Workplace Wellness Programs and the LGBTQ Community

The 2022 Workplace Wellness Survey (WWS) included an oversample of LGBTQ workers to better understand the unique workplace wellness needs of such workers and to explore and identify potential differences in attitudes, experiences, and behaviors related to workplace wellness.

Key Findings:

Jobs and Employee Benefits – Satisfaction and Trade-Offs: LGBTQ workers were less likely than non-LGBTQ workers to be satisfied with their job and various employee benefits. LGBTQ workers were less likely than non-LGBTQ workers to be satisfied with their employee benefits overall and paid leave. However, there is no overall difference nor is there a difference at any income level when it comes to health benefits or retirement benefits. LGBTQ workers and non-LGBTQ workers were about as likely to be satisfied with the mix of employee benefits and wages.
Eligibility and Participation in Employee Benefit Programs: Nearly across the board, LGBTQ workers were less likely than non-LGBTQ workers to be eligible for various employee benefit programs. Yet they were just as likely as non-LGBTQ workers to participate in such programs when they were offered to them.
Worker Opinions of Employer and Value of Benefits: LGBTQ workers give employers lower ratings than non-LGBTQ workers when it comes to employer efforts to help improve financial well-being, emotional well-being/mental health, and physical well-being/health. When it comes to worker expectations about employers’ responsibilities, LGBTQ workers and non-LGBTQ workers were in agreement. LGBTQ workers were less trustful than non-LGBTQ workers in institutions that provide various employee benefits.
Work-Life Balance: LGBTQ workers were less likely than non-LGBTQ workers to rate their work-life balance as excellent or very good. Aside from income and compensation, both LGBTQ workers and non-LGBTQ workers valued flexibility in work schedules above all other benefits, and both cohorts valued such flexibility almost equally.
Financial Wellness Programs: LGBTQ workers were less likely than non-LGBTQ workers to report that they were offered a financial wellness program.
Debt and Financial Preparedness: Both LGBTQ workers and non-LGBTQ workers described their debt the same: About one-third described it as a major problem, one-half described it as a minor problem, and 1 in 5 described it as not a problem. Differences by LGBTQ status were not found when examining debt by income level. LGBTQ workers were less likely than non-LGBTQ workers to report that saving enough for retirement and affording their children’s college tuition were the financial issues causing the most stress. They were more likely than non-LGBTQ workers to report that paying monthly bills and student loan repayments were the financial issues causing the most stress.

Interestingly, many of the differences observed by LGBTQ status appear driven by demographic differences. Nearly one-half of LGBTQ workers are under age 35 compared with 24 percent among non-LGBTQ workers. This would account for why LGBTQ workers have lower incomes and less education than non-LGBTQ workers. It would also affect the lower marriage rates and the fact that LGBTQ workers are less likely to have dependent children.

Regardless whether differences by LGBTQ status are driven by demographics or LBGTQ status, employers can use the information presented in this paper to build program offerings and devise communication strategies that more effectively support a diverse work force.

EBRI and Greenwald would like to thank the 2022 Workplace Wellness Survey (WWS) sponsors who helped shape this year's survey: AARP, Cigna, Edelman Financial Engines, Fidelity, Human Rights Campaign Foundation, Mercer, Morgan Stanley, National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (NRECA), OneAmerica, UNUM, and Voya Financial.

Figure 18 Figure 10 Figure 6 Usefulness of Financial Wellness Program, by LGBTQ Status Figure 5 Figure 14 Benefits Contribute to Sense of Financial Security, by LGBTQ Status Fi gure 11, Worker Rating Mos of t EV malu ploy ab er'le s EIm ffor pro ts to ve Hm elp en Im ts p rto ov e Emp Welllo -By eing, ee Ben by LG ef Bits TQ Sta Prog tusram .................................. 14 Wo L B Deb A C b A lik a EG c e ot ndno o ppendi ppendi e c B int ount h LGB ly nc TQ w • • •r t e tk ha rlus - and Fi e for L L L n Li st t TQ w or G G G e e non ion B B B k fe x x d s w e TQ w TQ w TQ w hy rin st 1 2 s or -B L : : a nanc G k L alanc nd e G or or or M Figu B ude rB TQ w s k k ke non TQ w e e e a nt t r r rnd s s s ial ho r -loa e or w w w L e no or G e e e k do n P r r rB e S k n e e e r TQ w e d r - t s t r le le m L logy e e at s ha G b ss ss or pare oB t is e p TQ w or rlik lik e v rt li e e k lie e e k i e fe ly ly ca e low f/ dne rr ly s d or rt thighe e ha ha l k e tp iff ha e rS a n non n non rs inc e y ignif s n non s rm r e r om a d e m tnt e - -w e L L e d - nt icanc G G he L s p m G B B ra a og n it TQ w TQ w B l he a nd TQ w nry ac l a m e e e a lt or ss or m m s, d h b or K k k p e e e e k loy e d e t e r re o uc s s ne y b r e s t tt tt a e o o he fit m t o ion th b r rs a a ir a e e ha na t p ne self e nd ov g re fit e te a m - low m n non t s highly low rha p ae tloy e nt e te d rtr e he ser - w p r rLe ’hy a s e G ir tw g v ir B si ie e he c e ff TQ w s m c e m or , a n it s or p l a e w tloy nt s t he or nd c c e o p a rk ouns re lm e a m he a offe rn cont e s e s. lp nt t non e o Irlin im a ts a tl he w he g -p rL ibut ould , rb G ir ov e a a B xpa lt c nk e TQ w ions h. ont a fin - ls nde at Irn o a ibu - aor nc w a nd dff or k t ia ion e ek l rc s t Paul Fronstin is D Preir fe ecrtror ed of TH ra ea dlt eh B -Oe ffs ne fit Bs Re etwe sea en rc B h a en t t ehfi ets Em ap nloy d e W e a Bg ee ne sfit , b Re y sea LGrB ch I TQ ns Sta titut tu e s (EBRI). Lisa Workplace Wellnes What s Pr Wo orkers V gram alu s an e, byd LG tBT he Q LG Status BTQ Community Fi Figure Figure 8 gure 21 11 Overall, how useful are the financial wellness program(s)? n=966 Which one of the following statements would you say is closest to the way you feel about How does each of the following benefits offered by your employer contribute to your feeling of t m we t ghe o eene a rnt e low sense ram al he l, e or r highe p w L e a G a m e of rlt B lik llta h b - ne TQ w rb e fin rre ia ly rw e ing sh a g ne ta nc e ha o ip g r fit a ia r e k n LGB a w s e s. e s, e l se tit e r s h a s xc c a ra e ur a rTQ w nd n lle tb e it ea d y nt d tnk .he t w or he A or a o fa k r ir g re v e e c c t e rp ir t r s t r a hy e y e tc d ha m o g c si ite ood e p t css uni nt a rLe l a G fe p .sa on. B rnd rog TQ w v fe ings p r m w ae m eor nt rs, a k la m ae l h n, e rnd s a nt ehe a ap rlt l he e a eh low lt tle h insu ins a ss ltur h b e lik ra e rtnc e a ha ly ne nc e n t.fit o e non , s a ha pa v nd -id e L G d tlow im B eTQ pe e e n r off, a w d w e or a nt g kn e e ecs. rhil s. m dSp e rr eg e ne c . nc ifi cya lly sa, vings 53 percent Greenwald is the CEO of Gree nwald Research. This Issue Brief was written with assistance from the Institute’s The L The B Fi G ot g Bh LGB u TQ w 20 W re 1 or 22 kTQ w or p W la kor e cr ek s or p W we la ke eclln rre s e e W a le ss nd e ss lln Sur Em no lik ese n vp s e ly -lL y S o G tur y ( ha B W er v TQ w n e W y Offe non S) found or is - rL k s c G eond Paid rB seve s d TQ w ue- csc rL ta e eav or r ld ibe si ka g e e nnu d nif r-s R t he ic tel a o ally ir ated nt ra d t bd e e yiff b tB tthe e he en trhe e ir nc E efi w m sa e or ts, p s b m loy k e -b e lif : e t ye w A e L b e b B GB out e a en LG la ne nc T one fit Q e B Re Statu TQ a -ts hir sea ew xc dor s r d e ck h I lle ee sc rnt ns s ribe a or tit nd ut dv e e non itr y ( aE s a g -B L ood RI G m B ) T .a a Q jOne nd or - Which of the following W Prepared , orker Rat if any, wou ne ld in b ss eg thto of e m Han Emp ost va dl lo lua e y ber' V le ariou im s prov Eff e s F ort mein ns ts an to to cial yHelp our employer’s employee Figure 12, Opinions About Va the r ious amou nA t spe of ___ c_t_ s of _____E _m yp ouloy cure ree n tlB y e rene ceivfit e ts, b hrougy h L yoG urB eTQ Sta mployer? tnus =67 ................................ 9 to n=1,518 .................. 14 45% LGBTQ Non-LGBTQ By Paul Frons Atside in, P from h.D., inco E memplo and coye mpe e nBe sa fina tio ne nn cial , fi wt h se R at cu de ri os ty ye ? oa n u v rch I =a 2lue 87 m to ns n ost = titut 1f,1 rom 47e a, na end mploy Li es r? aP Gre leasee se nw lect a tld, he Greenwald Figure 1 1 p of rog LG • • • rB am TQ w ;L L L G G G lifB B B e or TQ w TQ w TQ w ins ker ur s or or or a ra nc k k kte e ee e r r rd s s s ; a t w w w he e e e fin r r rir e e ea p nc le m le hy ss ss or iasi l w elik lik c a lie e e k l he ly ly e lln ly t te a ha ha ss tlt ha h a n non n non p n non rog s er- -xc a L L-m G G L eG B B lle ; TQ w TQ w B lon nt TQ w g or -or or t e v or k k rem e e r ky r re -s s c rg s t a t too o o re o r rd a e ins ha t p ce om o ur v re e ta m p tm nc ha a pr or loy e e t; d e te d he w m ris ’s e it ir e ah 61 p nt beili ff a m or tl he y p tloy in s t ea su re lt o cr e h b r he a nt offe nc lp eane em rim ;s fit ong ap p nd s e r ov ra sona non a nd e c ceide low -m liz LG ot e nt e B d iona r, TQ l benefits programs and offerings? n=1,518 G w p thir rTh ror ob ed e k e rle nw e e of e rm sea xa s. a L , ld c G L one rt G c BRe w h a B TQ w o TQ w -se h rd nd aing a lf d or re co d h. k fro e rit e k sc r or e The m s r r ria s w ibe the a l st t20 d e e r a q i2 te the ff ue 2 a s. A le s a su s irss tion w rny vlik m or e na y inor e k v ire ly ie -of lif w t e a 1 ha p s e nd ,rb 5 ob n a 1 xpr la the 8 non le nc m A e m ss s e , -a L e a e a mp G r nd d s ic B e le in t TQ w a xc 1 n s ie ihis w n zlle e or or 5 a nt rk d k e re e e e por r r sc or c ss t o r w t v nta ibe o e a arrs c b y ine e d e g tond it sa d hose oo a in td s not is uc e fied ca of tom e cd h t a p he w fig onlin a p itr rure h th a e od ut be .le w hor e July Als m it irh o j( aob Fi ,40 nd 13 * g , ur is p ov sh te hr e us rould e c oug 20 re e ad nt ll ) .h J to not e a D m m siff uly ig p ong b e loy nify e r2 e a e 9 nc no sc e , tha e 2 rn s ibe 02 t- b a 2 y d . Improve Well-Being, by LGBTQ Status Situations, by LGBTQ Status top 3 40% . n=1,518 Does your employer offer employees any of the following? n=1,518 Re Res gae rd ale rch ss whether differences by LGBTQ status are driven by demographics or LBGTQ status, employers can use the • LGBTQ workers were mD ore em liko eg lyr ta ha ph n non ic B-r Le Ga Bk TQ w dow or nks e,r s t by o L be G a B gT eQ s 21 Sta –24 tu . s Figure 13, Worker Rating of Work-Life Balance, by LGBTQ Status ........................................................................... 