New health insurance

[Dave Lehnert]

Warning!!!

THIS IS NOT A POST ABOUT THE NATIONAL HEALTH CARE DEBATE. SO PLEASE DO NOT GO THERE.

I work for a Fortune 500 company and we had our yearly insurance meeting.
Noticed a change that will not affect me because I have over 20 years in but for new hires into the company they will have to be employed for 3 years before their family members will be able to get health insurance.
I have never heard of this before. Is this something others have seen?

[Mitchell Andrus]

Well, if it's a fringe benefit... like teacher's tenure, some things have to be earned before you get them.

If you can't even buy into the company policy for 3 years... I'd contact a lawyer to see if that's legal in their state.
.

[Paul Ryan]

Well, if it's a fringe benefit... like teacher's tenure, some things have to be earned before you get them.

If you can't even buy into the company policy for 3 years... I'd contact a lawyer to see if that's legal in their state.
.

I second this. As important as the health care debate is today. Not allowing employees to purchase health care for their family from a companies provider may raise some eyebrows. If the insurance is provided free of charge for employees and their family I can certanly understand. That is a large benifit that not every employee deserves unless they have proved their loyalty and worth.

[Dennis McGarry]

If the plan is subsidized in anyway by the company, they can choose who other then the employee is eligible for coverage. Including when and for how much.

If there is a group plan, which most are, they are only obligated to offer it to the actual individual unless its a POS (point of service plan)

Companies are looking for any way they can to cost their own internal cost of health coverage, usually that means the costs are either passed on to the employee or parts are eliminated completly.

You said its a Fortune 500, shoot me a PM with the name, I along with spouse work for the company that handles 85% of all Fortune 500 compaines health insurance and with annual enrollment just around the corner, I might be able to dig up some more information..

[Mike Henderson]

At one time AT&T had a policy that a new employee had to pay for their health insurance for six months (I think it was) before the company picked it up. It was the company health policy but the employee had to pay all of the monthly costs.

All that meant was that we had to add a hiring bonus to pay for the six months of health insurance when we hired someone because otherwise they simply would not have accepted the job. It was a dumb, dumb, dumb policy - and so is your company's policy. The best people will go elsewhere if they have to pick up the cost for three years for their family. Or your company will only hire single people.

Those kind of decisions have unintended consequences.

Mike

[Dave Lehnert]

At one time AT&T had a policy that a new employee had to pay for their health insurance for six months (I think it was) before the company picked it up. It was the company health policy but the employee had to pay all of the monthly costs.

All that meant was that we had to add a hiring bonus to pay for the six months of health insurance when we hired someone because otherwise they simply would not have accepted the job. It was a dumb, dumb, dumb policy - and so is your company's policy. The best people will go elsewhere if they have to pick up the cost for three years for their family. Or your company will only hire single people.

Those kind of decisions have unintended consequences.

Mike

That was my thought. How would you ever hire anyone unless this is going to be a trend.
We noticed it in the meeting but was not too concerned with it as most of us has been with the company for a very long time and we have had a hiring freeze for over a year now.
We wondered if it was a misprint. Should have read 3 months , not years. 3 months would be common.

[Jeffrey Makiel]

Some companies require that you stay employed with them for a period of time before the company's group plan kicks in. Three years seems like a long time though. But, health care costs are in an upward spiral...at least here in New Jersey. Companies are looking for a way to reduce the burden, and with the labor market being tight, companies have the upper hand.

Many companies are also requiring new employees to pay a certain percentage of the premium. Even federal employees and government elected officials are required to pay 25% of the premium. However, these group rates are much, much lower than independent insurance for the self employed, unemployed and stay at home person.

The employer based health care model is very old in the US. It dates back to the Henry Ford era where he required all employees to buy suits, go to church, learn English, and have a bank account. However, things are changing and employer based health care is the last hold out. Remember employee pension plans?

Getting into a group rate plan within a fortune 500 company is one of the best deals around...even if you have to pay the full load. Often, pre-existing conditions is not an issue either.

-Jeff

[Joe Pelonio]

Most all employers are looking at ways to save money in these times. Mine is totally paid now, but starting January 1st we will have to pay about $75/month (for myself, and 3 dependents) but another alternative they considered, which may come up again is paying only for the employee, and dependents would be optional at our own expense at the group rates. The most common change I've heard of is to offer HMO paid, but other plans they pay the same as the HMO and you pay the difference.

[Jeffrey Makiel]

... but another alternative they considered, which may come up again is paying only for the employee....

Interesting, I thought I just saw something in the news that UPS is adopting this policy.

-Jeff

[Mike Henderson]

Interesting, I thought I just saw something in the news that UPS is adopting this policy.

-Jeff

UPS is union. It's hard to believe the union would agree to such a contract change.

Mike

[JohnT Fitzgerald]

Wow, I've not heard of that before. My company offers not only to employees and family, but also "domestic partners". There are different rates for individual, ind+1 (such as a couple), and "family" (someone with kids). As far as legal....check the laws in your area but I don't know if I've ever heard of a company being required to extend benefits to anyone past the employee.

[Dave Lehnert]

As far as the law goes I would THINK that a company could offer any package they wanted to just as long it was fair across the broad.
Now if they were to offer one employee one thing and something else to another then there would be a problem.
Correct me if I'm wrong but your employer does not have to offer insurance at all if they chose to???????

[Montgomery Scott]

My company does not pay for medical or dental plans for its temporary employees like myself. The employee may pay full cost for these plans which are offered through the company so we do get the benefit of the group discount. People who do not want insurance or who want an HSA, as many do, do not have to participate. I pay about $13k for medical / dental a year which is about average for a good plan.

I rather like this option as it gives the most flexibility for the employee and their family.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

California has some really different laws when it comes to employee benefits etc. but in most states I have never heard that an employer has to offer any benefits other than pay for labor.

I work for a really large corporation. While parts of the complany are unionized, some of it isn't and where I work isn't. We are provided health and dental insurance but of course, we have to pay our portion of it. Recently the deductibles increased dramatically from their historical levels.

[Joe Mioux]

Being a small business owner, I have to pay for my family's health insurance out of pocket.

A $2500 deductible and $5000 insurance premiums is my plan.

I wish all people had to pay for their own health insurance, it would force shopping around for the best medical value. Ex: when we had a last kid back in 2000, two hospitals were $1500 different in their respective ob costs. We chose the cheaper of the two hospitals. My wife doesn't do epiderals, but the hosp brought it into the room and they charged us. Anna called the hospital and said she didn't use it so take it off the bill. Had we had baby insurance, we would not have checked how to save money.

also, her Dr, reduced his fee by $1800 if we prepayed him for his services. we saved over $4000 by paying cash and being diligent and reviewing the itemized expenses.

if the above statement sounds too political, mods, please remove. I was attempting to interject economics into this thread.

joe