Next year, you’ll likely pay more for your workplace health benefits, but you may have to read the fine print to figure out where the bite will come.

As companies head into open-enrollment season, when they let employees pick their plans for next year, many firms say they are reluctant to boost health-care premiums too sharply at a time when wages are stagnant. Instead, workers can expect to pay significantly more for such out-of-pocket items as deductibles, co-payments and other fees.

Employees’ charges next year are expected to jump 10.1% from 2008, to an average of $1,880, according to a recent projection by Hewitt Associates, a benefits consulting firm. By contrast, health-care premiums are expected to rise 7.8%, after posting double-digit percentage gains in four of the last five years. In 2008, out-of-pocket costs also increased 10.1%.

Workers are generally on the hook for various fees whenever they visit a doctor, fill a prescription or go to a hospital. These costs can vary depending on the type of health plan they choose. Hewitt says the average employee spends only about five to 15 minutes on open enrollment, and nearly two-thirds of workers select the same option they picked the previous year. So many people may not notice any new charges, which often aren’t as obvious as changes in premiums. Of course, they’ll probably figure it out once they start getting bills.

Lauralee Schiraga, a nurse from Brewster, Mass., says she was surprised when she was billed $250 last month for a breast biopsy that had been done to check on a suspicious mass. Around the same time, she got another $250 charge, this time for an endoscopy ordered by her doctor after she had digestive problems. She called her health insurer and was told the bills were her co-payments for the out-patient procedures.

“It never occurred to me for one second they would charge me $250 for an outpatient procedure,” says Ms. Schiraga, who says she could only afford to send $50 initially to each hospital. “I was beside myself.” Afterward, when she closely reviewed the benefits information from her employer, she found the co-payment listed in the middle of a page full of small text. Next year she plans to set aside money for such expenses.

Employers say another reason they are raising fees at a faster pace than premiums is fairness: Higher fees place a greater cost burden on workers with the highest expenses. Forcing employees to pay charges out-of-pocket also makes them more aware of how expensive medical services really are, some employers say.

“Folks don’t know how much things cost,” says Robert Meyer, vice president and co-owner of Johnstone Supply of Atlanta, a wholesaler of heating and cooling equipment. “Health care is one of the few things your average consumer doesn’t shop for.”

Starting last month, Johnstone sharply increased the maximum employees are required to pay out-of-pocket for self-injectable drugs, such as the rheumatoid arthritis treatment Enbrel. It raised co-payments only slightly, and didn’t boost employee premiums. Johnstone also began for the first time requiring all of its workers to pay a deductible, which will be $2,500 for an individual. The company plans to offset the cost of deductibles through health-reimbursement arrangements, which are tax-advantaged accounts that allow employers to set aside money for workers’ health expenses.

Getty Images

Linda Hoffman and her granddaughter, Riley Bulnes, 4, pick up prescriptions from a Publix Supermarket in Miami, Florida.

Higher costs can prompt some people to forgo care that may be needed. A forthcoming survey by human-resources consultant Watson Wyatt Worldwide, which tallied 2,487 American workers this spring, found that cost concerns had driven 17% of them to skip a recommended doctor visit. The same percentage had failed to fill a prescription or had skipped doses.

If you are choosing your workplace health plan soon, here are some things to watch.

Paying Your Share

For services such as doctor visits, hospital stays, outpatient procedures and imaging scans, keep an eye out for higher co-payments. These can kick in whether you are in a traditional preferred provider organization plan, which offers more coverage for care provided by preferred doctors, or a health-maintenance organization plan, which traditionally requires participants to use approved physicians for nearly all services.

Also be alert for shifts from flat co-pays to co-insurance charges, which typically require you to pay a percentage of the total cost of a service and often take far more out of your wallet.