15 c wror itic k40 a el illne r % s (F w fin wa e igur a ss g llnc -e b a s. e ia e nd ing/m l c 3)c .ouns aSim nc ee nt e ila rlin a ins rl he ly g, ,ur c 38 aa oa ltnc h a p ce hin e r s a ce ll g e(Perc xc , nt ra or e nk of (Pe lle pe ent la L nt rcen d G nni r B or age eTQ w ta la ng v g te e iv R .r V e y at or e ly g ing ry k ood high. e orr s r Ex S . o a c m The t ellent e ed w h tonly he a t or P irrep V d m ery iff e ant red e rGood) a e)l he nce abltyh a LGs e BTQ st xcelle ant tus or w v ae s ob ry g ser ood ve d for statisttical o the ly of sig fic nific ers, t ant rus diffe tee re s, or nce eoxi the stsr b sponsor etween s of LGBTQ EBRI wFigure , ork Em ers ploy and 15 ee no Be nne -LGBTQ fit Resea work rce h I rs.ns All tit sut ige nific -Edauc ncaet ion a tests nd areRe at sea ther c95 h L A b LG G e ll r ne B Be TQ w TQ st fit spond s por aatc e us kk nt ea rw s g s (F e e w ,r e e igur ar nd e not a ep g found a 13 eisd ) 21 .l eTher a –w v 64 e he ..e They w n e The wexra e su m m re ini vr ini e eng y m l e ca ss d ol d e m b lik p iff tr eb e is ly y ree d t in n o c a ce b om na s in w e offe e tiona lev or re e l sa k d l.- lvife m arp ious b le a la of nc e1, m ep 014 rlo at yin e w e gor s b bk ee y ne r s Lfit G as. nd BTQ st They an o av twe us ers r w e a m he lep ss n le lik of e504 ly to Paid Leave and Wages Retirement Contributions and Wages Novem ber 10, 2022 • No. 574 43% 44% 36% information presented in this paper to build program offerings and devise communication strategies that more Greate Flr e Fin xibia lity nc iin a W l Co or ntri k S bu che tion dul Fr eom Your Employer • LGBTQ workers were more likely than non-LGBTQ workers to be ages 25–34. c pom aid p • • •t a im reeL L L d G G G off. w B B Bit TQ w TQ w TQ w h 57 p LGBor or or TQ w k k k ee e e rc r r re s s s or nt w w w k e e e e ar r r rm e e e s ong w le le lee ss ss ss r e non lik lik lik lee e ess ly ly ly -L G lik t t tha ha ha BeTQ w ly n non n non n non tha or n - - -L L L knon G G G erB B Bs. TQ w TQ w TQ w - L GBor or or TQ w k k ke e er r rs s s or t t tk o o o er r ha ra e s t p tv eo o e re tfe sa m tw ha y p loy e ttr ha tm e he tr e ’p s e ir nt a id e a ff m l he or tp im tloy s t a elt e o off c hr he b offe elp ont nerim fit s ribut s a fin prov a nd e nc d e ia highe tpo l p hy ala si sense rc nni al ng percent level. Appendix 2 at the end Percent of the repag ort e deof tail s W the orkers O exact sigff nific ered ant Fi diffe na re nc nce ial s in each figure indicted by *. If no b exa e offe m Fu ine nd rRe edd ti ( b rE a em yB fin RI inc enta - S om E nc aRF) via ie ng l w , s in t P or e lahe lln n, the S elow uc sir s p h a st e srr a og a 4 -ff a s. N 0 rnd 1(k am )e , m .40 itThey idd he 3(brle ), 45 E -g inc B 7a RI , o vom e r no low er gE e rB oup r RI ra-ts. Hi E ings to e RF lob gheb r-m ie inc s or ploy om e tea r k L ee G ff s p B or TQ w tosit s to ions or im ke p on rrs ov we spe e fin re cifi a le 40% nc css p ia olic lik l w 42% eye ly ll p -trb o op esa ing, osa y ls. completed surveys among LGBTQ workers, bringing the F itg ot ua rl to e 17 605 LGBTQ respondents. 95% LGBTQ Non-LGBTQ Figur35 e % 14, What W To or wkhe art s Va exteln ue t d, ob yy o u L f G eB eTQ Sta l prepared tus to ................................ handle the following fina ................................ ncial events in yo LG uB r l Tif Q e? ................................ W No on rkers -LGBTQ .. 16 How would you rate your employer's efforts to help employees improve their well-being in the effectively support a div Pre o Lfir G tse -S Bha Tw Q rior ng S k P ta lan for tusce. 91% Household Income Give • n o ur L G fin BTQ w dings o ork n d ers eb w te , rw ee le found ss liked lyiff te ha ren non nces in p -LGB eTQ w rcF ep ig tions or ure ke r 4 asb tout o b e p e arg sona es 4l fina 5–54n . c ia 71% l prepar32% edness to handle s of ucfh ina 60 ind nc %ic w w e ia a d e a l se to uc g llr -ea b c is s. te ur ion, in pit re gy/h s semi e (Fi e nt, a glt ur na th h a e er s, or s e 10 res)xc ult . w e slle e ab re nt ina W no or ellness rs t .vs e ta ry tis gtical ood Pr ly .og sig ram, nificantly by d LG iffeBTQ rent. Status EBRI invites comment on this research. n=1,518 t eha mot t tiona heir l w wor ell k--b lif ee ing/m b Mo al ra e Fl nc ent ee xa i bi w l he lP ity a ai : M s da V e o ltxc ac rh, e Cho ati ea lle on nd i Ti cnt e/M me por ore B hy v sie en cra y efi l w fg o tsoo ll to e oll w C d -ing b ho (e 40 o a isng/he e rea Fr pe o s? r m ca e nlt nt =h. 1),5 tThey 1 ha 8 n hig wehe rer l-e inc ss om like ely non to -rL aG te B TQ w their or wo krekr-s lif(e 49 b alance Eligibility and Participation 30% in Various Types of Financial Wellness Programs, by LGBT 43% Q Status 60% Work-Life Balance 70% 33% Introduction 77%* 56%* 63%* 60% 30 Pe % rcentage Extremely or Very Satisfied W Fith igu J re o b 3 and Employee Benefits,35 b %* y LGBTQ Status su Dad ta d • e w n e erLe cG onomi w B 51% TQ w eight c e or cd ok m b ey p rs lic ra w a ce teio r,e ns a le g e ss b,y g lik LeG e nd B lyTQ st e trha , inc n non aom tuse .- , L LG G and B BTQ TQ LGw w Bor or TQ st k ke er rs s w a ttus o eb r . e e The le ag ss em s 55 lik aregly – in of 64 tha . n ernon ror - aLtG tB he TQ w 95 p or ek rc ee rs ntt o confi repd oe rtnc e Figur • •e 15 L $7 , GP 5,00 BeTQ w rce 0 o ntor a r g k m e e or rof s ew W (e upp o re rk le e errss s Offe -inc likoem ly re e d t ha g Fi roup n non nanc ): ia - L l We GBTQ llnew ss or P kreog rs rtao mr, eb py o rL t G tha BTQ Sta t theirt us em ................................ ployer 91% offers access to ......... a 17 49% 27% 53%* a p 2 s e ercxc ent elle ). nt or very good. They were le He ss al tt h I rus nsutrful anc e in institutions that provide employee benefits. Workplace W 27%* ellness Programs a 60n % d the LGBTQ Community The other sexua Doe l orie s y nta our tions emp loy incelud r oe ff ea r sye oxu u ta hl, e q oue ppo ertu r, s ntra ity ig toht, pa rti and cipa “s teo in me a f thing 53% inan cial else w,e ” llw ne ith ss a pb rog out ram 1 ? p e n rc =35% e 1nt ,51id 8entifying as 50% 88% More Bene Ffiin tsan /Re cis al o urc Wees ll-B to ei H ng elp With Emo Yotur F ional in W ane clila -B l W eing ell/Me -Bein ng tal ^ Health Physical Well-Being/Health The demographic profiles and com position of LGBTQ workers in the United States are different from those of non- Figure 6 64% 11% 89% t le ha ve t l for •t hey L t he c GaBn ha TQ w totandle l sa ork m e ap rn une s lew of eH rxpe c e o ur w m rc D e or s tnt e e a e d m t w li ie s ko or xpe feig e ly ke d r ns ta r ha s a p e re in t h n non of i c y his $5 o B u 00 -r st Le w G udy ; a iB ttk ha h TQ d …. (to n= w tw he ?or 1 n W y ,k 518 s e c Lo ,r G a s t rk b n ha B ) TQ y e is o rs L ha a ndle G p n v p B e = r oxim T 7 a $3 7 Q n une 5,00 7 Sta a t e t0 xp o ly tu – n e $7 p= c s lus t4,99 1 e,d 5 or e 1 9 in xpe 34% 8 minu n 33% tot se s 2. aof l house 5 $5 pe,000 54 rc %* hold ent ; a t ha get 24% 31% 45% healto h coa LG cB hTQ w or heor a Qlt k ua h ca er lity s P ai Heal w rde e S rna th ie ck Car le v Tiga ime ss e Co tlik or ve e rser ly ag etv ha icn non e. -LGBTQ workers to rate employer’s efforts to help improve Regardless of whether you currently participate, which of the following employee benefits does your employer currently offer you? n=1,518 Suggested Citation: Fronstin, Paul, and Lisa Greenwald 5, 0% “Workplace Wellness Programs and the LGBTQ 25% 69% 33% each 50 of %these orientations. 60% Figure 16, Percentage of Workers Participating 37% in Financial Wellness Program, by LGBTQ Status ............................... 17 40% LGBTQ wA or bik lite y t rs. o Us Le P GB aiTQ w d Timeor Ok ff t eor 'B s t uy e' O nd thed er Be to neha fits ( vse om low etime es r c in alc led om Pe TO s than non-LGBTQ workers. They were also more likely to 92% By Paul Fronstin, Ph.D., An Un ex Emp pectedloye Expene se o Ben f $500 efi34% t Research Institute, and Lisa Greenw 35% ald, Greenwald 46%* t p H he oint ow y es. cva en ha rinc , mom ndle any e . of b eting he una diffe brle e Pnc ai to de Tim s wor ob e Off kser aan nd vd e P d ea a b idry Le n inc L aG veBom TQ st e for at us six cm ould ont a hs ls o due be td o riv ille ne n ss by or d einj mur ogyr; ap ahic nd tdha iffte r te he nc ye cs. L an ha GBndle TQ emotional well-being/mental health as exc and ellent or very good. 40% Community,” EBRI Issue Brie con f, vers no. ion) 574 (Employee Benefit Research Institute, Nove 87 m %* ber 10, 2022). 