both for part-time and full-time workers.1 While almost half of firms pay the full cost of single dental coverage premiums for full-time workers. Michael.4% 14.2% 73.6% 94.8% 54.gov/opub/mlr/2004/08/art6full.2% 22.8% 11. Table 9: Percent of firms offering dental insurance Dental Coverage FullParttime time 28. Joint payment was also the most common payment type for family coverage.3% 25.5% 12.8% 28.4% 3.7% 39.8% 17.9% 43.7% Family Dental FullParttime time 25.1% 7.5% 3.8% 24.2% 5.9% 5.3% 38. “New statistics for health insurance from the National Compensation Survey.5% All respondents Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade.5% 52.3 percent require joint payment. Among very small firms (less than 10 employees) only about 16 percent of employers offered even single dental coverage for full-time workers.7% 15.3% 1.6% 8.2% 25.9% 15.1% 20. Online at http://www.2% 21.5% 10.0% 12.8% 94. Frequency of dental coverage also varies slightly between regions of the state with plans being offered at the highest rates in the Twin Cities metro area.4% 14.4% 25. dental cost sharing is even more prevalent than medical cost sharing.9% 27.9% 30.4% 77.5% 37.5% 86.6% 21.6% 30.7% 4.1% 8.3 percent of employers provide jointly-paid premiums for single coverage.2% 13.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 medical coverage across size classes.bls.8% 9.5% 2.” Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Monthly Labor Review.7% 5.5% 28.4% 46.4% 4.6% 4. Family dental coverage also differs from single coverage in that fully employee-paid premiums are more 1 Lettau.3% 23.3% 3. 18 .2% 10.3% 2. and utilities Financial activities Professional and business svcs Education and health services Leisure and hospitality Other services Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) Very large (250+) Planning Region Central Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Twin Cities Dental cost sharing As the two sections of Table 10 show. employer costs per participant for dental insurance are a fraction of that for medical insurance.7% 15.6% 9.7% 6.

The majority of large and very large employers rely on cost sharing.7% 15.0% 93.7% 42.1% 40.7% 18.7% 5.6% 10.3% 33. and utilities Financial activities Professional and business svcs Education and health services Leisure and hospitality Other services Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) Very large (250+) Planning Region Central Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Twin Cities 19 .4% 9.5% 8.4% 11.0% % Fully Employee Paid 17.5% % Jointly Paid 45.1% 26.4% 2.1% 27.6% 29.0% 46.0% 35.3% 17.0% 14.0% 46.8% 53. they expect employees to bear more of the burden for the costs of family coverage than single coverage.5% 56.3% 8.2% 14.7% 29.2% 27.0% 50.4% 15.8% 18. In terms of size class very small employers are among those that most often pay the full cost of premiums for dental coverage.8% 21.5% 45.5% All respondents Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade.7% 35.4% 61.6% 32.6% 46.0% 42.3% 1.6% 40.8% 38.8% 21.8% 36.7% 4.3% 0.2% 17.4% 22.8% 43. transportation.4% 30.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 common than fully employer-paid premiums.7% 63.8% Single Coverage Part-time workers % Fully Employer Paid 37.3% 3.3% 63.6% 34. transportation and utilities and leisure and hospitality employers were among those most likely to have employees pay the full cost of dental premiums.0% 62.9% 24.8% 5.1% 22.5% 24.5% 53.3% 53.0% 12.0% 40.2% % Fully Employee Paid 17.5% 20.2% 74.1% 9.1% 40.0% 45.2% 16.2% 32.5% 26.5% 26.0% 64.2% 17.3% 29.3% 8.3% 26.9% 8.9% 27.6% 51.5% 38.8% 25.1% 19. Trade.2% 23.2% 75.0% 46.0% % Jointly Paid 36.8% 48.3% 28.1% 29.9% 16.5% 48.5% 43.5% 25.6% 39.6% 87.6% 53.9% 34.4% 49.0% 45.6% 76.7% 42.9% 14.0% 3.7% 53.4% 16.6% 21.4% 27.4% 43.3% 31.8% 12.2% 51.2% 47.1% 29. Table 10: Dental insurance cost-sharing Single coverage Full-time workers % Fully Employer Paid 46. suggesting that while employers are almost as likely to offer family coverage as single coverage.5% 78.1% 54.6% 24.5% 55.

0% % Fully Employee Paid 29.4% 7.8% 0.8% 80.2% 8.9% 62.3% 34.1% 51.6% 48.2% 50.1% 15.6% 42.0% 25.7% 8.8% 61.7% 29.2% Family Coverage Part-time workers % Jointly Paid 46.7% 24.2% 2.6% 14.9% 60.3% 18.3% 13.3% % Fully Employee Paid 42.0% 46.2% 34.5% 20.9% 17.0% 65.0% 31.9% 40.7% 31.8% 5.3% 85.8% 23.6% 49.6% 42.6% 32.8% 39.7% 49.9% 15.7% 34.0% 33.4% 20.1% % Jointly Paid 48.8% 62.0% 68.0% 6.8% % Fully Employer Paid 9. Offer rates and participation rates are highest for part-time construction workers and part-time workers in larger firms. and utilities Financial activities Professional and business svcs Education and health services Leisure and hospitality Other services Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) Very large (250+) Planning Region Central Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Twin Cities Frequency of vision coverage About 37 percent of full-time workers and eight percent of part-time workers in surveyed industries are offered some kind of employer-sponsored vision plan either as a stand-alone policy or as part of their medical plan.2% 2.4% 77.1% 28.2% 58.7% 27.5% 10.4% 13.2% 10.1% 64.2% 11.3% 70.2% 65.8% 49.1% 19.8% 44.5% 44.6% 17.2% 32.8% 5.6 percent of part-time workers in surveyed firms participate in an employer-sponsored vision plan. transportation.5% 54.1% 11.6% 41. Offer rates for full-time workers are highest in the financial activities and professional and business services sectors and in very large firms where more than half of full-time workers are offered vision coverage.2% 42.1% 50.0% 15.1% 7.2% 17.6% 39.0% 16.6% 81.0% 20.4% 39.1% 9.8% 29.4% 44.2% 47.1% 31.3% 19.5% 0.6% 36.0% 39.1% 34.4% 34.6% 2.6% 38.3% 63.3% 6.0% 17.6% 2.8% 31.8% 14. 20 .9% 17.2% 29.7% 50.6% All respondents Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade.7% 47.8% 25.0% 21.1% 7.4% 80.3% 67.4% 54. (See Table 11) But only 27.1 percent of full-time workers and 4.6% 47.): Dental insurance cost-sharing Family coverage Full-time workers % Fully Employer Paid 24.4% 11.4% 47.8% 27.2% 21.0% 9.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Table 10 (cont.6% 6.7% 39.5% 79.

6% 17.3% 1.7% 5. as well as in very large firms.7% 30.6 percent have coverage for part-time workers. transportation.1% 19.3% 7.4% 18.3% 53. where 53.2% 1.1% 24.3% 31.2% 19.7 percent of firms have coverage for fulltime workers and 29.5% 22.7% All respondents Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade.8% 7. (See Table 12) Rates are highest in the manufacturing sector.5% 2.1% 33.7% 9.0% 16. similar to medical and dental coverage.5% 32.6% 6.7% 7.7% 10.1% 37.9% 32.4% 31.8% 37.4% 5.8% 0.9% 23.1% 3.9% 31.1% 19. Less than ten percent of very small firms offered vision coverage to full-time workers.2% 2.0% 11.0% 23.7% 5.3% 18.5 percent of firms provide vision coverage for full-time workers.5% 3.8% 28.2% 2.5% 48.0% 5.2% 46. The lowest frequency of coverage among industries was in leisure and hospitality.8% 36.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Table 11: Percent of full-time and part-time employees offered vision coverage and percent of all full-time and part-time workers participating in a vision plan Full-time workers Percent offered coverage 36.2% 7.9% 17.2% 9.5% 36.0% 1.3% 6.7% 40.8% 30.9% 14.0% 33.4% 4.3% 6.2% 5.0% 42.5% 5.0% 2. but rates vary significantly between industries and size classes.1% 10.8% 13.5% 5. 21 .5% 38.9% 14.1% 39. Results suggest that vision coverage is less common than medical or dental coverage.9% 27.1% 38.6% 17.5% 25.7% Part-time workers Percent offered coverage 8.1% 27.1% 1.2% 2.9% 29.6% 8.5% 3.2% Percent participating 27. and less than five percent provide coverage for part-time workers. and utilities Financial activities Professional and business svcs Education and health services Leisure and hospitality Other services Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) Very large (250+) Planning Region Central Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Twin Cities Only 15.2% Percent participating 4. but that industry and size class trends persist across these types of benefits.