Briggs & Stratton Corp., a Milwaukee-based maker of small engines and lawn mowers, has done away with most co-payments in its main plans — a standard preferred-provider organization and a high-deductible option. In the standard PPO, workers pay 20% for all medical services with providers in the plan’s network, including doctor visits. That comes with an in-network, out-of-pocket annual maximum of $5,500 for an individual and $11,000 for a family. “There’s a much better case for shopping around” among medical providers if employees are paying a percentage of the cost of care, rather than a flat co-pay, says R. Craig Reynolds, the corporate director of employee benefits.

Fees can be structured in different, and sometimes confusing, ways. Some employers’ plans may demand a co-payment for each day you’re in the hospital, while other plans levy a fee for each stay. Ken Goulet, president of WellPoint Inc.’s commercial business unit, warns that in certain employer plans, a hospital admission may require a co-payment, and then separate co-insurance charges for services during the hospital stay. “Don’t just think, ‘Wow, a $200 co-pay, this is great,’” he says. “It may not just be a co-pay.”

Some employers also are raising the maximum workers are responsible for paying in out-of-pocket costs each year. One tricky twist is for the annual deductible not to count toward that cap, sharply increasing the total you could spend.

Taking Your Medicine

Keep a close eye on your medications. Most employees by now are accustomed to paying less for generics than for brand-name drugs. But if your employer tweaks the design of the drug benefit, the changes may have a substantial impact on your costs, or even knock your drug off the approved list altogether. In a recent employer survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation and the Health Research & Educational Trust, 41% of those offering health benefits said they were very or somewhat likely to increase workers’ drug expenses in the next year.

Drugs injected in a doctor’s office, which are often high-priced medications for such diseases as cancer, are one area to watch. Some plans that have lumped these in with the co-pay for physician visits may now charge separately for the medicine.

Eric Smith, a middle-school technology teacher in Dalton, Ga., who gets his health benefits through a state agency, has to pick a new HMO this fall because his plan will no longer be offered next year. He expects his premiums to go up by about $12 a month. But his drug costs will rise much more sharply, by more than $50 a month, mainly because of two brand-name medicines he takes that aren’t on the state’s preferred list; he says cheaper alternatives didn’t work as well. “That just negated my raise this year,” he says.

Filling Your Needs

Check for coverage of any care you know you will need; don’t assume it is included. Some employers looking to limit costs may trim certain benefits, though this isn’t expected to be widespread. Consultants say they’ve seen some clients cut back in areas including physical therapy and speech therapy. You should watch for limits on equipment such as hearing aids and prosthetics.

Once you’ve done your due diligence on the coverage options, decide what’s best for you. You may opt for a plan with more out-of-pocket charges and a lower premium. At the most extreme, there are high-deductible plans paired with health-savings accounts, a model being pushed by many employers but slow to catch on with workers. The key is to understand the real costs and coverage you get with each of the plan options.

McDonald’s Corp., for instance, offers its 18,000 eligible U.S. employees three different PPOs. The most popular is the one with the highest premiums, but no deductible and a flat co-pay for doctor visits. The plan with the lowest premium comes with a $1,000 deductible for a single employee and a company-funded health-reimbursement arrangement. In the middle is a plan with a $250 deductible and a 20% co-insurance charge for in-network doctor visits. McDonald’s offers online tools to help employees choose. Says Bob Wittcoff, the company’s senior director of global benefits: “One size does not fit all.”

Write to Anna Wilde Mathews at anna.mathews@wsj.com

Printed in The Wall Street Journal, page D1

By SIMONA COVEL

When it comes to cutting costs during tough economic times, many small businesses start out with a disadvantage: They don’t have all that many costs to cut. Even during good times, small businesses tend to keep expenses pretty tight.

The result is that small companies often have to get creative in their efforts to find waste in places where little exists.

Here’s a look at four companies that have cut their overhead expenses without sacrificing inventory, daily necessities or their employees:

Tracking the Trucks

Kenneth Bravmann, an operations consultant at Marjam Supply Co., knew the building-supply company was wasting money on gas and losing efficiency when drivers got lost. And he found out just how much after the company installed Global Positioning System equipment in most of its 165 flatbed trucks, which haul supplies to construction sites.