68% * 30% EBRI and Greenwald w44 ou %* ld like to thank the 2022 Workplace Wellness Survey (WWS) s 44% ponsors 50 0% % 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 33% • LGBTQ workers Pw he ys re ic m al or He ea lli tk hely than non-LGBTQ workers to report 53% that more benefits/resources to he29% lp with 20% Mental Health be younger, employed paG rten terous ime, Punm aid-Tia me rr-ie Ofd f B , ea ne nd fitsHispanic/Latino vs. non-LGBTQ workers. 30% Figure 18 Research 42% ha wor ving k •e rs to L wG ree B rte TQ w ir e yo 17% fiv unge or e k ye e rr a t s ha rW s e wn h eia P r cnon e ai r hlie d le o Ma fr-ss tLt h terni G ha elik B sn e ty TQ w e Le ly h pala a v te v ha nne e or yn non o ku d e S r p(s. a e Fi t r is -g Thi sL o fur G n aa c s B e ltl TQ iy c o 21 ould n us ). W w e d or i t a h ok c rC e ctount a r us k r e rte n o n a for tha d Jv o v a w b n et hy a $7 ge 5,00 L o G f? B TQ w n 0 o =2r 3 1m or to or k n e e = r s ha in 62t7ot ve a l house lower inc hold om inc e a ond me. Figure 17, Eligibility and Participation in Various Types of Fina 3nc 0%ial Wellness Programs, by 31% LGBTQ Sta 42% tus .................. 18 o LGBTQ wor 46k %* ers were less likely than non-LGBTQ workers to rate employer’s efforts to help improve 58% Non-LGBTQ 34% 15% 25%* 60%* who h Mo elp re B ed en sh efitsa /Re ps e th ources is to y H e el a pr W 'sith su Yor ur Ph vey y: s ic AAR al WelP, l-B Ci eing/He gna al, th^ Edelman Financial Engines, Fidelity, Human 20%* 92% their physical w LG eB llT -b Qeing/he Non-LG al BtTQ h would be a valuable improvement to the employe39% e 18% benefit 17% s program. The Workplace Wellness Sur An E veme y b rguil enc dys on Saving psr P erv og ious ram EBRI/Greenwald collaborative studies, inc 27luding %* the Health and 80% 71%* 20% 40% 20% less • C e d ouc pL y aG rtig ion th BTQ w ht In aor n non form kers -a L w ti G eo B rn e TQ w :le Tss his or lik k re e ely p rs. or t ha I t tis n non c ould copy -a rL ight ls Go BTQ e ad ff eb w cytor tthe he ke r E low s m to p eloy b r em e e a e m r rB p ia e loy g ne ee fit rd a tRe ful es. l ti sea These m rc eh I . 43% ns diff tit eu re te nc (e Es BRI ma ). y Y aou lso may 15% physical well-b15% eing/health as excellent or very good. 22% 86% 37%* 14% Q 6ua 1% li* ty Retirement Savings Benefits Rig COh Vts ID- Cam Related Ti pa mig e Off n Fou (separate nda from tio tradi n, M tioercer, M nal organ Stanley, Nati45% onal Rural Electric Cooperative More Benefits/Resources to Help With Your Emotional Well-Being/Mental 36% 29%* Fi gur •e 18 L, GUse BTQ w fulne orss ke of rs w Fie na re nc le ia ss l We like lln lye tss ha P n non rogra -m LG , B bTQ w y LGB or TQ Sta kers to tus re ................................ port that financial welln ................................ ess 55% programs were ... 19 LGBTQ 28% W Tyor pe ks of place fin Baenc ne ia fit l iss s Sur uev s t e 53% y ha ctond caus uce te st d rfr ess om 29% d 20 iffe 13 red 18% thr boug y LG hB 20 TQ st 18, at L the us GB TQ H (Fi eg alt ur h C e 22 onf 38% ). ide LGnc BTQ w e Sur 28% or vekye r cs ond weuc re 34% t e le dss fr lik om e ly 19 t9 ha 8 n 60% An Unexpected Expense of $5,000 10% 34% 50%* account • for LGB LTQ w G34% BTQ w orke or rs ke w rs’ ere p rm ior or ite ie li sk . e For ly t e ha xa n non mple-, LL G G BBTQ TQ w wor orkkeerrs t s w o e bre e e le m ss p loy like ely d p tha artn tnon ime. -L GBTQ workers to report copy, print, or d pa ow id ti nloa me od ff) this report solely for personal and noncom 0% m 46% ercia 2l use 0% , p 4r 0ov % ided6 0tha % t all ha 80%rd c1op 00ie %s retain 10% Health^ 10% 44% 33% 82% 27% Worker E 46 lig %* ible for Figu40 re 7 % 41% Association (NRECA), OneAmerica, UNUM, and Voya Financial. 9% 10% Life Insurance extremely useful. 36% 31% LGBTQ A T A G L A N C E t non hroug -LGh 2012 BTQ w 31% , or ak nd ers the to Va rep lue or tof tha Bt e ne sav fit ing 33% s Sur enoug vey h for cond uc rette ird e m in 199 ent 0% a9 a nd nd affor 20d 01 ing . their c 86% hil 28% dren’s colle LGg Be TQ tuition were the 40% Figure 7 Figure 12 36% Age Flexibility in Work Location t hat a sa ny v ing and enoug all cop h for yright re ta irnd em ot ent he a r nd app alic ffor ab dle ing not the ice irs c chil ont dra ein n’e s c d olle ther geein, tuit and ion w you ere m a the y c fin it 25% ea or nc ia quot l iss eue sm s c all p ausoing rtions the of Figure 19, Interest in Financial Wellness Programs, Among Those LN esot s T Offe han $3 re 5,d 00 P 0rogra Bm en , ebfy it LGBTQ Sta $75,0W 0t0 us o or r ................. k M eorr eHas Ben e 19 fit More Personalized Help or Guidance in Selecting B 29% enefits^ 29%35% $35,000–$74,999 0% 26% About the Workplace Wellness Survey Satisfied With the Would Rather Have Higher Would Rather Have Lower 30% 49% 28% Non-LGBTQ • LGBTQ w The Abor ilityk to er W s or w ke Frre om m Ho or me/T e lik ele ew ly or t khan non-LGBTQ workers t 27% o report that financia 24% l wellness programs were not 27% financial issues cE alus igiing bilitthe y am nost d P sa tr re tiss ci.p They w ation ie nr e E m mor ple o y lik ee ely B te ha nn efnon it P-rLo Gg BrTQ w amsor , bky e rL s t Go BrT eQ por Stt a tha tuts paying monthly 2 0 S % atisfied With the Amount Would Rather Have More Would Rather Have Less Retirement Plan Retirement Plan Retirement Plan 5% 26% 33% Figure 13 26% Non- 3% Non-LGBTQ Non- m Fiost gu rN s e 2 t or ne -L ss G. B TThey w Q ere more likely than non-LGBTQ workers to report t 45% 79% hat paying monthly bills and student loan • the rLeG pB or TQ w t prov oride kerds tw ha 6e 1t % r ey * ou less d o likso ve ely tha rb31% n non atim a-nd L8G %B w *TQ ith p wr or o Np k oe e n-r rLs G c tit Bo TQ atbion. e eligib Anyl eus for 5e 7% b *h ee ya ond lth insu the rsc a27% nc op LGee B.T of Q t 1he 7% *foregoing The 2022 Workplace Wellness Survey (WWS25% ) included an oversample of LGBTQ workers to better understand the A Financial Wellness Program 31% 27% of Paid Time Off Receive Paid Time Off and Lower Paid Time Off and Higher C 31% ontributions Receive Now Co 25% ntributions and Lower LGB CT on Qtributions and Higher Please note percentag Oe pp s in t ortunihe ties fo figur r Cae res m er Adv ay an not cem en tot t al to 100 percent due to round 35%ing 85% and/or missing categories. Any • Bein Lg Un GBTQ w able to W orork k Mo e an r rs e He dw Ee la p/ rrn I G eu nle id co an ss me c e i lik for 6 M n S ely el ec on tha titn hs g t n non Due he Ri to gh -L t B Gen BTQ w efits foror Yokuers to report that they trust their employer1%* to help them Fi gure 20 a, t D ae ll useful. scription of Household Debt .............................................................................................................. 20 bills and student loan repayments wer e the financia 22% l issues causing the most stL re Gss BT . Q LGBTQ LGBTQ LGBTQ 0% Worker Rating of Work-Life rdBalance, by LGBTQ 25% Status 24% Now Wages Wages r eparye m qe uir nt LG es w B s E TQe BrRI e 13% ’ts p he rfin iora e 34% nc xpress ial iss ue pes c rm 28% 21% a isus sion. ing 17% tFor he m p9% eos rm t is stsi re ons, ss. p W leea se d40% idc c ont ond ac uc t E t B re RI gr a ets si pon erm ais na si W ly ons@e ases ges and bri.or found g. that W ages uni que The • 3 0% wL W or Gor k Bp TQ w kla pla cec or e w e W ke lln e rs lln ess w ee ss ne re Sur ele dss s of ve lik y su w ely a cs c h w tha ond or n non kuc erts a e -L dG n for d B TQ w t o its 3 explor or kyee e ra s a r t nd o in 202 bid e eent 2 t ligib ify o lp e eot xa for e m nt a ine ia he l a d atiff lt tit h sa eude renc v s t ings a eow s in a ar cd c t LG t oun b it Be ude Tne Q t. fit s, s in Illness or Injury Employment Status Non-LGBTQ 0% 43%* Non-LGBTQ LGBTQ Non-LGBP Ta Q id Paternity L L Ge B aT vQ e Non-LGBTQ LGBTQ Non-LGBTQ LGBTQ Non-LGBTQ t rend changes or differences in subg roups noted in the text are statistically significant; if no trend changes are noted, Legal Assiim sta R p n e rcov g e are d lt ehe ssir o fov wh ee rta hll e rw ye oll u- b cu erirng entt lyhr poug artich q ipatua e, lit wh yi cb he o ne f tfit hes a follnd owin re gsour empc lo eys. ee be 28% nefits doe3 s4 y % o* ur employer 59% 58% More Benefits/Resources to Help W (Perc ith Careg ent ivage ing (for R c at hiing ldren a Ex ndc /o ellent r or 43% Very Good) 84% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 18% 21% 20 C% omprehensive Voluntary Insurance Benefits (e.g., disability, 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Extremely Useful Long-T V erm ery -Ca Us re I efu ns l urance Somewhat Useful Not Too Useful Not at All Useful LGBTQ st t • •he w L La G G or tB B us kTQ w TQ w p a land ceor or . dIk k ete e m e r rog s s xaw w m ra e eine p r re e hic s a le les b ss ss b ot lik lik roa h e ely ly d cont spe t tha ha ribut n non n non ctrum ed- - L L of to G GB B fin dTQ w TQ iff ae nc rw e ia or or nc l w k k ee e s in se e r rllbe s s t to o ing, b b ve e e re m e aligib m l aof rp rloy ie ltehe d m for . e out nt a c -tb om ra ad sed e its fou iona hel p a nd lte h insu ns in t ion o he r ap nc ra d p ee e , fin ra (nd e re d s ults Fi expe gurreie 21 nc, es, a Prep na dr e bd en he ass vior to s r He ala ndle ted Va to rw ious ork p Fila na ce nc w ia el Sit llneua ss.t ions , by LGBTQ Status .................................................... 