7% 2.5% 2.0% 2.0% 1.2% 12.0% 17.8% 6. with 52. transportation.5% 21. but these employers resoundingly rely on cost-sharing for their part-time workers.7% 17.5% 3. while financial activities sector employers are most likely to ask part-time workers to pay the full cost.0% 11.2% 16.8% 8.6% 21.5% 17.1% 10.8% Parttime workers 4.5% 5.1% 6. (See Table 13) More than half of manufacturing firms pay the full cost of coverage for full-time workers.6% 2.5% 11.6% 38.7% 2.3% 53.0% 9.9% 11. and utilities Financial activities Professional and business services Education and health services Leisure and hospitality Other services Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) Very large (250+) Planning Region Central Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Twin Cities 15. Very small firms (less than 10 employees) are the only size class where a majority of respondents who offer vision coverage pay the full cost of premiums for full-time employees.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Table 12: Percent of firms offering vision coverage Fulltime workers All respondents Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade.1% 36.5% 10.9% 3.9% 16. 22 .2% Vision cost sharing Cost sharing for vision premiums is more common than fully employer-paid or employee-paid arrangements. The majority of employers in other size classes rely on cost-sharing.4% 4.2% 50.0% 29.3% 16. Leisure and hospitality employers are most likely to ask full-time workers to pay the full premium costs.5 percent requiring it for parttimers.7% 15.6% 2.8% 3.5 percent of employers requiring cost-sharing for full-time worker plans and 60.0% 12.8% 8.

2% 5.0% 60.8% 39.9% 11.9% 10.6% 5.3% 8.6% 20.8% 2.0% 64.1% 24.1% 45.2% 13.7% 64.6% 56.4% 13.5% 49.6% 66.0% 10.0% 31.8% 14.4% 7.3% 16.1% 11.4% 2.4% 54.5% 50.2% 13.6% 47.3% 79.5% 70.8% 40.1% 9.9% 25.4% 1.4% 7.6% 75.1% 0.0% 11.7% 74.4% 72.0% 48.4% 24.1% 19.1% 7.5% 9.3% 0.5% 42.8% 19.9% 19.2% 39.1% 49.7% 12.2% 13.3% 40.3% 28.2% % Jointly Paid 52.4% 15.7% % Fully Employee Paid 28.0% 3.3% 73.5% 64.3% 19.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Table 13: Vision coverage cost-sharing Full-time workers % Fully Employer Paid All respondents Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade.4% 9.1% 5.4% 44.0% 22.3% 57.6% 75.7% 6.2% 79.2% 15.9% 33.3% 51.0% 61.7% 45.5% 53.5% % Fully Employee Paid 7.8% 2.8% 73.6% 18.5% 78.3% 19.1% 62.5% 24.5% 55.5% 26.5% 23.0% 56.5% 10.0% 2.1% 5.3% 14.0% 2.0% 2.8% 18.1% 5.9% 78.2% 10.7% 75.3% Part-time workers % Fully Employer Paid 11.1% 79.6% 17.3% 23.3% % Jointly Paid 60.7% 97.8% 59.4% 46.2% 76.2% 48. transportation.7% 4.8% 24.7% 65.7% 23.4% 63. and utilities Financial activities Professional and business svcs Education and health services Leisure and hospitality Other services Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) Very large (250+) Planning Region Central Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Twin Cities 39.2% 41.0% 23 .0% 9.2% 10.0% 46.

3% 2.8% 59.1% 1.5% 12.0% 6.0% 24.0% 0.7% 3.0% 54.2% All respondents Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade.9% 40.0% 9.3% 20.2% 87.2% 37.5% 54.5% 47.0% 1.6% Defined Benefit Plan FullParttime time workers workers 6.9% 13.5% 18.1% 8.4% 21.0% 4.6% 21.3 percent offer plans to part-time workers. and about one fifth (20.9% 30. ranking just below some types of paid leave and medical coverage for full-time workers and leading the list of benefits for part-time workers.8 percent of respondent firms).8% 41.5% 2.5 percent) offer a plan to their part-time workers.1% 42.2% 17.6% 48.5% 3. and 13.2% 22.3% 51. Almost all very large employers (more than 250 employees) offer retirement plans to full-time workers and 77. while employers in education and health services offer plans to parttime workers more frequently than employers in other sectors (42.8% 55. Forty-six percent of firms in Minnesota offer a retirement plan to their full-time employees.3% 35. Employers in the financial activities sector are most likely to offer retirement plans to full-time workers.9% 2.2% 5.7% 60.3% 33.6% 17.9% 44.4% 11.2% Defined Contribution Plan FullParttime time workers workers 43.1 percent offer plans for part-time workers.4% 3.0% 19.7% 43.8% 35.4% 89.9% 75.3% 24.3% 53.3% 15.6% 15.0% 2.1% 43. (See Table 14) The best indication of overall provision of retirement benefits is the size of the firm. Employers in the leisure and hospitality industry are least likely to offer retirement plans to either full-time or part-time workers.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Section 3: Retirement Benefits Frequency of coverage Retirement benefits are among the most commonly offered employee benefits provided by firms.1% 61.5% 41.3% 95.6% 8.7% 23.7% 53.9% 31.5% 3.7% 49.6% 9.9% 21.5% 93. transportation.8% 7.4% 3. Table 14: Percent of firms with retirement plans.6% 56.0% 14.4% 14.3% 22. About a third of small firms (less than ten employees) offer some type of retirement plan for full-time workers. and utilities Financial activities Professional and business svcs Education and health services Leisure and hospitality Other services Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) Very large (250+) Planning Region Central 24 .1% 24.4% 10.4% 5.9% 8.5% 79.7% 22.5% 9.1% 38.9% 0.1% 77.2% 1.1% 15.1% 8.3% 1. by type Retirement Plan (any type) FullParttime time workers workers 46.0% 76.3% 8.

7% 20.g.2% 16. In these plans the employer bears the risk of the investment. and financial activities employers being the most likely to have a defined contribution plan.2% 4. as well as in larger firms.2% 1. Industry and size class trends mirror those for overall benefit provision with manufacturing.7% 22. and trade.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Twin Cities 40.4 percent for full-time workers and 3.4 percent are offered access to a defined contribution and 15. The public administration sector. In contrast defined contribution plans (e. primarily defined contribution plans.5% 20.5% 13.2% 1. 401k) are individual. As with other benefits.8% 7. based on some formula such as earnings over time or in the last few years of the person’s tenure with the firm. (See Table 15) At the same time. and defined contribution plans retain higher participation rates than defined benefits plans across all size classes.6% 16. however.8% 7.3% 4. Offer and participation rates are highest for full-time workers in the financial activities and manufacturing sectors.7% 37. education and health services. which was not included in this survey. tends to be one of the only sectors in which employers are still more likely to offer pension plans than defined contribution plans. Defined benefit plans.0% 50. Defined contribution plans. sometimes called pension plans.1% 23. instead favoring defined contribution plans (43.2% 46. Instead the employee bears the risk of investment earnings. The offer rates for defined benefit plans jump.2% 3. 2 According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ National Compensation Survey. 25 . as well as in larger firms. are more popular even in these industries. provide employees with a set benefit amount at retirement.9 percent for part-time workers).5% Survey results also provided information on what types of retirement plans are offered.2 percent for full-time workers and 17. are participating to some extent in firm-sponsored retirement plans. manufacturing. versus 14 percent participating in a defined contribution plan. between the “large” and “very large” size classes at the same time that offer rates for defined contribution plans slip. and education and health services sectors. Table 14 shows that few employers offer the once traditional defined benefit pension plan (6.1% 4.1% 44. workers. portable plans in which the benefit available at retirement is not set.7% 17.2% 17.4% 13.0% 2.4% 41. and with the frequency of both types of plans increasing with the size class of the firm. where only about one in five workers are offered a retirement plan and where even fewer choose to participate in a plan. manufacturing. despite warnings that Americans are not saving enough for retirement. defined benefit plans or defined contribution plans. Defined benefit plans are offered most frequently in those sectors that tend to have the highest levels of unionization: construction.7% 42. financial activities.0% 6. The vast majority of full-time workers in Minnesota are offered access to retirement benefits: 64. more than half of these full-time workers are participating in employer-sponsored plans. at least full-time workers.7% 43. however.2 The survey results also suggest that. Full-time financial activities employees are also most likely to be offered a defined benefit plan.3% 35.8% 37. offer and participation rates increase for full-time workers as the employer size class increases.4 percent for part-time workers). transportation and utilities (where transportation and utilities unionization rates are high). Access to retirement plans is lower for part-time workers. nine out of ten full-time state and local government employees in 1998 participated in a defined benefit retirement plan.6 percent are offered a defined benefit program. Defined contribution plan offer rates and participation rates for part-time workers are highest in the construction. This is likely related to the correlation between very large employers and industries such as manufacturing that are more likely to offer defined benefit plans.