The Brooklyn, N.Y., company began installing the equipment about 18 months ago, and executives quickly realized wrong turns weren’t the only money wasters. “Now we know where our trucks are,” Mr. Bravmann says, “and we make sure [drivers] aren’t going out of route or stopping at home [or] at their girlfriend’s place.” In the early days, about 15% of the truck drivers had to be reprimanded for driving off route.

Drivers now are more efficient — and even more cautious since the system also transmits the trucks’ speed. A dispatcher monitors the trucks’ locations and time spent at each stop. And the GPS boxes transmit whether a truck is sitting idle, which wastes fuel and is illegal in some localities.

Some drivers griped. “They took it as Big Brother” watching, Mr. Bravmann says, but all the drivers appreciate having the system when they get lost.

Each GPS device costs $450 to $600, plus $100 for installation. The subscription fee is $26 per month per box.

Mr. Bravmann says it’s difficult to place a dollar value on the savings; drivers’ time is a big part of it. Altogether, he estimates, the company is saving about 10% of the cost of running the trucks.

The company is considering upgrading to a more sophisticated system that tracks how long a driver spends at certain types of stops, in order to track which drivers are the most efficient and who is lagging behind.

Filling the Store With Fakes

George Falzon, the owner of jewelry store G. Falzon & Co. in Holliston, Mass., has been hit by high metal prices and a tough economy — dual pressures that are weighing down small jewelers nationwide.

That left him with lots of pricey display bridal jewelry sitting around. So about four months ago, Mr. Falzon began stocking his store with different types of displays: faux pieces.

The new display engagement and wedding rings come from one of his usual vendors, a line called Authentix by wholesaler Overnight Mountings Inc. But the jewelry isn’t real gold or platinum. It’s crafted of plated silver, with cubic zirconium centers. He readily tells customers that the display pieces are replicas. Since most bridal jewelry is special-ordered anyway, customers generally don’t mind, he says. The real pieces take about a week to arrive.

Having lower-cost replicas serve as display pieces is saving Mr. Falzon about $75,000 in inventory at any given time. That means he can spend less than he did before and offer four times as many styles of engagement rings and wedding bands.

“This program puts me in the same league as a chain store with deep pockets” in terms of selection, he says.

Mr. Falzon does keep a few real gold and platinum settings in the store, he adds, “if the guy wants to get on his knee that night.”

Find the Little Things

Like banks across the country, Connecticut Community Bank N.A. has seen the value of real estate decline and nonperforming assets increase over the past few months. So the Westport, Conn., bank, which has nine branches across the state, went on the hunt for expenses that could be trimmed — and didn’t come in the form of salaries or benefits.

Working with Expense Reduction Analysts Inc., a consulting company in Carlsbad, Calif., that helps businesses cut expenses, the bank’s staff pored over the company’s office-supply and printing expenditures — a common culprit for wasteful spending, according to Expense Reduction Chief Executive Ken Hagerstrom.

Expense Reduction found that simply by ordering larger quantities of printed materials like forms and letterhead less frequently, the bank could take advantage of the printer’s bulk discount. Similarly, by using one vendor for office supplies rather than three, the company could place larger orders and pay less.

Altogether, says Bill Laudano, Connecticut Community Bank’s chief financial officer, the bank expects to trim 10% from its office-supply and printing budgets annually. ERA’s Mr. Hagerstrom estimates that will add up to about $40,000 a year.

Next up, the company plans to take a look at telecom expenses, evaluating its phone, fax and Internet services.

Losing the Office

Alliance Home Mortgage Inc. closes 15 to 20 transactions a month these days, down from as many as 60 a few years ago. And its staff is down to five people, from 15.

Paul Vitale, president of the Boca Raton, Fla., mortgage provider, has seen many of his competitors in the same predicament eventually close their doors forever. And he wanted to avoid that fate.

He considered putting personal money into the business. It was something he had seen a few of his contemporaries do — but some ended up going out of business anyway. So he decided it was time to make drastic cuts to the company’s overhead expenses.