21 84% Total adults)^ Less Than $35,000 $35,000–$74,999 19% $75,000 or More Figure 19 3%* 19% accident, life, critical illnes s, etc.) currently offer you? n=1,518 Non-LGBTQ there are no significant differences. Income differences noted in the text are simple correlations within the same Stude •n t LoLaG nB D TQ w ebt Ror elik ee f/R rs ep w ae yr m ee le ntss likely than non-LGBTQ workers to report that the 18% y trust the 23% ir employer t55% o help the68% m Financial Wellness Benefits and Wages Mental Health Benefits and Wages Report Availabili Excellent/ty Ver:y Thi Goos r d ep Gor ootd is aFv aa irila /Pob ole r on the 19% internet at www.ebri.org Excellent/Very Good Good Fair/Poor are not • sh LG ow BTQ w n in tor he k e pra s pw ere)r.e more likely than non-LGBTQ workers to be neve 13% r married. retire bm ene ent fit b p ela ne n, fitor is su cae sh s. The How ba la wnc o 20 ue ld 22 p yo la u W n. dW escri S inc belude the w do a rkn o -lifev b ea rsa lanm ce p le at y of ouL r co GBm TQ pan w yor ? n k= e1 rs ,51 to 8 allow for closer analysis Childcare Assistance/Subsidy LGBTQ 81% 19% Non-LGBT So QurceMo : Em re S ploiym ee pl Be icity ne: Few fit Res er Cho earch In ics es titu /Fewe te andr O Gre pti eon nws a to ld Re Cho sea os rce Fr h 20om 22 Workplace Wellness Survey. 21%* 30% 25%* 21%* 81% and incom 60e % group. Only some of these differences can be found 24in t %* he11% figures. Deta 14% ile 39% d figures are available upon request. A Fi ug to ur ae n Ha d22 /v om ing r, H a Fi to le ona m Re q e nc du ua In cia s lit e u l I W y ra oss d n rkc e ue Ho e cis s Tha urs ions or St ta op b Cout W aus ork e tin he t g t he ir o Care he Most afor a lth a Strnd esshe , baylt h ca LGBTQ Sta re. tus ................................ 19% 19% ................................ 50% 56% 21 LGBTQ He No lp n-W LG ith BT EQ me Dis ra gb en ilic ty y S Ins av ur ing ans ce LGBTQ Non-LGBTQ Key Fin 20% dings: Satisfaction With Employee Benefits 81% • of • • the L L LG G G cB B Bha TQ w TQ w TQ w llenge or or ork k k s t e e er r rhe s s s w w w y e e efa r r re e e c e le m m in t ss or or e elik he li lie k k ir ly e e ly ly fin t ha t taha ha nc n non n non n non ial w -e L- -G ll L L-G G B bTQ w B B eTQ w TQ w ing. or Tor or he ke k kr 10% e ea sr r d s t s t tv o a o o b nt e b ba e ee g ligib liv v ee of ing ryl e a or w n o for it som h a vae rre sa e p w ta ir m h re a tp ne m tle int e r . is ne t trsa he est v ings p e ad b ili in t ty la he to n, ir c su ont em cr h a p ol loy s a er Child or Other Loved One for 6 months 10% Satisfac 43% tion With Paid Leave Which of the following benefits do you, yourself, currently have through your employer? n=287 to n=1,147 8% Identi • ty ThL eG ft B PTQ w rotector ionk e Sr es rvw ice es re less likely than non-LGBTQ workers to report that the 22% y trust the 24% ir employer t46% o help the52% m 50% Regardless whether differences by LGBTQ status a No re ne d orf th ive e A n b bo 5y v 0e % demographics or LBGTQ status, employers can use the 20% Table of Contents Figure 19 Gender (LGBTQ population) 9% Sex45% ua 8% l Orientation (LGBTQ population) • LGBTQ workers were more likely than non-LGBTQ workers to be Hisp 44% anic/Latino. for im m 40 p a1( or kP ing k t ai a )0% d , nt Care 40 a vfa a 3( gi ila cb t vor 2 er L b )0, le % s t 4 ea : 57 ha v e (c , t4 or hi a 0% lr de p or el rst ofit rde ong 6- 0 rsh c %are) ly ar a ing ss 80oc % plia an te . 1d 0 0w %ith many of the79% results about workplace wellness. In 70% 6 0% 43% Ability to Give Back/Volunteer Through Your Job 23% Non-LGBTQ 64% 45% 54% 45% 87%* 13%* Accident, Critical Illness, or Cancer Insurance College Savings A57% ccounts 41% 10% 15% 20%* 47% 48% • J m oabs le a qua nd lit E ym de pc lo isy ions ee Ben about ef it prse p –a Sa ring tis fo fa r c rti eto irn e a me nnt d T . rade-Offs: LGBTQ workers were less likely than non- 40% 80% inf ormation presented in this paper to build program offerings and devise communication strategies that m 49or %*e Introd 6uc 0%tion ................................ Inter................................ est in Financial Well................................ ness Programs, Amo................................ ng Those .......................... 5 3 9%* 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% p • • artic L LG G ula B BTQ w TQ w ro, LGSt B or or TQ w ude k ke er rnt s s o w w r loa k e ee r re e n d rs le le w e ss ss e b r tlik lik e r e m e elie ly ly or f/ t te ha ha r e lik p n non n non a ey lym te ha - -nt L LG G n non .B B TQ w TQ w -LG or or Bk kTQ w e er rs s t to o orb b ke e e re A s t ligib sio an o b le e rfor y P oung a a cifi he c e ra I sl lt and h w ande te o lln rha . e v ss e p low rog erra inc m. omes. 40% 50 37% % 21 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 40% 56% 60% 55%* 47% 50% 50% 29% Subsi • d ized L/G CB o4 m TQ w 5% pl*ime or ntk ae ry rs Cw hie ldr39% e o rle Dss ay c lik are ely than non-LGBTQ w 16% orkers to report that the 20% y were co 24% mfortable using 61% employ65% er- 10 0% % LGBTQ workers to be satisfied with their job a2% nd various Work e em r p Eloy ligie bl ee b fe or nefits. LGBTQ workers were less likely effectively support a diverse work force. Not Offered Program3 , 5b %y LGBTQ Status 32% 35% Having to Re Eti lde re r5 Y carea e A rs s E sis arli tan er T ce/S ha uNo n bs Y in d ou e y o P f lThe anne se d 70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% • 40%LGBTQ workers were less likely than non-LGBTQ workers to ha 0% ve a gr 2a 0% duate4 or 0% profe 60ss %ional d 80% egree 1. 00 % • D ue LtG o B the TQ w o se D uni or eb kq e t ue rm s a w cna ha erg e lle e le m ng ss ee nt s, t lik ser ehis lyv tic ha Ie ss s o n non uer B cr ouns - ie LfG m BeTQ w or lin 3% e g .c or losely e kers txa o b m eine eligib s LG leB TQ w for long ork -e te rs rm b yd is us aing bilittyhe . measures D emographics ................................................................ 18%................................ 47% ....................................................... 5 LGBTQ Non-LGBTQ LGBTQ Non-LGBTQ 50% LGBTQ Non-LGBTQ LGBTQ Non-LGBTQ 39%* 45% Benefit Worker Has Benefit Employ So eu e rc A e: s Em sis pltoa yn ee c Be e P nerfio t g Res ram eas rc h( E InA stiP tus te) and Greenwald Research 2022 Workpla3 c0 e% Wellness Survey. 33% 38% 43% 48% 30% 40% 30%t pha rov n id non ed -tL ools to ma GBTQ worna keg rs t e to he bir e e sa mtot isfied iona w l a itnd h th meeirnt eam l he ploaylt eh. e benefits overall and paid leave. However, there is 36 (Pe %* rcentage Very or Somewhat Interested) 41% 34% Figure LGB 20 TQ 23% • d ^e Dif ve fe Llop re GnB ce e TQ w o d b e in t tweE eor xpa n he Lk G e BT W nde rs Q W w aS. d ne d r m ne on e le -nt LG ss a BT l he Q lik we oa rk ly lt e h b rs tha with e n non ine ncofit mes, su - sL bG eloB w cTQ w $ h a 35,0 s fr 00 or se ta ke tie s r tics couns a t llyo sib ge ne ilin fi ce ag ligib nt. sess le 58% F ions for ull T sh i m w eor ith a t-P te a rm r t m Te im nt d eis aa l he 39% bilia ty lt.h th erapist or 20% Sou T rc ota e: lEmp40 loy%* ee Benefit Research Le In sssti Tha tute a n $ nd35 Gre ,0e 00 nwald Res2 e5 a% rch 2022$35,000 Workpla– c$74,999 e Wellness Survey. $75,000 or More 0% 10 40% % N 20 on %- 30% 40%Non- 50% 25% 35% 40% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Job s and Employee Benefits – Satisfaction and Trade-Offs ........................................................................................ 7 A n Em • erge Ln G cB yTQ w Savinor gsk F eu rn s dw 20% Te hrae t Y leoss u C lik an e ly C otn ha trib n non ute to- T Lh GrB ou TQ w gh Pa or yrk oe llr D s etd o uc re tip on ort that the 33% 22% y were co 23% mfortable using 58% employ59% er- no overall difference nor is there a difference at any income level when it comes to health benefits or 40 1% 0% 19% 3% 2% 27% 30% 17%* Descrip 0% tion of 10% Ho 20%us 20% ehold 30% Debt 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Figure 3 20% • LGBTQ wcor oakceh. rs were less lik ely than non-LGBTQ work LG ers B TQ to be LG eligib BTQ le for long-te LG rm B-TQ care ins LGur BTQ ance. 23% Sou 0% rce: Employee Benefit Research Institute and Greenwald Research 2022 Workpl3 a0 ce % Wellness Survey. Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute and Greenwald Research 2022 Workplace Wellness Survey. 0% Tuition Reimburseme H no tw interested would you be in having your employer make these benefits availa 27% ble? n=891 3 5 to % n *=1,287 34% 43% r pe rtov ire ide me dnt tools to ma benefits. L na Gg Be TQ thw eir or p ke errsona s and l fina nonnc -Le GsB . TQ w 15%orkers were about as likely to be satisfied with the mix 15% 18% Eligib The ility W and orkP pa lar So c tic e u rc ipa W e: e Em tlln ion in ple oyss ee Be Sur Em nep fiv t loy e Res y e e b ae uil rc hBd In es on sne titufit te ap nP r de r G og v reious erna wm a ldE s Re B ................................ RI sea/Gr rch 2e 0e 22nw Woa rkld placc eolla Wellb neo s................................ r s a Su tiv rvee y .studies including ........................ the Health 10 Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute and Greenwald Research 2022 Workplace Wellness Survey. Healt Fh e m In as le urance Male Gender Non- Transgender 73% 81% *^ 82% 86% 2 E 0%ligib • il Lity GBTQ w o LG and Pa BTE Qor arkne erd s r No w w ticipat e n-LG ar gee B le a Tc ss Qc e ion i lik sse ( ly a LG b tn Employ ha ili BTtQ y n non for a -n L NG oe n- B m e LG TQ w p e BT loy B Qe or e ek ne te o rsa fi LG c tt o c B e Tb P ss Qer o e m ligib gr one No am ly en-LG tfor he s B y lif T Q ha e ins ve ur ea LG arn ne Bc Te Q d. beforNo e t n-LG heir B TQ 33% 10% Thinking about your current financial situation, how2 w 0% ould you describe your level of debt? Workers Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute and Greenwald Research 2022 Workplace Wellness Survey. 