|
Due
to the time gap between “deadline” and “publication” of Chaparral,
I am responsible for an error in information in the last issue which I
will correct herewith. I am also responsible for a personal
opinion which I will reiterate.
First, the reiteration: I firmly believe that it is impossible
for the college to continue paying the premiums on our current form of
health coverage. If you have not been keeping up with the issue,
please ask all your friends who are public employees, private business
employees, or self-employed. Ask them about health care costs.
I guarantee you will appreciate what you have when you hear their
costs and coverages.
Second, the correction: When I wrote last time, the
administration representative at the committee had only spoken about
Plan Modification, not Premium out of Paycheck. Plan Modification
means that we would pay more when
we use medical care, but not pay every month for part of the
insurance premium.
Unfortunately, after I turned in my Chaparral
article, the administration heard that the Guild had urged members to
“Just Say No” to the health insurance survey. The
administration decided without consultation with the unions at the
committee (which met October 8) to go into negotiations with a Premium
out of Paycheck approach as well as Plan Modifications. This
change in approach was a total surprise to me and other committee
members. I am disappointed that both "sides" did not
respect the committee role: the union did not seek full cooperation of
members to obtain good survey data and the district did not fully
disclose its plans to the committee.
Due to all of this, I must correct my statement: On October
10, the district officially said to the Guild that it wants us (at least
those in Blue Shield PPO and Kaiser) to pay part of the premium every
month. Here’s what I think about this Hobson’s choice.
I dislike Premium out of Paycheck (aka POOP) for the following
reasons: it makes almost every employee (except those in the lowest cost
HMO plan) pay every
month by paycheck deductions even if they rarely utilize
their health care. This penalizes the healthy and does not create
a real incentive to care for ourselves. We would probably just get
used to lower take-home pay and then forget that we are now paying
regularly for what we do not use. I consider this approach a last
resort if all other Plan Modification
approaches
are fiscally unworkable.
I favor Plan Modification for the following reasons: it places
responsibility on the health care consumer (us) to make good choices
about preventive care, self-care and fitness, and appropriate use of
medical care and drugs. For example, if we request mail-in
prescriptions of regularly needed medications for a
90-day period, we save money for ourselves. Or if we
request generic instead of name-brand drugs, we save money for
ourselves.
These kinds of Plan Modifications give us an incentive to be
pro-active about being health-conscious and wise consumers in a
profit-driven health care market.
Given the timeframe of negotiations and insurance renewals, it is
probably too late to change anything for the coming year. For
2003, you probably can enjoy the same coverage you have now — that’s
my current guess.
But now the genie is out of the bottle. Those of us who use
minimal health care and want to avoid having a monthly premium (ranging
from perhaps $100 to $200 per pay check depending on your plan and
family size) must speak up. Those who prefer the Premium out of
Paycheck approach instead of Plan Modification must make their case.
We may be insured as before for 2003, but for 2004, be
prepared for big changes. It will be important that the unions and
district work collegially towards "the greatest good for the
greatest number" as we face together the skyrocketing rates.
&
[back
to the top]
|