5% 1.2% 12.0% 0.5% 9.2% 1.3% 16.7% 26.0% 10.3% 2.0% 20.6% 0.0% 31.8% 8.2% 83.1% 21.7% 43.4% 46.3% 6.4% 24.5% 5.9% 29.7% 19.5% 25.8% 12.1% 16.5% 79.4% 49.6% 15.9% 26 .5% 10.8% 20.0% 1.9% 4.9% 8.2% 5.5% 4. and percent of all full-time and part-time workers participating in a plan Full-time workers Defined Benefit Percent offered coverage All respondents Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade.4% 25.6% 7.1% 22.3% 18.0% 16.3% 23.0% 11.1% 12.8% 1.4% 20.4% 1.6% 10.0% 8.6% 3.8% 30.7% 18.6% 11.1% 1.7% 11.1% 40.5% 0.6% 67.9% 70.2% 2.9% 60.7% 57.1% 2.6% 13.3% 0.5% 58.2% 5.2% 18.4% Percent participating 47.1% 12.9% 32.1% 8.6% 30.5% 1.3% 28.8% 7.1% 0.0% 1.0% 64.4% 45.3% 59.3% Defined Contribution Percent offered coverage 19.6% Percent participating 9.3% 20.6% 64.2% 15.0% 13.6% 51.3% Defined Contribution Percent offered coverage 64.7% 50.8% 1.3% 32.4% 34.8% 9.7% 1.3% 52.6% 8.7% 9.0% 4.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Table 15: Percent of full-time and part-time employees offered a defined benefit or defined contribution plan.5% 6.2% 15.7% Percent participating 3.1% 10.7% 57.9% 42.9% 18.1% 3.6% Percent participating 14.4% 4.5% 69.4% 3.9% 15.8% 8.9% 4. transportation.0% 11.0% 14.3% 20.9% 54.2% 2.3% 75.7% 54.1% 11.9% 5.2% 10.0% 4.6% Part-time workers Defined Benefit Percent offered coverage 3.0% 64.4% 5.6% 8.2% 4.8% 12.0% 34.4% 15.6% 5.7% 70.9% 5.1% 42.6% 4. and utilities Financial activities Professional and business svcs Education and health services Leisure and hospitality Other services Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) Very large (250+) Planning Region Central Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Twin Cities 13.0% 12.4% 5.6% 16.8% 44.0% 24.7% 13.0% 13.9% 82.9% 63.9% 34.2% 26.3% 27.2% 9.0% 8.2% 1.6% 47.7% 17.1% 31.3% 11.1% 2.1% 55.6% 4.

0% 10.5% 69.1% 10.4% 6.0% 22.4% 16.0% 8.5% % Jointly Paid 73.9% 71.4% 75.2% 66.6% 8.7% 13.8% 9.3% 9.0% 79.0% 10.8% 17.0% 68.7% 71.6% 7.3% 63.0% 16.3% 18.9% 22.5% 84.1% 4.0% 12.8% 11.6% 9.1% 15.7% 71.5% 81.4% 5.5% 71.5% 12.0% % Jointly Paid 76.7% 68.7% 6.3% All respondents Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade.9% 9.0% 71. and utilities Financial activities Professional and business svcs Education and health services Leisure and hospitality Other services Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) Very large (250+) Planning Region Central Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Twin Cities 27 .7% 85. Defined contribution plans are jointly-paid in most firms.5% 21.1% 6.8% 16.9% 70.6% 75.3% 9.8% 9.3% 12.3% 9.3% 63.5% 24.8% 5.8% 15.4% 74.9% 7.7% 5.7% 9.1% 73.3% 81.5% 17. transportation.1% 7.4% 62.8% 19.7% 18.2% 15.3% 11.9% 2.4% 15.9% 85.9% 24.6% 75.9% 12.6% 14.9% 27.2% 79.8% 82. given their contrasting designs.8% 60.1% 11.5% Part-time Workers % Fully Employer Paid 14.7% 19.2% 35.1% 1.7% 76.8% 84.9% 26.1% % Fully Employee Paid 9.0% 6.5% 7.7% 76.1% 6.6% 83. (See Table 16) Table 16: Cost sharing for retirement plans Defined contribution plans Full-time Workers % Fully Employer Paid 17.5% 14.0% 16.2% 18.2% 74.3% 8.8% 19.2% 73.7% 13. some of the starkest differences in cost sharing are between the two types of plans.1% 55.6% 16.4% 20.3% 4.5% 20.3% 9.7% % Fully Employee Paid 9.1% 11.5% 21.7% 69. while defined benefits plans are generally employer-paid.3% 69.3% 4.7% 72.1% 5.8% 70.6% 26.1% 11.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Cost sharing by type of plan Not surprisingly.0% 17.

5% % Fully Employee Paid 0.3% 85.7% 58.9% 54.2% 6.6% 6.8% 93. and utilities Financial activities Professional and business svcs Education and health services Leisure and hospitality Other services Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) Very large (250+) Planning Region Central Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Twin Cities 28 .7% 91.0% 0.0% 0.5% 0.7% 8.0% 0.2% 51.5% 0.3% % Jointly Paid 20.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Table 16 (cont.0% 0.8% 40.1% 8.2% 1.7% 47.0% 0.1% 2.0% 3.9% Part-time Workers % Fully Employer Paid 78.0% 0.5% 0.5% 85.0% 2.0% 4.9% 1.8% 0.1% 78.0% 99.4% 0.4% 0.4% 5.7% 66.9% 46.0% 0.7% 1.5% 21.2% 91.4% 0.2% 14.0% 0.5% 0.3% 44.0% 3.5% 41.0% 87.7% 7.4% 11.2% 74.0% 3.2% 9.3% 33.7% 65.8% 90.8% 48.7% 59.5% 58.4% 72.0% 0.8% 7.3% 38.2% 63.8% 100.8% 90.3% 55.3% 0.7% 40.8% 80.5% 77.0% % Fully Employee Paid 2.9% 91. transportation.2% 18.8% 18.1% % Jointly Paid 16.): Cost sharing for retirement plans Full-time Workers Defined benefits plans % Fully Employer Paid 80.4% 2.3% 8.6% 21.2% All respondents Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade.7% 86.7% 25.9% 0.6% 76.6% 80.8% 16.6% 22.0% 0.6% 0.3% 12.8% 4.6% 97.7% 67.0% 0.4% 4.6% 0.2% 73.5% 6.7% 88.3% 1.7% 53.4% 6.7% 95.6% 15.6% 2.0% 3.0% 0.0% 1.6% 94.8% 26.6% 90.4% 23.6% 21.2% 92.3% 52.2% 31.2% 14.