10% Bank-at-Work Partnership With a Bank or CC re od nifto rU mn in io gn , 18% 26%* 49% 56% of employee benefits and wages. Woarnd keW r or Opin kplace ions Bene fit of s Sur Em ve ploy y cond euc r and V ted fromalue 2013 o thr f oug Be h 2018 ne 0%fit, st he 20 % Health C 40% onfide6nc 0%e Surv 8e 0% y cond 1uc 00% ted A Health SaT viota ngls Account (HSA) ThLe at sC s Tha ome n $ s 35 W,0 it00 h a 45% 53%30% * 56% $75,000 or Mo 58% re • LGBTQ workers were less likely than non-LGBTQ work 5% ers to $35,000 be in e –$74,999 xcellent or very good physical health. • LGBTQ wsc or he kedrule s wde rpea y ledss ay lik ). ely than non-LGBTQ w n=1 or ,5k1e 8rs to be eligible for dental insurance. W Neor arkly e ra Op cross inions of the boa Em rdp,loy LGeBrTQ w and or Vaklue N eorn s -of Bwe ina Br re ye ,n ole e rfit sss lik ................................ ely than non-29% LGBTQ w ................................ orkers to be eligible................................ for various employee 13 5% 10% 30% LGBTQ Non-LGBTQ Fi gure 13 10% Employee Discount Programs/Partnerships (e.g., cell phones, travel, entertainment) 42% 44% 64% 67% 0% Health Insurance Plan Genderqueer from 1998 through 2012, and the Value of Benefits Survey conduc Bistee xd ua lin 199 Gay9 a or L nd esb20 ian01. O ther Orientations LGBTQ workers give employers lower ratings than non-LGBTQ workers when it comes to employer efforts to help 0% • • L LG GB BTQ w TQ w o Por or etk k e e ins r rs s ur w wae enc r re ee le le . ss ss lik like ely ly t tha han non n non- -L LG GB BTQ w TQ wor ork ke er rs s t to o b be e e in g ligib ood le for phy vsi iscion insu al healtrh. anc e. Legal Assistance 74% 77% benefit programs. Yet they were just as lik 25% Ma ely jor a Ps robnon lem -LG Mi Bno TQ w r Prob or lem kers t No o t a pa Prrt ob iclipa em te in such programs when they were Satisfied With the Mental Would Rather Have More Would Rather Have Fewer • Eligibility and Participation in Employee Benefit Programs: Nearly across the board, LGBTQ workers 0% D W Fin 0% eor bt k anc M -L an ife ag ial B em ala eWel nnc t S ee ................................ rlne vicess os r CP ou rn o sgr elinam g s ................................ Figure 9 ................................ 18% ................................ 21% ................. 48% 51% 15 Satisfied With T tSo hre a u d F rciit n eia : o Em nn ca ia pll loP yW e een o u Be sld io n R e n fi a t o tRes hre D r e H e aa f rc iv n h ee In M ds o tiB r tu ee te n W a e nfo d itu G lP dre lR a ea n nt w , h a e o lr dr Re H C av a se e s ah F rc e h w 2 e0 r22 Workpla29% ce Wellness Su 40% rvey. *^ 65% 67% Health Benefits Receive Now Mental Health Benefits and Mental Health Benefits and improve financial well-being, emotional well-being/mental health, and physical well-being/health. For example, 46 • LGBTQ workers were more likely than non-LGBTQ workers to be in fair or poor physical health. • • L LG GB B STQ w TQ w tudentor or Lo k ka e enr r s s De w w be e t r r Re e e lle le iefss ss /R elik lik pae e yly ly m et tnha ha t n non n non- -L LG GB BTQ w TQ wor ork ke er rs s t to o b ra et e e ligib work le- lif for e b su alp ap nc lee m 59% a es nteaxc l he elle alt nt h insu 5 or 1% v*erraync ge ood . . offe Wellnr ee ss d Bteo netfhe its R m ec.e ive Financial Wellness Benefits Financial Wellness Benefits # Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute and Greenwald Research 2 20% 022 Workplace Wellness Survey. we Ba re la n le css e P lik lan ely than Ben non efits -LGB M TQ ost wIor mp keo rs t rtan o Figure b t e iFigure n e Jo ligib b22 lD e12 ecision for various , by e L m GB ploy TQ Statu ee benefit s programs. Yet they were Lower Wages Higher Wages Employee Hardship Assistance/Payroll Advance or Short-Term Loans 23% 26% 46% 50% Overa 10 ll, a 0% bout one-half of workers reported being offere Fdi g au fin rea 2 ncial wellness program. LGBTQ workers were less likely Now and Lower Wages and Higher Wages Fi Fina gu nc re 2 ial We 0 llness Programs..................................................................................................................................16 perce 20 nt % of non-LGBTQ workers rated their employer’s efforts to help workers improve their emotional well-being/mental Auto and/or Home Insurance 73% 72% • • • L A LG G mB B ong TQ w TQ w wor or ork k ke e er r rs s s w w we e itr rh $75,0 e e le less ss lik lik 00 o e ely ly rt t ha ha mor n non n non e in house - -L LG GB BTQ w TQ w holdor or inc k ke eo r rm s s t teo o , b b LG e e B in e eTQ w ligib xcle e or lle for knt e ra s or cw c ide v ee re rnt y le g ins so s lik od ur a e m nc ly e nt e tha . al he n non alt- h. LG BTQ Retirement Savings Plan, Such as a 401(k), 403(b), 457, 63% 71% * 75% 81% * Opinions About Various Aspects of Employee just as likely Fi a na s non ncial -LGIssu BTQ es worTh kerat s t o Cau partse icipa th te e in suc Mosh p t Stress, rograms w byhe LG n th BT eyQ we Stat re offe usred to them. 10% Figure 16 Personalized Financial Counseling, Coaching, or Planning 19% 24%* 59% 55% 13% than non-LGBTQ workers to report that they were offered a financial wellness pr 14% ogram (36 percent vs. 46 percent) When consideringD we he m tho er to gr a sta ph y in ic y B our r cu ea 15% rr ked no t job wn os r , ch b oy osing LG a B nT eQ w jo Sta b, wtu hich s benefits are most 17% he LGa Blt TQ w h as e or oxc rk Id P ee er rn o lle s tfiiwe ttnt y -S T h ror he a er file tv n P g e ss rrP oy tllik e a g c nood e tio ly n t S ha ceom rvn icp e non s are-d L G wBitTQ w h 34 p ore krecre snt to ab m eong eligib LG le B TQ w for he or ak lte h insu rs (Figur ranc e69% e 11 , a) .h e The alth sa diffe v67% r ings a ences b ccount y • LGBTQ workers were more likely than non-LGBTQ workers to be in fair or poor mental health. • 90%w LG or Bk TQ w ers tor o r ka etre s w wo errk e- lif lee ss b lik ala enc ly e tha as e n non xce-lle LG nt B TQ w or veor ry kg eoo rs d to . be eligible for a financial wellness program. Debt and Financial Preparedne 21% ss ................................ Health ................................ Benefits and Wages ...........................................................20 Benefits, by LGBTQ Status 23% The 2022 Workplace Wellness Sur Percent vey (W ag We S)of inc W lude orkers Partici d an oversamppa le tin of Lg GB in TQ w Fino an rke cial rs to better understand the Among LGBTQ workers, 57 p im ep rc oe rta nt n t ide in y nt ou ify r d a es fe cisiom n? a le Plea ; 39 se p se elect rce nt th ea to s m p 3a m leo ; st 3 im pe pr oc rta ent nt. a ns g =75 e6nder non-confor 25% ming, non- Basic Money Management Tools, Such as Budgeting Tools or Calculators 29% 29% 64% 67% • No significant differences by LGBTQ status. (Figure 15). When examined by income, LGBTQ status differences in offer rates dissipated. The disparity in offer rates Stock Options or Equity Awards Program 24% 28% 59% 59% College W S ha ich ving os f th Ac ec fo ou lln otw s ing financial issues personally causes you the most stress? Select 60% the top 3. 56% L (H GSA BTQ st ), a tartaus dit w iona erel p not ens pion rese pnt lan, for a low retir ee r-m aend nt m saidd vings p le-inc la om n, e a w he or ak lte h w rs. e The llness ov e prra oll fin gram d, ings a long-p te pr em ar atnd o bsh e d or riv t-e te n b rmy • LGBTQ workers were less likely (Perc than non entage -LGB Agreeing TQ worke W rsit t h o St ha at vem e aent ret)irement savings plan, such as a 401(k), • Worker Opinions of Employer and Value of Benefits: LGBTQ workers give employers lower ratings than Total Less Than $75,000 or More Total Less Than $35,000–$74,999 $75,000 or More $35,000W –$7ellness 4,999 Prog LGram, BTQ by Non -LG LGBT BTQ Q Status unique workplace wellness needs of such workers and to explore and identify potential differences in attitudes, Ib C nc ina onc enr t10 lu iy v 80 , e % si sor % on , R g e ................................ e wnde ardsr,q o ue r G ea r; ma end s to2 E p ne c................................ r oc ue ra nt ge a N s t on r-a Rns etg ire em nd e W n eo tr rkers .S ................................ For avin n g sexua = s1 a ,5 n1 d8 l o Pru rid eent nta tion, ................................ 58 pe 25% rcent of L 29% GBTQ........................... worker64% s identify 68% a22 s 62% w Fia gsu only re 4 see A Hn a ealtm h ong Wel ln highe essM Pr a r-o rinc ig ta ra lom m Sta et u gs roups. There were no signif42% icant diffe50% rence *s in partE icd ipa uc 55% taion r tionates b 63% y LGBTQ Subsidized/$ C 3o 5m ,00 p0 limentary Child or Daycare $35,000 45% 44% Figure 14 d diff isa eb rili enc ty eins s b ur etaw nc ee e, n long LGB-TQ term and -canon re ins -LG urB aTQ w nce, o lifre k eins rs a urta inc nce om , de e nt lev ae l insu ls of r$7 anc 5,0 e, 00 vis or ion insu morer.a nce, supplemental health 70% Health Insurance 40 non 3( -b LG ), B4 TQ w 57, or or k pe rofit rs w -sh heanr ing it com plae ns t . o employer efforts to help improve financial well-being, emotional well- 74%* 70% 2 F Fi ing au ncrie 2 al A1 ct ions Taken experiences, and behaviors related to workplace wellness. In this report, we examine the findings of this oversample bisexual, 39 percent as ga Ty o w or h a le t sbia exten n, t da ond you 3 a 63% p ge ree rce ont r d a isag s oree the w r ith or t ie hnt e fa otllions owing . st atements? n=1,518 status, eitheE r m ov ple oy re ae ll or Ass b isy ta n in cc eom Proe g r( aFi mg s ur (Ee A P 16 s)). 