And Mr. Vitale knew the big culprit was his $10,500 monthly rent.

At first, he looked into a lower-cost alternative, executive suites, which are small offices that house one or two desks and cost about $800 each per month. But he would have needed two or three to fit all of the company’s staff, an arrangement that wasn’t ideal.

Instead, Mr. Vitale decided to forgo office space altogether. He signed up with CES Virtual Offices, a company that offers clients a receptionist to answer calls, a corporate mailing address, and email and fax services — all while the staff works from home.

CES forwards calls and faxes. Voicemails are delivered to Mr. Vitale’s home phone and are also sent to his email inbox as sound files. Faxes are sent via email as PDFs. If Alliance Home Mortgage’s staffers want to meet clients in person, they can go online and book local conference-room space provided by CES.

Mr. Vitale spends about $500 per month altogether for the virtual-office setup. He doesn’t cover employees’ home-office expenses, but he does offer an extra 5% commission to his salespeople as compensation — which generally comes to between $1,000 and $2,000 per month. Because that expense is correlated with sales, it’s easier to manage than extra rent, he adds.

Mr. Vitale’s most potent fears — that email or fax forwarding wouldn’t work — have been unfounded, he says. He does miss the camaraderie of an office. “But when I think about the money I’m saving,” he says, “I don’t miss it quite as much.”

Write to Simona Covel at simona.covel@wsj.com

Printed in The Wall Street Journal, page B5

Por JEFF BENNETT

DETROIT— Ford Motor Co. registró una ganancia neta récord en el cuarto trimestre gracias a una desgravación fiscal extraordinaria, aunque las menores ventas en los mercados europeos y las pérdidas de producción causadas por las recientes inundaciones en Tailandia redujeron la rentabilidad de la automotriz.

La ganancia neta fue de US$13.600 millones, o US$3,40 por acción, lo que se compara con el beneficio de US$190 millones, o 5 centavos por acción registrado en el mismo período del año anterior. La empresa registró la mayor ganancia para un cuarto trimestre de su historia.

Los ingresos fueron de US$34.600 millones.

Bloomberg News

Si se excluye el beneficio extraordinario, la ganancia de Ford fue de US$1.100 millones, o 20 centavos por acción, inferior a la estimación de los analistas de 25 centavos por acción, lo que refleja la desaceleración de las ventas automotrices en Europa y los problemas provocados por las inundaciones en Tailandia. La automotriz con sede en Dearborn, Michigan, informó una ganancia de 30 centavos por acción en el mismo período del año anterior.

“Cumplimos con la mayoría de nuestros objetivos pese a una serie de desafíos”, dijo el viernes el presidente ejecutivo de Ford, Lewis Booth. “Vimos un deterioro en el ambiente externo. Europa sigue siendo desafiante y permanecerá así por un tiempo”.

La empresa señaló que su pérdida operacional antes de impuestos se amplió de US$51 millones en el mismo período del año anterior, a US$190 millones, debido a mayores costos de materiales y menores ventas.

El impacto tributario de US$12.400 millones provino de la decisión de Ford de revertir una exención de valuación que realizó en 2006 contra activos tributarios diferidos, cuando la empresa se encontraba en medio de cuatro años de pérdidas operativas y menores ventas en EE.UU. Según la normativa contable, Ford debe retirar la valuación una vez que comience lo que considera un periodo de rentabilidad.

Para el año, la empresa reportó una ganancia neta de US$20.200 millones, o US$4,94 por acción, frente al beneficio de US$6.600 millones, o US$1,66 por acción en el mismo periodo del año anterior. Fue la tercera ganancia anual consecutiva para la empresa.

By BILL TOMSON

The fungicide found in orange juice made by Coca-Cola Co. and PepsiCo Inc. was federally approved for use on oranges as recently as 2009 and is considered safe for dozens of other U.S. crops.

The FDA is beginning to release results from orange juice tested for fungicide, but did not test any oranges from Brazil, Leslie Josephs reports on Markets Hub. (Photo: Reuters)

Federal regulators halted orange-juice imports for testing this month for a procedural reason: The approval had expired and no one had sought to have the fungicide reapproved for use on oranges.