1% 18. In terms of industry. Table 17: Percent of full-time and part-time employees offered life insurance and percent of all full-time and part-time workers participating in a plan Full-time workers Percent offered coverage 66.5% Percent participating 10.4% 77.4% 4.1% 15.5% 86.2% 69.0 percent respectively for the next largest size class (100 to 249 workers).3% 30.5 and 13.0% 13.8% 52.4% 51.3% 55.3% 80. while part-time workers in leisure and hospitality were least likely.7% 8.6% 30.9% 2.6% 76. Only 14. Rates were closer to one-third in the largest firms (more than 250 employees).0 percent of part-time workers in surveyed firms were offered life insurance coverage by their employer.1% 87.0% All respondents Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade.5% Percent participating 60.2% 13.6% 72.2% 30. transportation.0% 24.1% 32.7% 58.7% 80.6% 3. with offer and participation rates for part-time workers dropping to 16.7% 25.3% 11. as do workers in the manufacturing sector.8% Part-time workers Percent offered coverage 14. part-time workers in education and health services were most likely to be offered and to participate in employer-sponsored life insurance.1% 16.7% 10.6% 6.9% 8.2% 2.6% 16. Advantages of a group plan include administrative cost sharing and the risk sharing associated with a mix of different age workers.1% 4.6 percent of such workers participated in an employer-sponsored plan.4% 42.6% 7. Results of this survey suggest that about two-thirds of fulltime workers are offered life insurance through an employer.7% 8.5% 49.7% 64.9% 0.3% 44. and utilities Financial activities Professional and business svcs Education and health services Leisure and hospitality Other services Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) 29 .2% 35.7% 0. (See Table 17) Full-time workers in larger firms have the highest offer and participation rates.9% 76.5% 62.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Section 4: Life and Disability Benefits Frequency of coverage: life insurance Individuals can access life insurance benefits either individually in the marketplace or through their employer.7% 13. if that employer sponsors a group plan.3% 12.6% 16. and about 60 percent of full-time workers participate in an employer-sponsored life insurance plan. and only 10.

9% 25. and 49.9% 41.7% 5.2% 15.4% 90.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Very large (250+) Planning Region Central Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Twin Cities 88.9% 12.8% 69.0% 5.1 percent).0% 7.gov/opub/mlr/1991/10/art4full.4% 13.6% 12.9% 65. while education and health services firms are most likely to offer it for part-time workers (21.9% 76.0% 10.5% 61.5% 16.4% 10.6% 31.3% 34.7% 31.5% 11.1% 30.5% 64. In the largest size class 97. Online at www.4% 97.1% 53.8% 21.3% Firm characteristics: life insurance Employer-sponsored life insurance plans started to appear in the early 20th century.1% 22. October 1991.8 percent offer it to their part-time workers.9% 54.6% 9.3% 20.0% 58.1% 29.9% 65.0 percent of firms offer life insurance to their fulltime workers.5% 7. and by the start of the 21st century they were standard for almost all full-time workers in medium and large firms across the country.0% Part-time workers 10.0% 11.9% 8.6% 26.0% 28.1% 30.3% 60.1% 5.5% 44.6% 10. (See Table 18) Manufacturing firms are most likely to offer coverage for full-time workers (53.9% 10.2% 60.7% 9.9% 1.” Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Monthly Labor Review. Table 18: Percent of firms offering life insurance Full-time workers 28.3 Survey results related to firm characteristics show that employer size class is a strong indicator of whether a Minnesota firm will offer life insurance to its employees.4% 13.9 percent).1% 6. “Growth of employer-sponsored group life insurance.7% 61. transportation. Michael.7% 29.3% 13.5% 3.3% 28.0% 28.3% 10.7% 57.4% 67.8% 16.3% 6. 30 .pdf.9% 5. and utilities Financial activities Professional and business svcs Education and health services Leisure and hospitality Other services Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) Very large (250+) Planning Region Central Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Twin Cities 3 Bucci.7% 6.7% All respondents Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade.bls.6% 84.2% 49.8% 7.

6% 15.8% 85.8% 7.3% 77.0% 3.3% 2.7% 2.0% 78.4% 77.0% 7.1% 11.9% 6. Table 19: Premium cost sharing for life insurance Full-time workers % Fully % Fully % Employer Employee Jointly Paid Paid Paid All respondents Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade.6% 73.8% 92.1% 6.1% 79.1% 3.0% 5. In 78.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Cost sharing: life insurance Life insurance differs from many other types of employee benefits in that premiums are paid in full by the employer in a majority of cases.5% 70.6% 85.4% 1.2% 78.7% 5.6% 4.8% 91.0% 2.0% 10.5% 20. Rates for both types of insurance increased steadily for full-time workers as the employer size class increases.6% 2.0% 6.0% 69.5% 93.6% 0.9% 5.7% 33.4% 6.0% 82.3% 60.7% 83.2% 17.0% 5.2 percent for part-time workers.8% 78.6% 83.5% 7.3% 23.0% 82.4% 9. while construction employers asked full-time employees to pay the full premium costs in 18.3% 18.1% 62. and utilities Financial activities Professional and business svcs Education and health services Leisure and hospitality Other services Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) Very large (250+) Planning Region Central Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Twin Cities 78.1% 44.4% 6.3% 5.4% Part-time workers % Fully % Fully % Employer Employee Jointly Paid Paid Paid 77.8% 10.4% 14.4% 11.9% 81.1% 7.3% 8.0% 91.0% 25.4% 47.8% Frequency of coverage: short-term and long-term disability insurance About half of full-time workers are offered either short-term or long-term disability insurance.6% 19.9% 77.5% 9.1% 69.4% 5. (See Table 19) Financial activities and manufacturing firms were most likely to pay the full cost of life insurance premiums for full-time and part-time workers.8% 4. and about 42 percent of full-time employees participate in employer-sponsored coverage.7% 9.5% 11.1% 27.5% 22.8% 5.2% 14.1% 8.6 percent of cases employers paid the entire premium cost for full-time workers.4% 70.7% 15.9% 27.9% 8.1% 11.4% 31.3% 87.0% 19.6% 93. Leisure and hospitality employers were most likely to ask part-time workers to pay the full premium cost.5% 51.0% 2.7% 12.6% 36.0% 17.0% 10.8% 3.8% 76.3% 13.8% 3. while rates for long-term disability are highest for full-time workers in the financial activities sector.9% 6.5% 5.9% 5. transportation.2% 7.9% 93.4 percent of cases.5% 7.7% 48.7% 7.1% 12. (See Table 20) Short-term disability offer and participation rates are highest for full-time workers in manufacturing firms.9% 14.8% 79.4% 87.3% 75.2% 13.7% 71. and that figure only dropped to 77.0% 65.5% 13.6% 83.5% 11.6% 11.9% 5. 31 .7% 26.9% 4.8% 5.1% 11.