74% 73% Long-Term Disability Have you participated in the financial w44% ellness prog 58% ram? *^ n=608 53% 56% 65% Appendix 1: Methodology ......................................................................................................................................23 insura70 nc Re % e tir, em aent ccide Savnt ings ins Pla ur n, S anc uch a e, sa a 40 nd 1( ak )fin , 403 anc (b)ia , 457 l w , ellness program (Figure 7). We often found that these differences were 59% 47% Financial P ble aing/m nning E ed nt uc aa l he tiona , lt Sh, ema in nd arsp , h oy r si Wce abl w inae rsll-being/health. When it comes to wor 22% ker expe2 c9 ta %t*ions about 52% employers’ 54% LGBTQ 60% 46% 58%* and aim to focus on 34% areas where diff 36% erences by LG 21% BTQ sta 7% tus were present, even when comparing workers in the same • LGBTQ wor or P kerr ofi s t-w Sha erre ing le Pss lan likely than non-LGBTQ workers to be extremely or very satis 35% fied with their current • LGBTQ workers were more likely than non-LGBTQ workers to report that they value work-life balance the most SA an ti s E fa mc etrig oe n n c W y it S ha v H in eg a sl tFu h In nd s u Th ra an t Y ce o u P C laa n n Contribute to Through Payroll D S ea dt uic stfia oc ntion With R 85% etirement Bene 83% fits When it com Sho ers t-T to erm w or Dik se ar b ie litx y S p ae vc int ga E tions nough f aob r Re out tir ee m m enp tloyers’ responsibilit 52% ies, LGB 60% TQ w * orkers and non 57%-LGBTQ w 59%orkers were 60% Figure 8 Your Employer Has a Responsibility to Make Sure Employees statistically significant at higher income levels as well. 76% 46%* • LGBTQ workers were less likely than non-LGBTQ workers to be very or somewhat prepared for an unexpected Subsid0% ized r/e C sponsibilit omplimentie ars, L y GyG m B TQ w or Fitnor esk se C rs a entnd er Anon cce- sL sGBTQ w 46% orkers were in agreement 29% . LGBTQ 30% workers were58% less trust54% ful Appendix 2: Figur 1 e Statistical Significance Key ................................ 52% ........................................................................24 Many of the differences observed by LGBTQ status in the remainder of this pape 49% 38% r could be driven by these 60% 58% W inc he om n it 60e % ccohor omets . t o the types of Pai fin d S ainc ck/ia Vac l w ation elln Tim ess e programs offered, there were several differences b 77% y LGBTQ status job. Are Mentally Healthy an5 d0 E % motionally Well 70% 50% 60% 56% from Tu ia tin e on R m eip mloy bure sr e.m ent 64% 59% in agreeme Lo nt nLG . g -The T Be TrQ msa -Ca m re e No In as m n-LG uount ran Bc Te Q though LG t BtT he Qir emp Nloy on-LG erBT ha Qs the follow LG 32% BTQing r 32% e 40% No sponsibilit n-LG *^ BTQ ies (Fi LG g43% B ur TQ e 12): No 49% n-LGBTQ 64% Non-LGBTQ 59%* 20%* 9%* 10% LGBTQ 15% 6% 26% 31% 20% expense of $500. 61% 46% Expanded tM ha en nta non l He-a LlG thB B TQ w enefitor s 50% , k S eurc s in i h as ns Frt eie tut Cion ouns t seha lingt S pe rov ssiide ons v W ar itio h us a M eem ntp aloy l ee bene 32% fits. 36% 48% 47% Having Savings in Case of an Emergency 51% demographic differences. 14% ( Figure You 1r7 E)mp . Re loyp er Ha orting s a Re only spon stihe bility p to rog Mar ka e S mus w re Eit mp h st loyee at sistically significant differences, we found tha 50% t LGBTQ workers were Endno • T rad teis tiL on G ................................ aB lB P TQ w a en nk s-ion ator -, W Defi koe rr k ne s P dw B are en tnre e er fi s t,le h or Cas ................................ iss p W lik ith h e Bly a a l B an ta ha c nek P n non o lan r Cre- dL itG UB n ................................ TQ ion workers to be extr................................ emely or very 65% satisfied ............................. w41% ith th 61% e employee28 • • L LG GB BTQ w TQ wor ork ke er rs s w we er re e 4le le 0% ss ss lik like ely ly t tha han non n non- -L LG GB BTQ w TQ wor ork ke er rs s t to o r ha ep vo er tp a tha id tv tahe cay tion ti value m q eua . lity 78% retirement savings 60% Total Less Than $35,000 $35,000–$74,999 $75,000 or More When it 50% com Lifee 55% Is nsto ura pnacre ticipation differences, the only difference bet52% w 21% ee*n LGB64% TQ w *^ orkers and non 80% -LGBTQ w 80%orkers was 51% Health Therapist or Coach 50% 52% 46% 51% • LGBTQ w Aror e He kearls thyw ae nd r P e hle ysss ica llik ly W ely ell than non-LGBTQ workers to be very or somewhat prepa74% red for 45% an unexpected 51% 51% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 43% LGBTQ less lik • elyT to ha m n anon ke su -LrGB e e TQ mpw loy ore ke es a rs t ro e m ree pnt ora t lly tha he t tahe lthy ir eam nd ploy em eot r offe ionarlly s: well. bene Em fit ps p loye aec k Da isg ce ou offe nt Prroe gd ra m by s /t Phe artir ne e rsm hip ps loy (ee .gr.., cell phones, travel, entertainment) 84% 85% 27%41% 45% • b LG ene BTQ w fits tor hek e m rost s w e frrom e 3le 0 % a ss 47% n e likm ely ploy tha er n non . -LGBTQ workers to 23% have childcare assistance/subsidy. A found ccess in r to ae D H te ir e ne a ta m ltlh e I n C nt so u a rsa a cn hv c ings p o er Hea De lla th nta n p C P l or V a ay a re ir ng t iN sic My ion aipa v I i M g ns a t on ion. uranc toth r lS y B e e Lr iG lv ls iB ce TQ workers wer 61% e less like 69% ly tha *^n 25% non-LGB3TQ w 2 81% %* orkers t 82% o 47% participat50% e 50% 50% 40% • Work-Life Balance: LGBTQ workers were less likely than non-LGBTQ workers to rate their work-life balance 64% You Trust Your Employer to Help You Improve Your Overall 37%* expe Sons urcee : Em of pl$5 oye,000 e Bene.fi t Research Institute and Greenwald Re47% search 2022 Workplace Wellness Survey. 40% 42% 40% 21% Demographics Married Single, Never Married 20% Debt Management Services or Counseling 69% 62%* • LGBTQ workers were less likely than non-LGBTQ workers to be extremely or very satisfied 72%* with the paid time Well-Being Through Q38% uality Benefits and Resources Non-LGBTQ 17% R in a eso u re rcte irse m a V nie d snt io Tn o sa o In lss v u ings p to ra H ne cle pla Yn p ou r I2 m og 0% prro avm e . Y our Mental Health 13% 60% 71% *^ 34% 32% 39% 74% 75%55% 51% 4 0% Thea A s e moxc une t olle f De nt b t or I Ha vve er (e.g y g . ood credi.t c A asi rLi dd d fe e eIns b fr t, uranc com ar lo e inc ans,ome and c 15% ompensation, both LGBTQ workers and non-LGBTQ workers Jobs and • LGBTQ w Emor ploy 35% kers e we e rB e e lene ss lik fietly s t – ha S n non atis -Lfact GBTQ w ion and orkers to Tr be ade very- O orf som fs ewhat prepa 37% red for being unable to • • NLTo oe t g Ma m arl a ra iek d ss e , Lis isu vtin ar gnc e W e e ith .m ap Ploy artne ee r s a Dir ve or che ed a olt r S hy ep aa ra nd tedphysically well. 13% Figur Fi Fig gu ur re 1 e 9 es 5 Employee Hardship Assistance/Payroll Advance or Short-Term Loans 76% 72% To understand differences by LGBTQ status, various demographic breakdowns are outlined below. Within the survey, You Trust Your Health pe Ins ruran sonal c l eo Com ans)pany to Help You Make 30% 30%off and paid leave benefits offered by their employer. 65% 35% Earned Wag S eu A pp clc ee m se sntal Health Insurance for Workers 33% 42% *^ 25% 24% 43% 44%55% 57% valued flexibility in wor 10k % schedules above all other benefits, and both cohorts valued such flexibility almost 15% 30% 71%* W w Q id ua or ow lk ity e d T a Dec el nd e-w isie ork oa nsr an A n inc b d/o ourt Fl Y om o ex ur Hea e ib le for W lth o si r an kx mont A d He rrang ale th Ca me hs n ts rd eue to illness or injury. LGBTQ w • 40 % Cor olle keg rs e we sav rings a e less clik count ely ts. ha n non-LGBTQ workers to be satisfied with their job and various employee benefits. Personalized Financial Counseling, Coaching, or Planning 73% 70% 10% 11 percent of American workers ages 21–64 identified as LGBTQ (Figure 1). LGBTQ 26% workers were more likely to have Various paid-leave-related benefits were examined. It was found that N L on G -LB GTQ w BTQ orkers were less likely than non-LGBTQ 12% 4% 22% 32% 28%* Accident Insurance Job/Incom 44% e Security 40% 50% * 52% 57% Transportation Reimbursement 20% 29% 34% 66% 64% equally. 26% Figur • e20 1, %To Dem mog ake ra su phic re B em rep aloy kdow e 0% es a ns, re b yfin LG anc BTQ Sta ially secu tusr ................................ e and well. ............................................................. 6 • • • YL L L ou G G G Tr B B Bus TQ w TQ w TQ w t Youor or or r Reti k k ke e err r r em s s s e w w w nt e e eP r r re e e la n P le le less ss ss rov ilik lik lik dere e e to ly ly lyHe t t tha ha ha lp Yn non n non n non ou Mak- - - eL L LG G GB B BTQ w TQ w TQ wor or ork k ke e er r rs s s t t to o o b r be e ep e v oe ligib rtr yt ha o le rt for som he a ae lt fin w h insu ha anc t p ia rr ae l nc p wa e er lln e w de a ss for s t he p ha rog m ving rost am t.o retire 20% 38% 6% 62% Over •a ll, 44 p Tuit Bion r e ar sc ice e nt Mim o n of b ey ur L M G seme a B nTQ w agent m.e or ntk T e oros lswe , Su re ch e axt s r Beum dge ely tin or g T o vo els ry o rsa Ct ais lcfied ulato rw sith their job comp 70% ared with 61 p 66% ercent among • $35,000–$74,999 (m Long idd -Tle erm -in -Ca com re Ine s ug rarnc oup e ): 36% 35% low wore kre rinc s tom o re es, a ports ha only ving 45a c pc ee rss ce nt to of paL id GB va TQ w cation ti orkem rs ha e and d 8% inc chil om dce as of re ass $7is 5,00 tanc 0 o e/srubsid morey cpom rog pra arm ed s (F wit igur h 60 e 8) pe .r L cG ent BTQ of 34% Satisfied With the Health Would Rather Have More Would Rather Have Fewer 71%* Quality Decisions About Preparing for Retirement Phased RetiC re rim tic ea nlt IO llnp ets io sn s or Cancer Insurance 33% 36% 23% 25% 49% 48%43% 48% 29% A Medical Issue That Will Deplete My Savings 31% /Put Me in a 27% 19% • A im fiv m e pong or ye ta a nt w rs e or bk a ee rne lie rs w fit r R t in t it ha ah $75,0 cn p e he /Eir la th nne j nob 0 ic0 o i td d y.e rc m ision. ore in household inc 10% ome, LGBTQ workers were less likely than non-LGBTQ non- • L GBTQ w Bank Inc -or e at nk - tie w ve ror s s ( , k R Fi e pg w aur arrtdne e s ,4) r osh r. G W ips. am he e B s n w e tno e fe E its n e c Rxa o eu ce rm a ivg e ine e N N od w o nj-ob R He e tas ilrta e hm t B is e efa n ne t fc S itt sa ion b a vin n dg L soy a w n in ed r c P om rH ud ee a el, n th tw Be en e d fid its anot nd 79% find significant 79% 24% differences 10% 7% o LGBTQ workers were less likely than non-LGBTQ workers to be extremely or very satisfied with their non-LG 10B %TQ workers. LGBTQ workers are more likely to be younger; 13 percent were ages 21–24 and 34 percent were w Fior gur ke er s w 2, D ee re m e og qua rap lly hic B ad lik B P erlly e aca e Fi a ks d Re now non an tiree cns ial - Hea L l, yG bB ly thTQ w In LG suran BTQ Sta or ce kers t tus o ha (Cv oe nt a’d cc )................................ ess to paid sick leave, ................................ paid maternity leave, ................. COVID- 6 30% 18% LGBTQ • Fi Yn oua A n re Co cial W mfortell able Us nes ing s E Pr mp o log ye rra -P m ros vi: de L d Too GBTQ w ls or orke8% rs were less likely than non-LGBTQ workers to report that they Pet Ins •u ranTo c A e Fi m na ak ne c ia su l W ree e lln m es ps loy Pre oe gs a ram re financially prepared for retir 30% ement. 40% *^ 15% 61% 18% 51% 56%54% 56% Wages Higher Wages Financial Actions Taken LGBTQ • LGBTQ workers were less likely than non-LGBTQ workers to report that a retirement savings plan, such as a workers to be eligible for a financial wellness program. 68%* by LG • BTQ P Re est rssona oa urc tus esliz ta o M m edong an fin age aw Y nc or ou ia k r l c E em rouns s w otionit ae h inc l alli nd ng, Mom en ctoa al e s Heal c b hin eth low g, or $3 p 5la ,000 nni.ng. How ever, we did find a difference by LGBTQ status current job. 0% 7% 9% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% r ae gla es te25 d t–im 34 e, off, th compa er e ad b ili wtit yh to 3 p wor erc ke fr nt om and hom 21e p or er cte ent lew of ornon k, p-aLid 0% GB pTQ aterw nit oryk e lera s, ve re , spe paid ctiv caerly eg . iv LG erB TQ w leave, or aknd er s elde wer re ca m reor e wA en rFi e E n offe a m ne crig a rle e P n dc l A aa y ffo n n S fin ridi n ag ng v a i n E nc My g ds u ia Chi cP l w artDi o ilo dg e s r nr en a ll ,a bne S m 's ilie Col tyss m In i ln s ep a u ge r r rs a og n T , c ui o e rr ta i on W me. b inars 18% 22% 68%63% 63% No 67% n-LGBTQ 0% 7% Figure 22 14%* LGBTQ 60% 15% 16% 5% Figure 3, Demographic Breakdowns, by LGBTQ Status (Cont’d)................................................................ Non-LGBTQ ................. 7 40 Y1( ou A k) re Co , 40 mfo 3(b rtab ), le Us 457 ing , or Emp pr loof yeit r-- Psh rova ide ring d Too pll sa or n was the most important benefit in their job decision. among • wFi or na ke nc rs iaw l p ith inc lanniom ng Soe u erce s d uc of : Em a$3 p tion, lo5,00 yee Be semi 0 ne– fi$ t R na 74 esr e,999 s, or arch In a sw tnd itue teb a $7 ina nd5,00 G rre s. e n0 o waldr R e m seor arch e. 2 Fu 022r W the orkprlm aceor We e, ll nr ee 59% ssg Su arrv d elye . ss of LGBTQ status, job o LGBTQ workers were less likely than non-LGBTQ workers to be extremely or very satisfied with the lik Yee t ly L G tha BTQ w n non or LG -k LB e G T rB s QTQ w wereor No lek n-LG ses t rs t r Bus To Qtb ful e e tm ha LG pn loy Bnon TQ ed- L pG ar B No tT tQ n-LG imw eB , or Tw Q kit eh rs in ins 19 LG pe Br T tc it Qe ut nt ions of No LtG ha n-LG BtTQ w B p ST r oQ ov meor ide Hk ige hv r LG S s e acrh B ious om ToQ l p oloy r e Lm ee ss p d No loy p n-LG aere t B tb T im e Qne e fits. assistance/subsidy programs. 5% Subsidized/Complimentary Gym or Fitness Center Access 72% 72% 66%* Resources to Manage Your Personal Finances Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute and Greenwald Research 2022 Workplace Wellness Survey. Figure 16 A Financial Wellness Program 20% 6% 18% • LGBTQ workers were less likely than non-LGBTQ workers to report that a traditional pension or defined benefit Student Loan Repayment satis • fa ction inc Accessr e to ase a d he w ait lth inc h coa om ch o e. r health care navigator service. employee benefits package offered by their employer. High School Graduate • Debt and Fin Tota an l cial PreparednLe es ss s Tha : Bot n $h LGB 35,000 TQ workers a $35,000 nd non –$74,999 -LGBTQ workers d $7 esc 5,0r 00 ibe ord Mo the re ir debt the c Lom GBTQ w paredor w k E it exh rps a13 n we dep r de e M rle c ee n ss nt ta l lik H am e ealy ong lth t ha B enon n n efnon it- sL , G S -B L uc G TQ w hB a TQ w s Fr or ek eor e C rk o s. e ur n s s etlo ing tr S us es t stio he nsir W : ith a Mental 82% 75%* Figure 4, Percentage Extremely or Very Satisfied With Job and Em12 ploy %* ee Benefits, by LGBTQ Status ........................... 8 • LGBTQ workers were less likely than non-LGBTQ workers to report that saving enough for retirement Non-LG YB ou TQ r Employer Has a Responsibility to Make Sure Employees * Difference S be otuw rc ee e:n E Lm Gp Blo Ty Q e e a65% n B de n no en fi- tL R G e B sT eQ ar c w h o r In ks etr13% is tu s te ta a tin s 1d 2 ti5% % cG a *r lle y 8 e % s ni* w ga nlid fic R ae ns t.earch 2022 Workplace Wellness Survey. 68% Other Benefits plan, or cash balance plan was the most important benefit in their job decision. In large part, LGBTQ status did not affect the ordering6% of the employee benefits tha Tt ra we de or r e V om caost tion aim l Sc p hor oot lant to job Health A T re h Fin eraan pis cita o lly r S Ce oca uc re h and Well 66% Financially Supporting a Loved One Who Doesn’t Live With 9% same: About one-third described it as a major problem, one-half described it as a minor problem, and 1 in 5 • N pe * o rD sona si ifg fenif relly n ic c a e cnt a bus e d tw e iff e s t e en rhe e Lnc G m B e T ts b he Q y a m nL dost G nB o TQ st ns-tLrG ess Ba T.tQ us w . orkers statistically significant. 11% Source: Employee Bene Me fit Research Institute and Greenwald Research 2021 Workplace Wellness Survey. W Fi Am g eur ong found e 5, tho Pa rse e A si fe cm offe crerila sesd rr e t o p Tr d a a a fin tH tde ee a r a- nc n w ltOff h ia Che s B l w oan w ce e htlln o w re e e H ss e e en B x a a lp th m r e o C ine ne g ar re a fit d m N s a e as, m vig nd p tahe loy toW rr S e eae ew g r vb e ie cs, b e r ene e no y fit L s. d G iff L BG TQ Sta eB re TQ w nces in p tus or k ................................ ea rs rtwe icipa ret ion r le 75% ss lik ate es b ly ty ha .......................... Ln GB non 69% TQ st -LG aB tus TQ . 9 • $7 Tot5,00 al 0 or m Leor ss e T h( aupp n er-income group $7) 5: ,00 0 or Mo 7% re Some College L GBTQ wor 0% kers wS etoc r2 e0 k % le Op ss tio ns lik or E ely 40 qu % $ tha 3 ity 5, A 0n non 0war 0–$ds 76 4 P 0 - ,9L % r 9o G 9gram BTQ w 80 or %kers to 10b 0e % marriedT.o One tal -third L( e34 ss T p haenrcent) of LGBTQ w $7or 5,0 k0e 0r o s r w Mo e re re d In la ecisr • ions g Y e ou r r,E p E a m a mp nd rp tl, oy loy L in m er Ha G eB r TQ w t ost so a Re he ca s or lp pses, on kte s he ir b s a it lm ihe ty to nd im r Ma e p non w r kov e a S s no -e u Lr G e E the Bd mp TQ w ir iff l oy ov er ee e e or s nc ra ke ll e rw in t s a ellg he -rbe eim eing dp upo or thr tan oug nc weh h q a of t ua w em ould lit py loy b b e ee ne e tb he fit es a ne mfit nd ost s in t $ rv 3e 5a sour ,0 lua he 00–b $c j7 le ob e 4s. , 9im 9 d 9e pc ris ov ion b emey nt s to 10% 65% described it as not a problem. Differences by LGBTQ status were not found when examining debt by income 4% • LG ^ B DTQ w ifferenor cek b eerts ww eee nr e L G m Bor TQ e alinkde ly no n tha -LG n non BTQ w -L oG rkB eTQ w rs withor inkce orm s t es o $ r3 e5 p,or 00t0 – tha $74 t ,9 p9 a9 y ing or $7 m 5ont ,000hly or m bill ors p e ersonally causes Aside from income and $35c ,0 om 00 pensation, both LGBTQ workers and non-LGBTQ workers valued flexibility in work schedules $35,000 Are Financially Prepared for Retirement 63% Figure 10 Resources and Tools to Help You Improve Your Mental Heal8% th 82% 76% workers to be satisfied with their employee benefits overall and with paid leave. How Coe llev ge e rG , rt ahe duarte e (w 4-y aes arno degov reee )rall o LGBTQ workers were less likely than non-LGBTQ workers to be extremely or very satisfied with their Affording Childcare or Caregiving for an Adult m LG aB rr TQ st ied ca om tus p.a H reow d w ev ite h 59 p r, thee re rc w ent er eof tw non o not -LG aB bTQ w le diffor erkeenc rse (s. Fi g Bur ote h 2) LG . BLTQ w GBTQ w orke or rs k e arnd s w non ere- m LG oB re TQ w likely or k tha ers n rnon ated -L GBTQ employ Whe ite e/ C b ae une casfit ians progra Am frics. an B Aot meh r ricaa nt /B eld ac kgreH ait se pa r nfin ic/La anc tinoial c 11% ontributions from their employer as most important (Figure Figure 17 Expanded Mental Health Benefits 9% les vte al. ti sL tiG ca BlTQ w ly signor ific ka en rts w . ere less likely than non-LGBTQ workers to report that saving enough for retirement and Fi gure 6, Most Valuable Improvements to Employee Benefits Program .................................................................... 