Wednesday, February 08, 2006

Davis 2-06-2006 Memorandum

MEMORANDUM

To: ALL MEMBERS

From: Ron Davis, MEBA President

Date: February 6, 2006

Subject: MEDICAL PLAN CHANGES DISCUSSION

At the October 2005 Trustee meeting significant changes were made to the Medical Plan. The Board of Trustees faced very painful choices as we worked to fulfill our obligation to the participants and ensure the Plan’s future, Each of the twelve Trustees had a different opinion about the recommended changes presented by the Plan’s consultant and which changes to make.



Much discussion took place because of these differences. This discussion followed prior meetings in which the Trustees were not able to reach an agreement on any changes. Without agreement, action at earlier Trustee Meetings was not possible. According to the Medical Consultant’s projections presented at the October meeting, the Medical Plan had reached a critical stage and for the first time the Trustees were told that the Medical Plan could face bankruptcy in just a few short years due to the projected escalating costs of medical despite the fact that the employers are now contributing more than $26 million per year. A compromise among the Trustees was finally reached. None of the Trustees are totally satisfied with the ultimate compromise that was reached and each would have made different choices if they could have acted alone. I can assure you that extensive research, thought and discussion were undertaken before these changes were made. The Union Trustees especially recognize the hardship placed on the retirees and are trying hard to find a better solution that will be agreeable to the Employer Trustees. These changes have created a tremendous hardship on many retirees.

Specifically, raising the non~ Medicare eligible retirees (under age 65 with dependants to $700/month has been particularly devastating for many retirees as this can represent more than 25% of their pension.

At this juncture, and before the Trustee Meetings that will take place later this month, I am asking the membership to assist us and provide feedback on the following:

If the retiree dependant coverage was lowered to $450/month, the medical plan would need to make up that money in some manner. (Approximately $1.6 million per year)

There are numerous ways to accomplish this such as
• Reducing benefits for retirees;
• Reducing benefits for retirees and active members;
• Having a monthly contribution from all active participants of the medical plan;
• Having a monthly contribution from all active participants with dependants of the medical plan;

If active member participants were to subsidize this retiree cost there are several ways to do this such as:

• if we were to charge all active participants of the Medical Plan a percentage of their base salary it would be approximately 1.1 %
• If we were to charge only active participants with dependants in the Medical Plan it would be approximately:
o Single members participating in the MEBA Medical Plan $0
o Active Members with one dependant $60/month
o Active Members with more than one dependant $120/month

We as a Union brotherhood have come to a time of reckoning. A look back in history will remind us that many of today’s Retirees were the ones who chose to give up personal raises as Active Members, agreeing that this money instead go into the Pension Plan. Those of us who follow in their footsteps now reap the benefits of these sacrifices. As you know, the Pension Plan has been fully funded since 1986, and no Employer contributions into the Pension Plan have been required since that time, instead, such, amounts have been channeled into better wages and increased MPB contributions. It is now time to decide if we, the Active membership, are willing to make a small sacrifice and help our MEBA Retirees maintain a level of medical benefits at a more modest cost.

The Union Trustees are evaluating these options and there is no certainty that any additional changes will he made to the Medical Plan at the February Trustee Meeting. Much will depend on the Employer Trustees. I, however, would appreciate any and all feedback from the membership on the above possibilities. Written comments, ideas or suggestions should be sent to Allen Szymczak at the Plans office in Baltimore,

I ask the chairman of the meetings to now open the floor for discussion on this matter and please provide me feedback on the result of these discussions.

3 Comments:

At 08 February, 2006 12:55, Blogger wff said...

Brothers, Sister Pat, Active Members, Retirees and all Ships at Sea

Send your ideas in now. If they don't get your ideas, feedback, whatever by next Teusday they it won't make it to the Trustees Meeting unless they carry their laptops on the golf corse and have satellite e-mail in Palm Desert. Keep the pressure on and maybee we can lift a few safety valves.

Allen Szymczak, Plans Administrator
Ron Davis, Chairman Board of Trustees

RE: Memorandum sent to Active Members 2-06-2006

The 26 Active Members at the SF meeting 2-07-2006 unanimously endorsed your proposal. This should send a message to you and all the Trustees regarding the Active Members concern (at least in San Francisco) regarding the recent changes in the Medical Plan and how they impacted the retiree, and how it will impact them when they retire.

Some of the suggestions at the SF meeting to go along with your proposal of 1.1% of base pay would be:
$100/120 minimum along with the 1.1% of base pay.
active members with dependents $150 minimum along with 1.1% of base pay.
open enrollment period of 6 months for retirees that opted out of Plan due to severity of last change.
I offer these further suggestions to be brought to the table:
Minimum reserve be established (say $25 million) and contribution rates of active and retired members adjusted, and harder bargaining at contract negotiations in order to maintain that reserve.
Retirees be returned to the 6% of annuity with a minimum of $250 per month for single participant and $400 per month for participant with dependents.
These proposals and any changes that you enact will have to be an ongoing priority with the Trustees. As the dynamics of the Plan contribution/expenses changes then the contribution rates and benefits need to reflect that change. This should be a priority at every Trustee Meeting, to view these changes and in a timely manner (say annually) make adjustments to these rates in order to insure the viability of the Plan well into the future.

Continued efforts in exploring all options regarding decreasing the ever escalating Plan expenses are of the utmost importance. I know the clinics are a great resource but of the 4400 participants in the Medical Plan how many of them are actually taking advantage of facilities. Your actuaries and advisors should explore the option in of closing the Clinics in great depth. Is the percentage of participants that use the Clinics worth the expense of operation.

I am sure that this as with all my other correspondence will be presented to the Board at the upcoming Trustees Meeting.

Walter Fletcher
IDN 34757

 
At 15 February, 2006 06:20, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It seems that the percentage of base wage method for figuring the contribution will penalize those people which have full employment. Yet those people who are part time MEBA can reap the same benefit without meeting any type of obligation. We have all met those people who have two vocations yet only one medical plan. The MEBA. I realize that in our union there will always be a contribution according to the billet whether permanent or rotary but there appears to be an advantage to the dual track rather than the permanent with respect to contribution vs. liability. You shouldn't be penalized for being an asset to the system. A cap on the contribution may be in order.
Regards,
Dave

 
At 16 February, 2006 07:44, Blogger wff said...

Dave

One of the changes that became effective 2-1-06 regarding active member eligibility and coverage:

"Effective for eligibility beginning on Fegruary 1, 2006 and except as otherwise set forth herein, in order to maintain eligibility under the Paln as an Active participant, an Employee who currently or previously has obtained benefits eligibility under the Paln must complete 60 days on the payroll in covered employment with one or more Employees within and period of six consecutive calender months."

This accomplishes a number of things regarding loopholes in the coverage system that you memtion. If you dont't maintain covered employment then you aren't covered under the Plan. The charge on active members would most likely kick in as a deduct from their vacation voucher and therfore only cover their actual employment time and extended coverage after vacation expires.
Walter

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

unique visitors counter