1% 7.1% 58.4% 5.0% Firm characteristics: disability insurance By industry.1% 3.8% 27.5% 31. and utilities Financial activities Professional and business svcs Education and health services Leisure and hospitality Other services Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) Very large (250+) Planning Region Central Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Twin Cities 53.2% 4.8% 49.6% 46.5% 76.5% 48.6% 48.5% 22.8% 22. Table 20: Percent of full-time and part-time employees offered disability insurance.7% 46.7% 1.6% 17.4% 12.8% 6.5% 16.5% 3.9% 15.1% 2.7% 34.9% 8.7% 46.9% 44.4% 54.3% 11.3% 3.8% 27.0% 43.6% 1.9% 3.0% 5.3% 6.2% 70.7% 2.0% 70.7% 36.5% 3.7% 2.9% 13.1% 2.3% 44.6% 3. manufacturing firms are most likely to have short-term disability plans for full-time workers.5% 1.0% 72.4% 27.6% 62.9% 10.2% 8.1% 0.0% 0.7% 34.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Coverage for part-time workers in surveyed firms is a fraction of that for full-time workers.0% Percent offered coverage 8.8% 67.1% 12.5% 0.5% 76.4% 2.1% 30.0% 57.8% 1.3% 48.7% 78.4% 7.0% 0.8% 38.7% 14.3% 54.0% 2.3% 45.2% 43.1% 32.1% Percent participating 42.5% Percent participating 5.0% 12.1% 11.7% 3.4% 44. (See Table 21) Employers in education and health services are most likely to have either type of plan for part-time workers.2% 35.9% 8.6% 39.8% 10.6% 1. transportation.8% 62.3% 28.7% 30.1% 5.5% 40.5% 36. For this reason all forms of income replacement are coordinated in a firm’s benefits package.4% Percent offered coverage 50.9% 18.4% 50.4% 1.1% 47.0% 13.7% Part-time workers Short-term disability Long-term disability Percent offered coverage 9.7% 2.4% Percent participating 5.4% 8.2% 3.9% 59.8% 20.2% 9.7% 10.3% 41.9% 9.0% 40.2% 47.0% 57.1% 0.0% 18. 32 .8% 10.9% 0.7% 33.2% 7.3% 4.9% 5. and coverage of these benefits might best be reviewed alongside those of paid sick leave.4% 1.4% 4.3% 51.5% 51. while financial activities employers are most likely to have long-term disability plans for full-time workers.2% 8.7% 52.7% 10.0% 14. In most cases firms in larger size classes are more likely to have plans in place.1% 3.3% 10. and percent of all full-time and part-time workers participating in disability insurance (by type) Full-time workers Short-term disability Long-term disability Percent offered coverage All respondents Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade.8% 49.5% 41.9% 12.3% 11.4% 10.5% Percent participating 42.3% 4.2% 19. Much like sick leave. Just less than ten percent of part-time workers were offered short-term or long-term disability insurance and only five percent participated in coverage.8% 57.5% 19.2% 20.6% 1.0% 0.3% 23.5% 2. disability insurance is meant to assist with income replacement when an employee is unable to work because of an illness or accident.3% 14.4% 42.2% 40.0% 62.8% 35.0% 16.2% 3.7% 33.1% 57.6% 11.8% 18.6% 35.4% 39.1% 0.

2% 4.3% 13.2% 24.7% 20.3% 1.1% 11.3% 4.8% 14. About 65 percent of employers pay the full premium cost of full-time workers’ long-term disability. and utilities Financial activities Professional and business svcs Education and health services Leisure and hospitality Other services Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) Very large (250+) Planning Region Central Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Twin Cities Cost sharing: disability insurance More than 50 percent of employers pay the full premium cost of full-time workers’ short-term disability coverage.5% 20.8% 6. Similar to short-term disability premiums.6% 2.8% 37.3% 11.8% 4.3% 1.3% 12.1% 32.3% 6.7% 22.4% 2.8% 10.8% 4.5% 61.1% 21.4% 18. as well as firms in the financial activities.7% 33. (See Table 22) Very large employers are most likely to pay the full premium for full-time workers.2% All respondents Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade.4% 13.2% 5.6% 6.2% 82.5% 4.2% 17.8% 7.4% 8.3% 3.2% 27.1% 9.0% 16.0% 15.0% 23.7% 9.9% 15.8% 8.2% 6.3% 15.6% 50.2% 88. 33 .2% 2.5% 24.2% 18.2% 49.0% 4.1% 5.5% 17.8% 15.2% 4.8% 16.9% 5.8% 12.8% 2.4% 12. Full costs of short-term disability premiums are borne by the full-time employee most often in construction firms.4% 29. and part-time workers are most often responsible for the entire premium cost in leisure and hospitality.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Table 21: Percent of firms offering disability insurance (by type) Short-term disability FullParttime time workers workers 19.5% 2.0% 8. while part-time leisure and hospitality workers are most likely to pay the full premium cost for short-term disability. transportation.1% 2.0% 67. manufacturing. and professional and business services sectors.5% 15.3% Long-term disability FullParttime time workers workers 18. (See second section of Table 22) With long-term disability employers pay the full premium cost for full-time workers most often in the professional and business services sector and in very small firms.3% 5.8% 1.9% 27.3% 4.5% 8.8% 34.6% 20. fulltime workers are again most often responsible for the full cost in construction firms.5% 19.8% 14.7% 0.6% 1.

9% 0.3% 54.4% Part-time workers % Fully % Fully % Employer Employee Jointly Paid Paid Paid 41.5% 34.9% 27.3% 5.4% 43.8% 78.1% 9.3% 62.4% 58.1% 54.8% 6.3% 60.5% 12.5% 28.5% 28.8% 83.6% 54.9% 5.2% All respondents Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade.6% 48.9% 9.7% 12.8% 10.6% 65.9% 84.2% 7.3% 23.2% 68.3% 16.8% 3.3% 32.7% 16.4% 43.1% 8.2% 51.7% 47.0% 2.8% 58.6% 17.7% 3.6% 5.9% 56.5% 8.6% 53.0% 10.0% 8.3% 40.7% 8.2% 75.7% 24.2% 68.9% 52.2% 30.4% 77.1% 12.6% 11. and utilities Financial activities Professional and business svcs Education and health services Leisure and hospitality Other services Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) Very large (250+) Planning Region Central Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Twin Cities 34 .2% 14.2% 0.1% 6.8% 67.7% 16.8% 10.9% 5.5% 33.2% 14.2% 29.9% 8.0% 5.5% 70.3% 12.9% 13.2% 50.5% 39. transportation.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Table 22: Premium cost sharing for disability insurance Short-Term Disability Full-time workers % Fully % Fully % Employer Employee Jointly Paid Paid Paid 56.4% 19.4% 58.6% 69.3% 28.0% 82.2% 13.9% 77.6% 31.0% 45.6% 79.2% 74.0% 28.4% 60.1% 38.3% 10.0% 78.5% 41.1% 96.7% 54.1% 1.1% 8.6% 62.4% 9.4% 25.6% 9.0% 7.2% 65.0% 11.2% 53.6% 68.0% 4.1% 4.0% 8.6% 4.4% 9.1% 34.9% 3.0% 0.8% 21.5% 7.3% 37.5% 65.4% 26.9% 81.1% 1.

6% 31.0% 2.2% 50.2% 35.9% 7.5% 10.9% 6.5% 74.4% 25.6% 39.2% 3.6% 15.9% 32.4% 11.0% 31.6% All respondents Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade.1% 5.7% 55.3% 18.1% 12.6% 32.2% 35.4% 19.4% 19.7% 12.8% 7.4% 41.5% 32.5% 52.9% 12.9% 80.7% 34.0% 67.5% 32.4% 27. and utilities Financial activities Professional and business svcs Education and health services Leisure and hospitality Other services Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) Very large (250+) Planning Region Central Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Twin Cities 35 .5% 36.0% 67.2% 35.9% 27.9% 23.8% 5.6% 42.1% 36.5% 8.7% 50.3% 12.3% 21.1% 64.1% 56.2% 67.4% 62.7% 52.8% 52.2% 15.2% 69.5% 34.5% 5.1% Part-time workers % Fully % Fully % Employer Employee Jointly Paid Paid Paid 49.6% 72.3% 41.2% 59.2% 13.6% 59. transportation.3% 12.6% 61.1% 55.1% 54.1% 9.4% 55.1% 62.2% 9.8% 1.5% 9.8% 2.8% 59.5% 4.1% 28.7% 72.7% 44.1% 1.5% 26.0% 52.8% 28.0% 57.1% 9.5% 0.5% 67.1% 21.1% 42.9% 26.6% 25.5% 8.): Premium cost sharing disability insurance Long Term Disability Full-time workers % Fully % Fully % Employer Employee Jointly Paid Paid Paid 64.8% 9.6% 25.4% 68.4% 8.0% 25.6% 2.7% 39.4% 82.4% 13.1% 76.0% 74.5% 20.5% 59.9% 45.7% 61.0% 5.4% 66.0% 4.3% 19.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Table 22 (cont.0% 29.0% 7.8% 19.6% 6.2% 31.2% 20.8% 36.3% 12.2% 35.

and/or holidays. which tended to have higher median hours of other paid leave benefits. financial activities employers. and the median number of hours provided to full-time workers is 112. where offer rates are only 48. sick leave. 36 . About one in ten firms offer PTO. Over half of firms (58. A third of Minnesota firms offer paid sick leave to full-time workers with most of those employers offering 40 hours of paid sick leave per year.6 percent) offer paid holidays with most offering 48 hours or six days worth per year for fulltime workers. and large and very large firms are both more likely to offer sick leave and more likely to offer more hours of sick leave. and a majority of respondents offer paid vacation to full-time workers in all industry classifications except the construction and the leisure and hospitality sectors. also have the highest median number of PTO hours. education and health services sector employers are most likely to offer PTO.6 percent respectively. At almost 30 percent. Education and health service employers and employers in larger size classes provide the most paid vacation hours at five years of service. (See Table 23) The median number of weekly hours required for full-time workers to qualify for paid vacations is 38. In most classifications full-time workers qualify for 40 hours of paid vacation at one year of service and 80 hours at three years of service. The offer rate and the median number of hours are greatest in manufacturing and among very large firms.3 and 40. The requirement is lowest in the education and health services sector and in larger size classes. which can be used in place of or in addition to paid vacation. particularly paid vacation time and paid holidays. is a type of leave plan that provides employees with a bank of paid time-off hours. More than 62 percent of Minnesota firms provide paid vacation leave. also known as consolidated leave. Very large firms.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Section 5: Paid Leave Frequency of coverage and median hours offered: full-time workers Paid leave is one of the most common types of benefits offered to full-time workers. Education and health service employers. Paid Time Off (PTO).

