An offer letter shows base pay. It rarely shows the premium contribution, the deductible, the disability coverage or the account deposits that come with it. For employers competing on total package rather than salary alone, we build the document that puts both sides on the same footing, honestly, including where your package is not the stronger one.
A list of plan names persuades nobody. A benefits package persuades when an employee can see what the same protection would cost them somewhere else.
A higher salary with a larger premium deduction can take home less. We show the annual employee contribution at each tier, because that is the number a competing offer rarely states. Showing annual contributions makes benefits comparisons fair. Take-home pay is the real comparison.
Deductibles and out-of-pocket maximums decide what a bad year costs a family. For an employee managing a known condition, this line can outweigh a salary difference. Out-of-pocket exposure is a key part of benefits value. A bad year is where plans differ most for a family.
Employer-paid disability, life coverage and HSA deposits never appear in an offer letter, yet would cost the employee real money to buy individually, and some would require medical underwriting. Showing hard-to-replace coverage strengthens retention messaging. Some of it would require medical underwriting to buy.
For employees weighing contract or self-employed work, an estimate of the employer-paid coverage they would have to replace can help them weigh the offer. Such a figure is an estimate only, not a quote, and the actual cost of replacement coverage depends on the plan, the individual and the market when they apply.
Employees considering an offer compare numbers carefully. A document that overstates value damages trust at the moment you most need it.
We count what the employee would actually lose by leaving, not every program on the books. Leaving out a perk nobody uses makes the total more credible, not less. Counting only real value makes retention messaging credible. Padding makes the total less believable.
If your deductible is high or your family contribution is above market, the document should not hide it. Managers need to know that before the conversation, not in the middle of it. Honest comparisons prepare managers for retention conversations. Surprises hurt credibility.
Claims about value are checked against market contribution and out-of-pocket data first, so the word “competitive” refers to something specific. Market-tested claims keep retention messaging accurate and give managers numbers they can defend when an employee checks. Specific beats vague.
Retention decisions happen in manager conversations, recruiting calls and counteroffers. The material has to be ready for all three.
A one-page summary for candidates that turns the package into annual dollar values, so a lower salary offer is judged against the whole package rather than the base alone. Annual dollar values help candidates compare total rewards. The whole package competes, not just salary.
When a valued employee has another offer, a personal comparison built on their own coverage and tier gives the manager facts rather than impressions. Personal comparisons strengthen counteroffer conversations with facts about the employee’s own coverage and costs. Facts beat impressions.
Managers explain benefits poorly because nobody explained the benefits to them. A short briefing with the numbers lets them answer the question they are actually asked. Short briefings help managers explain benefits clearly and answer the questions employees actually ask about their coverage.
No. It is a comparison, and a fair one includes the parts of your package that are weaker. Employees trust it precisely because it is not one-sided. Balanced comparisons make retention messaging trustworthy. Employees trust a comparison that admits where the package is weaker.
Then the document shows that, and it becomes an input to the next renewal. Sometimes the answer is a contribution change rather than a raise, and we model both. Market comparisons can shape the next renewal strategy. It becomes a renewal input.
Not usually. We use market data by size, industry and region, and when an employee shares a competing offer, we can compare it directly with their permission. Market data makes retention comparisons practical without asking employees for sensitive details from a competing offer.
How a Section 127 program lets employers help with school and loans tax-free.
Designing an employer repayment program and what it costs.
What borrowers have to decide after the 2026 federal changes.
The laws and rules named on this page link to the statute or regulation they come from. This is general information, not legal or tax advice, and rules change, so check the current text.
Tax rules for health savings accounts paired with qualifying high-deductible health plans.
We’ll tell you whether it looks competitive, where we see opportunity, and the five questions we’d put to your carrier. No cost, and no obligation to move anything.
The renewal letter
Your current plan summary
Contribution split by tier
Enrolled counts by tier
Four documents — two more if your group is 50 or more. Nothing else; every extra one is a reason to postpone.
An independent employee benefits consulting firm. We look at the entire benefits program — cost, plan performance, risk and administration.
Switch to CFH. Unhappy with your broker? Your employees won’t notice. You will. →
We use cookies to keep the site working properly and to understand how it is used. You can decline anything that is not essential. See our Privacy Policy for the detail.