The chemical, called carbendazim, is approved by the Environmental Protection Agency for use on apricots, bananas, cherries, grapes, peaches, pears and other crops. The EPA also approved its use on apples and allows for small amounts of it in apple juice.

The EPA approves fungicides and sets safety tolerances for residues. The Food and Drug Administration is responsible for making sure the food industry complies. Ships carrying orange-juice imports remain idled in U.S. ports while FDA officials test for traces of the fungicide. The testing set off swings in orange-juice futures this month.

FDA Deputy Commissioner for Foods Michael Taylor said the agency must examine the juice because the chemical isn’t currently registered with the EPA for use on oranges.

“If we just turned our eyes from that and allowed chemical residue in because this particular residue is not posing a public health concern, we could totally take away the incentive for folks to…ensure that the product they bring in here does not contain illegal pesticide residues,” Mr. Taylor said.

A spokesman for Coca-Cola declined to comment Friday. The company, which makes Simply Orange and Minute Maid juice, found carbendazim in its and competitors’ orange juice imported from Brazil and reported the finding to the FDA on Dec. 28. The FDA began testing all imported orange juice Jan. 4 and launched tests of products on retailers’ shelves. Last week, PepsiCo said it had found traces of the fungicide in its Tropicana orange juice. Both companies said the levels of the chemical weren’t unsafe.

A PepsiCo spokesman Friday said in an email message: “We take this matter seriously, support the FDA’s approach to ensure the safety of the orange juice supply and will follow the Agency’s guidance.”

Fungicides can be hazardous to people who are exposed to them at high levels, according to National Pesticide Information Center. Children, pregnant women and sick or aging people are among the most sensitive.

Doug Archer, a former FDA deputy director, called the discovery of fungicide in orange juice a “technical violation,” that didn’t deserve the “overdone” reaction by the FDA. “The chemical is approved for lots of different crops and people are already exposed to it,” he said.

The EPA approved carbendazim for oranges between 2002 and 2009, and for certain years before then. DuPont Co. made a carbendazim-containing fungicide that Florida farmers used to fight post-bloom fruit drop, a fungal disease that damages orange groves. In April 2001, DuPont told the EPA it no longer wanted to sell the product, according to EPA documents and the company. The EPA canceled the company’s registration for it 19 months later.

But orange growers still needed protection from post-bloom fruit drop. In 2002, the state of Florida asked the EPA to issue a temporary “emergency” approval for a different type of fungicide containing carbendazim. The EPA concluded “no harm will result to the general population and to infants and children from aggregate exposure,” according to a report on its decision. The agency approved the request.

The EPA granted several more temporary approvals to use carbendazim on oranges, and the most recent expired Dec. 31, 2009. EPA spokesman Dale Kemery said the agency temporarily approved the chemical because other alternatives weren’t available, and it was needed to prevent a severe threat of economic loss. He said other fungicides became available after that so the chemical was no longer needed.

Sterling Ivey, a spokesman for the Florida Department of Agriculture, said the state stopped petitioning the EPA to renew the emergency approval for carbendazim in 2009 because “alternative pesticides were becoming available to control fungal diseases in citrus” at the same time that “EPA’s approval process for emergency exemptions was becoming more rigorous.”

Cerexagri Inc., a division of the French chemical company Arkema that operated in the U.S., said in 2002 it began selling carbendazim fungicide to Florida orange producers under the EPA’s temporary approval. Cerexagri was bought by the Mumbai-based United Phosphorus Ltd. in 2007 and still sells the fungicide in the U.S., though not to orange growers.

“The whole market is freaking out about [carbendazim] in orange juice when in reality they could be getting much larger, perfectly…legal, doses” in other foods, said Todd Fujimoto, a director at juice maker Leahy IFP. He said customers were asking for guarantees their juice didn’t contain the fungicide.

Write to Bill Tomson at bill.tomson@dowjones.com