1% 18.1% Median Median Median Median number of number of number of number of Median hours hours hours required per Percent of hours hours firms offering provided to week to provided at provided at provided at majority of paid sick qualify for one year three years five years employees leave service paid vacation service service 40 40 40 40 80 80 80 40 40 40 40 40 40 80 40 40 40 40 40 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 60 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 120 80 80 80 80 96 112 120 80 80 80 80 80 80 38 40 40 40 38 32 30 40 40 38 40 36 32 32 40 38 40 40 40 35 33.1% 42.5% 20 12 16 20 20 20 32 48 18 20 30 40 48 20 32 20 20 20 16 17.1% 51.9% 24.0% 63.6% 8.9% 16.8% 19.9% 40.8% 3.1% 12.8% 13.1% 10.5% 41.8% 14.7% 57.1% 15.4% 8. and utilities Financial activities Professional and business svcs Education and health services Leisure and hospitality Other services Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) Very large (250+) Planning Region Central Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Twin Cities 65.7% 9.6% 62.8% 76.0% 24.3% 76.7% 9.2% 3.6% 32.1% 69. full-time workers Full-time workers Paid Vacation Paid Sick Leave Paid Holidays Paid Time Off (PTO) Percent of firms offering paid vacation All respondents Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade.0% 44.1% 21.3% 38.4% 29.3% 18.1% 5.4% 60.5% 21.0% 37 . and utilities Financial activities Professional and business svcs Education and health services Leisure and hospitality Other services Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) Very large (250+) Planning Region Central Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Twin Cities Median Median number of Median Median hours hours number of number of provided required per Percent of hours hours firms week to Percent of provided at provided at at five qualify for offering paid years firms offering one year three years service paid vacation sick leave service paid vacation service 18.4% 11.7% 2.3% 7.3% 88.0% 6.7% 49.4% 6.0% 16.6% 91.1% 15.8% 22. part-time workers Paid Vacation Part-time workers Paid Sick Leave Paid Holidays Median number of hours provided to majority of employees 32 24 20 32 32 32 32 40 52 30 32 32 36 48 36 43 32 36 30 24 Paid Time Off (PTO) Median number of hours provided to majority of employees 52 ND 76 52 45 72 32 80 80 24 10 56 60 100 24 10 88 80 18 52 Median number of required hours worked to qualify for PTO 20 ND 20 20 24 24 20 20 20 20 24 20 20 20 30 3 20 2 16 20 All respondents Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade.4% 16.0% 1.0% 14.1% 25.0% 5.8% 31.2% 9.2% 14.6% 38.0% 21.7% 35.0% 0.9% 2.7% 8.5% 29.3% 57.5% 40 40 24 40 48 40 48 40 48 40 40 40 48 48 40 40 40 40 40 40 Median number of hours Percent of provided to firms offering paid majority of employees holidays 58.7% 29.2% 53.9% 74.1% 12.7% 15.8% 3.5% ND 3.3% 59.1% 17.8% 35.5% 24.2% 11.7% 18.0% 61.8% 85.8% 7.4% 33. transportation.2% 57.4% 18.9% 12.4% 18.7% 0.5% 3.3% 8.5% 2.8% 46.8% 33.0% 17.9% 56.7% 5.7% 89.7% 27.9% 89.2% 13.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Table 23: Frequency and usual hours of paid leave by type Table 23: Frequency and usual hours of paid leave by type.1% 0.5% 16.4% 10.6% 88.7% 63.2% Median number of Percent of hours firms provided to majority of offering paid holidays employees 20 18.6% 22.8% 6.5% 73.4% 20 40 40 20 9.8% 46.3% 21.9% 15.7% 54.5% 37.4% 25.2% 62.3% 44.9% 8.5% 66.3% 26.0% 21.1% 61.5% 68.1% 1.): Frequency and usual hours of paid leave by type.9% 16.0% 57.5% 35.5% 41.4% 57.1% 33. transportation.5% 1.6% Percent of firms offering PTO 3.5% 32.8% 59.9% 31.8% 8.3% 25.9% 40.2% 32.5% 57.5% 2.8% 19.9% 4.6% 9.9% 66.5% 45.6% 72.3% 48.7% 38.5% 2.1% Median number of hours provided to majority of employees 112 21 100 96 105 80 112 80 40 112 100 120 96 136 112 40 96 80 48 112 Median number of required hours per week to qualify for PTO 35 40 40 40 30 38 35 30 38 35 36 30 31 30 36 31 40 32 38 35 Table 23 (cont.2% 20 20 35 20 20 24 20 25 20 20 40 36 40 20 35 24 30 20 20 40 40 40 40 20 32 40 40 40 32 40 40 48 40 40 40 48 40 30 40 40 40 44 20 40 40 40 40 40 40 60 72 40 48 40 60 40 40 20 25 20 20 20 20 17 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 3.0% 12.4% 48 48 56 52 56 48 48 48 48 48 48 58 56 64 48 48 48 48 48 56 Percent of firms offering PTO 9.8% 68.3% 7.2% 28.2% 10.

Paid Time Off (PTO) is offered to part-time workers by very few firms.4 percent of firms offer paid vacation for part-time workers versus 62. while very large firms offered the greatest number of PTO hours to part-time workers (100 hours).6 percent for full-time workers. Where full-time workers had large PTO banks in that sector. but the median number of hours offered is the same for full-time and part-time workers. although the offer rate was again well above average in the education and health services sector. three. About one in five firms offer paid holidays to part-time workers versus 58. One anomaly was the number of PTO hours offered to part-time workers in education and health services firms. Only 18. Few firms in the other services sector provide sick leave to part-timers. and five years of service are generally about half of what is offered to full-time workers. Firms across most classifications require a 20-hour work week to qualify for paid vacation time.1 percent for full-time workers. 38 . Firms that offered PTO provided 52 hours of paid leave at the median. with a median 32 hours of holiday leave for those firms’ part-time workers. Median hours offered at one. part-time workers had small banks relative to other industries.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Frequency of coverage and median hours offered: part-time workers Paid leave benefits are far less common for part-time workers than for full-time workers. Only about one in ten firms offer paid sick leave to part-time workers with 20 hours being the median number of hours offered.