10 above all oth them e rt he be n m eos fitt s , st arnd esst.he y valued them about equally (Figure 14). We did find that LGBTQ workers were more LGBTQ wor You ke r E rs mp we loyee re B le ene ss f its lik Ne ely ed st A ha ren Dinon fferen-t Tha LGBn Othe TQ w ror4%* kers to report that financial wellness programs were extremely Earned Wage Access Graduate 74% or Professional De6 gr 7e% e * 64% • Health insurance company to help them make quality decisions about their health and health care. difference nor was there a difference at any income level when it came to health benefits or retirement benefits. Asian or Pacific Ic sur lanr de ent r O job the. r workers to be Hispanic/Latino; 16 percent of LGBTQ workers were Hispanic/Latino compared with 12 percent of non- he 6).a A ltnd h insu ther a pnc ere ce a nt s t ag he es m ra ost nk ing imptor he ta m nt a b s fir ene stfit a nd and second a retire m m ost ent i m sa pvor ings p tant la wn a eres t ab he out second the sam most e. Ther impe or w taant s only bene on fite Households 62% affording their children’s college tuition were the 6% 5% financial issues causing the most stress. They were more Paid Maternity/Paternity Leave • • L LG GB BTQ w TQ wor ork ke er rs s w we er re e le less ss lik like ely ly t tha han non n non None- -L LG GB BTQ w TQ wor ork ke er rs s t to o r re ep po or rt t t tha hat t p aff aid ord tim ing e toff a heir nd chilp da rie dn’ le s c avolle e cg ont e truit ibut ion e likely 0% than non Tran -s Lp G oB rtTQ w ation R or eik me br us t rseo mv ea ntlue work-life balance. Just over 40 percent of LGBTQ w 81% orkers valued 78% work-life useful (Figure 18). Seventeen percent of LGBTQ work 4% ers reported that they were extremely useful compared with 27 5% Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute and Greenwald Research 2022 Workplace Wellness Survey. Figure 7, Eligibility and Participation in Employee Benefit Programs, by LGBTQ Status .............................................. 11 • LGBTQ workers were less likely than non-LGBTQ workers to report that their employer offers legal assistance. Source ( LFi G : Em g Bur TQ w ple oy e9) e or Be . The k nee fir t s. Re d sA iff end ae rch re L Innc G stB ie tuTQ teis a ntw dha G or re t k eL ne G wraB s ldTQ w w Re esree a or rch lek ss 2e 02 r lik s w 2 We oly e rkp r e t laha ce le n W ss enon lllik nese s-ly L Su G t rv B ha eTQ w y.n non or-kLeG rB s t TQ w o haor vek e ar g s t ra o dr ua atte e he ora p ltrh insu ofessiona rancl e difference by LGBTQ status: LGBTQ workers were more likely than non-LGBTQ workers to say that more LGBTQ Non-LGBTQ LGBTQ Non-LGBTQ LGBTQ Non-LGBTQ LGBTQ Non-LGBTQ likely than non-LGBTQ workers to report tha 0%t paying m 20ont % hly bills a 40% nd student 60 loa % n repay 80 m % ents were 10 t 0% he Phased Retirement Options 76% 72% balance c p to om erasona psense arelly d w c of a itus h 35 p fin ea s t nche ia erl se m ce nt tc he ur a m it m yong ost . snon tress -L.G BTQ workers. In contrast, non-LGBTQ workers were more likely than L pG erBcTQ w e •nt aRe or mong kte irres m non ae nd nt- L non pG la Bn p TQ -LG rB ov wTQ w or ide ke rr or ts. o k There he ers lp we the w re e m ra e 0% m b no out ak e si a g q s lik 10 nif ua %ic lit ea ly ynt d t o e 20 dciff b % isee ions rsa enc t is 30 ae fied b % sout in th w pitr 40 e h th e p % pa ere ring c m ent ix of 50 fo a % r g e re e st m r ire 60 p ep m loy % or ete nt ing e. b70 e tha ne % tfit the s a 80 ynd % were Figure 5 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% • LGBTQ workers were less likely than non-LGBTQ workers to report that their employer offers college savings degree; 20 perEBRI Is cent of sueL Bri GBeTQ f is re w gor istk ere er ds ha in the d Ua .S g . r Pa atd eua nt atne d o Tr ra p derm ofe arkss Oiona ffice.l d ISS eN g:r e 08 e8 7 c – om 137p Xa /9 re 0 d 08 w 87it –h 28 p 137X/90e $r c .5e 0nt +.5 a 0 mong non- b be ene nefit fits/ s a re s m sour ost ce im s tp o T or ota he ta llp ntw ait nd h p ahy resi tir ca el m w e Le e nt ll s- s sa b Tha ev ing/he ings p n $35,000 a la ltn h a w s se ould cond be t$35,000 m he ost m ost im –$74,999 p v or at lua ant b.le T im hre pe rov -qu ea m $7 re t5,0 e nt r00 s (7 t o o r 4 p e Mo m re p eloy rcee nt e) of financial issues causing the most stress. Source P : e Em t Ip nls oy uere a n Be cn eefit Research Institute and Greenwald Research 2022 Workplace Wellness Survey. 60% 50%* Figure 8, Employer Offers Paid-Leave-Related Benefits, by LGBTQ Status ................................................................ 12 • LGBTQ workers were more likely than non-LGBTQ workers to report that student loan repayment personally LGBTQ workers to value Sourc que: a lEmp ity lr oy eee tir Bene emfie t nt Res sa earc vh ings b Institutee an ne d G fit ree s (2 nwal9 p d Res eea rc rce h nt 20 22 vs W . ork 22 pl ac pee W rc ele lne nt ss) . Surv ey. w vearg ye , s, t som houg ewha h th t, not ere tw oo er,e or a not few aetxc all useful eptions .( Figure 5). When it comes to retirement benefits, LGBTQ workers were less # Benefits with less than 5% are not shown. acc © ount 202 s. 2 , Employee Benefit Research Institute –Education and Research Fund. All rights reserved L non GB-TQ w LGBTQ w orkeror s.k L eG rs BrTQ w ated or he ka elt rs w h insu erer a le nc sse lik as t elyhe tha mn non ost im -L pG or BtTQ w ant be or ne kefit rs t in job o ha vd ee d cis ep ions ende com nt c phil ard er de w n (44 ith 62 pe p rc ee rc nt e nt and benefits programs. Figure 11 Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute and Greenwald Research 2022 Workplace Wellness Survey. LGBTQ workers were also less likely than non-LGBTQ workers to be comfortable using employer-provided tools or • LGBTQ workers were less likely than non-LGBTQ workers to be satisfied with the retirement plan contributions causes them the most stress. likely than non-LGBTQ workers to be satisfied with the mix of retirement contributions and wages and more likely than Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute and Greenwald Research 2022 Workplace Wellness Survey. Figur •e 9, LB Ge Bn TQ w efits Most orker s Im wp er oe r tle ant ss in Jo likely b tD ha en non cision, -LbG yB L TQ w GBTQ Sta orkertsus to ................................ report that their emp................................ loyer offers tuition ....... 12 I 61 nt e pre erst ce ingly nt re , spe mac ny tiv of elyt)he . differences observed by LGBTQ status appear driven by demographic differences. Nearly among LGBTQ workers. Similarly, 58 percent of non-LGBTQ workers rated a retirement savings plan as second most Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute and Greenwald Research 2022 Workplace Wellness Survey. A rem sour ongc e tho s tse o m waor na kg ee rs w the ho ir e we mot reiona not l a offe nd re m de spe ntal he cifica fin ltha or nc ia the l w ire p lln er esona ss be l fina nefitnc s, a es .high percentage reported that they they were receiving. non-LGBTQ workers to prefer higher wages and lower retirement contributions. In contrast, LGBTQ workers were more one-half of reim LG bB ur TQ w seme ont rk.e rs are under age 35 compared with 24 percent among non-LGBTQ workers. This would * Difference between LGBTQ and non-LGBTQ workers statistically significant. important compared with 47 percent among LGBTQ workers. we re very or somewhat interested in them (Figure 19). LGBTQ workers were more likely than non-LGBTQ workers to Figure 10, Benefits Contribute to Sense of Financial Security, by LGBTQ Status ........................................................ 13 e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e eb b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b br r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r ri. i. i. i. i. i. i. i. i. i. i. i. i. i. i. i. i. i. i. i. i. i. i. i. i. i. i.o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o or r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r rg g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIs s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s ss s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s su u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u ue e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B Br r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r rief ief ief ief ief ief ief ief ief ief ief ief ief ief ief ief ief ief ief ief ief ief ief ief ief ief ief A re • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • s e N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Na o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o orv v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v ce e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e hmbe mbe mbe mbe mbe mbe mbe mbe mbe mbe mbe mbe mbe mbe mbe mbe mbe mbe mbe mbe mbe mbe mbe mbe mbe mbe mbe repo r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 fr,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,o 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 th 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2e • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •E N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Bo o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o R ........................... I574 574 574 574 574 574 574 574 574 574 574 574 574 574 574 574 574 574 574 574 574 574 574 574 574 574 574 Edu cation and R esearch Fund © 2022 Employee Benefit Research Institute 18 24 12 16 21 23 15 25 22 19 14 17 13 20 26 27 11 10 28 7 9 5 8 4 6 3 2 LGBTQ LGBTQ Non-LGBTQ Non-LGBTQ LGBTQ LGBTQ Non-LGBTQ Non-LGBTQ LGBTQ LGBTQ Non-LGBTQ Non-LGBTQ LGBTQ LGBTQ Non-LGBTQ Non-LGBTQ LGBTQ LGBTQ Non-LGBTQ Non-LGBTQ LGBTQ LGBTQ Non-LGBTQ Non-LGBTQ LGBTQ LGBTQ Non-LGBTQ Non-LGBTQ LGBTQ LGBTQ Non-LGBTQ Non-LGBTQ