1% 2.9% 6. Size class appears to be correlated with the provision of fringe benefits.1% 16.1% 20.1% 0.4% 20.9% 9.0% 10.1% 5.9% 28.2% 31.3% 39.0% 9.3% 89.7% 5.2% Nonproduction bonuses.9% 0.8% 1. Table 24: Percent of firms offering other fringe benefits Full-time workers Tuition/ educational assistance or reimbursement 19.5% 21. (See Table 24) Manufacturing sector employers have among the highest offer rates in almost all categories of fringe benefits for full-time workers.5% 25. and about a third offer a flexible medical spending account.6% 0. transportation.1% 16. as the share of firms offering each benefit steadily increases with each size class.6% 22. and utilities Financial activities Professional and business svcs Education and health services Leisure and hospitality Other services Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) Very large (250+) Planning Region Central Northeast Northwest Southeast 39 .5% 13.0% 51. Almost half of employers in that sector offer a non-production bonus.8% 91. hiring bonus 22.3% 2.4% 11.2% 26.5% 38.6% 71.7% 11.0% 22.8% 16.9% 47.6% 25.4% 15.2% 20.6% 19.3% 1.9% 9.6% All respondents Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade.4% 3.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Section 6: Other Fringe Benefits Frequency of other fringe benefits: full-time workers Non-production bonuses such as hiring bonuses are the most common type of fringe benefit offered to full-time workers in Minnesota followed by tuition assistance. Hiring bonuses offered by temporary placement agencies are apt to be included in the fairly high rate of non-production bonuses in the professional and business services sector.7% 12.4% Flexible child care spending accounts 15.2% 28.0% 19.0% 25.3% 13.1% 16.0% 6.8% 28.4% 25.5% 0.3% Child care benefits other than flexible spending accounts 1.4% 1.8% 79.0% 73. e.7% 25.2% 39. and professional and business services employers are most likely to offer child care benefits other than flexible child care spending accounts.4% 1.6% 57.7% 12. and flexible child care spending accounts.1% 16.6% 25.3% 0.7% 47.3% 2.1% Flexible medical spending accounts 18.1% 6.8% 26.g.0% 18.3% 10.1% 12.9% 15.9% 15. flexible medical spending accounts.7% 22.1% 26.3% 34.3% 27.7% 18.1% 26.2% 9.0% 16.4% 54.8% 22.6% 0.2% 23.7% 1. Tuition assistance is most prevalent in the financial activities sector.0% 20.

0% 54.3% 16.4% 2.2% 6.9% 26.7% 0.3% 6.9% 4.3% 3.2% 17.5% 14.3% 7.7% 20.2% 20.8% 16.8% 20.4% 7.2% 6.1% 53.4% 24.9% 0.4% All respondents Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade.7% 3.9% 9.3% 6.2% 19.8% 21.4% 0.7% 1. Flexible spending accounts for medical and child care expenses are offered to part-time workers in more than half of the very large firms. e.1% 6.1% 6.9% 16. hiring bonus 12.9% 20.g.0% 27.0% 35.): Percent of firms offering other fringe benefits Part-time workers Tuition/ educational assistance or reimbursement 10. flexible child care spending accounts.2% 1.2% 12.9% 3.3% 1.1% 10. the share of firms offering each benefit steadily increasing with each size class.7% 12. Education and health services sector employers have among the highest offer rates in almost all categories of fringe benefits for part-time workers.2% 4.8% 12.2% 0.3% 7.7% 10.6% 7.1% Frequency of other fringe benefits: part-time workers Non-production bonuses such as hiring bonuses are the most common type of fringe benefit offered to part-time workers followed by tuition assistance.6% 7.5% 2.9% 10.1% 11.0% 9.4% 11.8% 8.3% 1.1% 25.0% 0.4% Flexible child care spending accounts 7.1% 6.4% 23. Firm size again shows strong correlation with the percent of firms offering fringe benefits.2% 0.2% Nonproduction bonuses.0% 2.3% 9.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Southwest Twin Cities 21.6% 18.5% 17.8% 8.7% 11.2% 0.5% 23. and flexible medical spending accounts.0% 22.8% 2.0% 5.5% 0.2% 0.2% 6.5% 7.1% 27.2% 33.2% 10.3% 7. and utilities Financial activities Professional and business svcs Education and health services Leisure and hospitality Other services Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) Very large (250+) Planning Region Central Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Twin Cities 40 .6% 9.9% 0.3% 40. Professional and business services sector employers are most likely to offer child care benefits other than flexible child care spending accounts to part-time workers.7% 15.5% 11. Table 24 (cont.5% 9.4% 1.8% 7.6% 7.2% 2.0% 1.6% 22.8% 14.2% 0.5% 5.3% Flexible medical spending accounts 7.7% 6.6% 27.1% 9.7% 3.6% 15.4% 0. transportation.2% 13.8% 0.5% 7.8% 16. A third of employers in that sector offer tuition assistance and 27 percent offer non-production bonuses.4% Child care benefits other than flexible spending accounts 1.5% 9.

8.9 percent in terms of benefits costs.182 $2.us/divs/hpsc/hep/issbrief/2005-02.3 percent of the combined cost of wages and salaries and health benefits is spent on health benefits. they are the firm costs of insurance and retirement spread across every employee.8% Private Industry Mar-05 Mar-04 Mar-03 Mar-02 Minnesota survey results The Minnesota Employee Benefits Survey collected information on firms’ costs for three components of compensation: straight-time wages and salaries. including those employees who are not offered or choose not to participate in the benefit. Total costs were divided by total average employment to create average annual expenditures per employee4[1]. accounting for an ever-larger portion of total employee compensation. dental and vision only). Information on health care premium costs in Minnesota is available in other surveys. It is important to note that the median costs of insurance per employee shown in the table below are not premium costs for insurance.pdf The statewide survey results correspond with national findings that benefits represent a significant cost for employers.872 $1. Of employers who offer retirement benefits to their 41 . premium costs).MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Section 7: Employer Costs National cost trends Employee benefits have grown to become a large part of many employers’ budgets. annual cost) $3. These cost increases have resulted in small shifts in the share of compensation costs related to health benefits.592 $32. these estimates serve as useful benchmarks for operations or management decision making about the share of compensation costs being spent on these benefits.state. Instead.864 Health Insurance (Avg.672 $34.4 percent in terms of wages and salaries and 5.411 $3. annual cost) $1.mn. and retirement plans.7% 8.664 $1.mn.g. Wages and Salaries (Avg.0% 4. (See Figure 1.394 $1.3% 4. insurance (medical.) Between March 2004 and March 2005.0% 7.611 $33. And the costs continue to rise. For example see the Minnesota Department of Health publications at http://www. the Employment Cost Index—the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ measure of changes in employment costs—rose 2. in each year since 2002.health.5% Retirement (Avg.us/divs/hpsc/hep/issbrief/2005-01. While these figures do not reflect the average benefit costs per employee for those workers enrolled in a firms' plans (e.933 $2.health. the national rate of twelve-month change in benefits costs has outpaced that of wages and salaries since 2000.310 Percent of Total Spent on Retirement 5.pdf and http://www. annual cost) $35. the cost of both health insurance and retirement benefits (including defined benefit and defined contribution plans) have grown at a rate faster than the cost of wages and salaries for private employers. Of employers who offer health benefits to their employees.683 Percent of Total Spent on Insurance 8.4% 8. The table below shows that nationally.0% 3. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.state.

MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 employees.4% 3.7 percent of the combined cost of wages and salaries and retirement benefits is spent on retirement benefits.004 in wage costs at the median.) Those private firms in Minnesota that offer retirement or insurance benefits paid between $30.690 $30.4% 10. and construction sectors.4% 8.141 3.0% 4.6 percent respectively).313 $29.699 $11.959 $2.021 $28.828 $3.825 $2.7% 7.470 $31.8% 2.348 $22.4% $34.776 $2.2% 7.778 Percent of Total Spent on Insurance 8.088 $35. professional and business services. Table 25: Cost to employers of providing wages.792 $2.0 and 4.7% 8.0% 7.241 $2.9% $30.1% 2.727 $34.000 2.0% $30. That sector also had the lowest share of costs going to retirement or insurance benefits (1.709 $3.476 and $31.877 $35. Insurance costs per employee were greatest in financial activities and manufacturing.685 $960 $964 $551 $504 $1.500 $39.661 $1.974 $26.936 $27.4% 3.262 $28.081 $27.1% 9.8% 2. as well as because of differences in numbers of full-time and part-time workers.4% 8.320 $4.187 7.476 Median Cost of Insurance Per Employee $2.0% 2.3% Employer costs: wages and retirement Median Cost of Wages Per Employee $31. (See Table 25.6% 8.8% $29. and utilities Financial activities Professional and business svcs Education and health services Leisure and hospitality Other services Establishment Size Class Very small (less than 10) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) Very large (250+) Planning Region Central Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Twin Cities $29. (See Table 25.2% 8. while financial activities and construction topped the list of median costs of retirement per employee.) Median wage costs varied between industries and size classes both because of the mix of high and low-paying jobs in these classifications. insurance and retirement benefits Employer costs: wages and insurance Median Cost of Wages Per Employee All respondents Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade.756 $34.509 $2.1% $29.196 $37. 2.2% 8.808 $25.660 $2.200 $30.4% 8.651 $2. Regional differences likely reflect several things including local industry and size class mix.516 $32.5% $34.049 $2. Wage costs were greatest in the financial services. transportation.322 $23.767 7.948 $2. and differences in local wage levels.225 $800 $628 $118 $839 2.137 $29.8% 2.799 $34.160 8.881 $28.923 $3.690 $2.2% 2.931 $11.8% 2.818 $2.7% 1. as were costs for retirement and insurance benefits.284 $548 $800 $799 $732 $921 $1.000 $39.344 $2.651 $27.750 $30.004 Median Cost of Retirement Per Employee $785 Percent of Total Spent on Insurance 2.3% 3.1% 10.6% 2.533 $32.0% 2.034 $664 $668 $1. differences (particularly metro versus non-metro) in the availability or generosity of benefits.485 $31.6% 9.604 $30.219 $35.6% 8.192 $525 $2.7% 2.7% 42 .0% 3.146 $32.8% 2. Wage costs were lowest in the leisure and hospitality sector.

Idaho. generally without transformation. or otherwise allowing for the use of tangible or intangible assets. reconstruction. and the usability of the resulting statistics. Manufacturing: Firms engaged in the mechanical. These firms were selected from the universe of firms that were doing business in Minnesota’s six Planning Regions during second quarter 2004. are represented in the survey sample. Finance. such as natural gas. Transportation and Warehousing: Firms engaged in the transportation of passengers and cargo. defined by the 2002 North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). Surveyed employers were randomly selected from Minnesota's Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW). warehousing and storage for goods. such as coal and ores. generally without transformation. or change in ownership of financial assets) and/or facilitating financial transactions. Professional and Business Services (PBS) Technical Services: Firms specializing in performing professional. steam supply. Kansas. processing and distribution of information and cultural products. and gasses. NAICS includes the following industrial sectors: NAICS INDUSTRY DESCRIPTION Construction and Mining Construction: Firms engaged in the construction of buildings and other structures. Information: Firms engaged in the production. government) were excluded from the sample. Nebraska. oversee. scenic and sightseeing transportation. leasing. Agriculture and public administration (i. made up of 12 states.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Methodological Note Sample Design Information on benefits for the first quarter 2005 Minnesota Employee Benefits Survey comes from a survey of 5. or decision-making role. and Utilities (TTU) Wholesale Trade: Firms engaged in wholesale merchandising. natural gas. 50 to 99 employees. liquid minerals. or chemical transformation of materials. 100 to 249 employees. Healthcare. 10 to 49 employees. and manage the company in a strategic. additions. and establishments providing related service. and Real Estate Finance and Insurance: Firms engaged in financial transactions (including the creation. alterations. Seven other states including Alaska. Insurance.345 Minnesota firms. and support activities related to modes of transportation. and rendering services incidental to the sale of merchandise. Eight major industrial super-sectors. heavy construction. Firms were selected based on a sampling procedure that stratified by planning region (click on link to view regional definition). water supply. and technical activities for others. Healthcare: Firms providing healthcare and social assistance to individuals. Retail Trade: Firms engaged in retailing merchandise. liquidation. organizational. survey methodology. Transportation. Education Services. Montana. Mining: Firms that extract naturally occurring mineral solids. and sewage removal. or components into new products. Utilities: Firms engaged in the provision of the following utility services: electric power. and by eight industrial sectors. Management: Firms who hold the securities of companies and enterprises for the purpose of controlling interest or influencing management decisions or who administer. This survey was conducted as a pilot in conjunction with the National Benefits Consortium.e. installations. scientific. and Information Educational Services: Firms providing instruction and training on a wide variety of subjects. Missouri. substances. such as crude petroleum. and rendering services incidental to the sale of merchandise. firm size (less than 10 employees. Leisure and Hospitality 43 . physical. Trade. and more than 250 employees). and maintenance and repairs. Real Estate: Firms engaged in renting. Administrative and Support: Firms providing routine support activities for the day-to-day operations of other organizations. and North Carolina also conducted surveys to determine the effectiveness of the survey instrument.

Firms without benefits were also asked to return the survey reporting that information. entertainment. size class. and cost of benefits. please call Annie Tietema in the Labor Market Information Office at 651. but who did not provide a number of employees who participate in the benefit (a ratio from the donor firm was used to calculate the non-responding firm’s participating employees).tietema@state. When no one benefit plan covered all employees.and part-time employees separately.g. imputation was used to estimate the response. A nearest neighbor approach in which other firms in the same strata (i. and geography) were used as donors for the firms that did not respond to a given question was applied. or jointly). 2002. Following a review of the survey results. A random sample of firms was drawn to represent the benefits typically offered by Minnesota firms by three categories or strata—size class. Firms who offered benefits plans through unions were asked to return the survey as if they were offering the benefits directly. and industry classification for firms were drawn from the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) data maintained by the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED). industry. the data were scaled to produce benefit estimates representative of Minnesota's labor market by Planning Region. Imputation was also used where necessary in the estimation of benefit waiting periods for full. paid leave. firm size information. In cases where non-response was high for a particular question. Survey questionnaires were mailed in January 2005. weights were applied to the participating firm’s benefit responses to represent benefit responses for the population of firms in Minnesota. Accommodation: Firms providing customers with lodging and/or preparation of meals. vision.296. The scaling process takes account of the distribution of benefits and overall employment by industry and size in the respondent group and in the universe of regional employers. and geographic location. NAICS Web page: www. retirement plans.8783 or e-mail Annie. employee. industry. Firms were instructed to provide benefits information for only the employees on the payroll at the time of the survey.census.us 44 . United States. This can produce a seasonal effect in the responses. Survey Instrument and Results Employers were asked to supply information on current employee benefits including single and family medical. Other Services: Firms engaged in providing services not specifically provided for elsewhere in the classification system. Contact information. and recreational interests of their patrons.and part-time and for questions asking about who was paying for the benefit (e. After data were gathered and desired response rates of over 60 percent by strata were reached.gov/epcd/naics02/ . Firms excluded from the sampling process included those in the private households and personnel service industries and those firms with no employees. dental. snacks and beverages for immediate consumption. Source: North American Industry Classification System. and life insurance.mn. Benefits questions were asked for full. Additional survey mailings and follow-up telephone calls were used to solicit survey responses between January and April 2005. firms were asked to respond for the majority (the mode of workers) plan. For more information. This type of imputation was done for firms that provided a number of employees who were offered a benefit.e. but will also allow for analysis of changes in benefits packages over time. employer. disability.MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Arts and Entertainment: Firms engaged in providing services to meet the varied cultural.

MN Department of Employment and Economic Development Employee Benefits Survey Spring 2005 Survey Response Rates by Firm Size for Minnesota First Quarter 2005 Sample Received Response Rate 1.1% Size Very Small (less than 10 employees) Small (10 to 49) Medium (50 to 99) Large (100 to 249) Very Large (250 or more employees) TOTAL Industry Construction Manufacturing Trade.5% 792 540 68.4% 70.0% 712 466 65. and Real Estate Professional and Business Services Education Services.326 669 50.2% 61.7% 727 621 618 5.3% 60. Insurance.345 826 1.3% 815 542 66.195 1.2% 746 512 68.9% 63.345 3.475 901 973 801 5.6% 1.017 609 538 384 3.9% 754 492 65. Transportation.5% 61.1% 45 .374 63.9% 67.1% 68.9% 63. and Utilities Finance. and Information Leisure and Hospitality Other Services TOTAL Survey Response Rates by NAICS Industry for Minnesota First Quarter 2005 Sample Received Response Rate 628 383 61.6% 55.374 69.5% 5.345 469 381 438 3.3% 47.1% Geography Central Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Twin Cities TOTAL Survey Response Rates by Planning Region Geography First Quarter 2005 Sample Received Response Rate 912 619 67.374 64.4% 778 623 638 468 382 387 60. Healthcare.