2007 Benefit Changes

[Birdman]

Having received and reviewed the Lifematters AA benefit newsletter today, I'm a little puzzled. :blink: In the medical changes section under TWU represented it says "The Company will pay the first 5% of the 7.9% increase and the employee will cover the remainder of the increase, or 2.9%." In the illustration on the opposite page it quotes my POS contibution increased $25.50 a month from 2006 to 2007. Ironically that equals a 17% increase year to year. If, as it said, it only went up 2.9% or $4.33, why does my math say $25.50? :huh: :huh: Also, generics will go to 20% copay and namebrand 30% copay. Can't wait till the 1.5% increase in pay this spring.

 

[local 12 proud]

"Just be glad you have a job brother"

 

[TWU informer]

Check out the changes in your Prescription Drug coverage.

You have been hosed more than your current calculations.

 

[AMFAMAN]

Having received and reviewed the Lifematters AA benefit newsletter today, I'm a little puzzled. :blink:

You're outta order brother.

 

[FWAAA]

Having received and reviewed the Lifematters AA benefit newsletter today, I'm a little puzzled. :blink: In the medical changes section under TWU represented it says "The Company will pay the first 5% of the 7.9% increase and the employee will cover the remainder of the increase, or 2.9%." In the illustration on the opposite page it quotes my POS contibution increased $25.50 a month from 2006 to 2007. Ironically that equals a 17% increase year to year. If, as it said, it only went up 2.9% or $4.33, why does my math say $25.50? :huh: :huh: Also, generics will go to 20% copay and namebrand 30% copay. Can't wait till the 1.5% increase in pay this spring.

Assuming you're asking a serious math question, here's the answer:

From the numbers you provided, your total medical premium for 2006 was $879.31/mo of which your share is $150/mo.

For 2007, the premium will increase by 7.9%, or $69.47/mo. AA has agreed to pick up 5% of it and the TWU agreed on your behalf that you'd pay the other 2.9%.

The company's 5% share is $43.97 and your 2.9% (calculated as 2.9% of the 2006 amount of $879.31) equals $25.50. Your monthly cost did indeed increase 17%, since you were paying only $150 of the $879.31 monthly premium.

Look at it this way: Say the monthly premium increased the same 7.9% but AA agreed to pay none of it; your monthly medical contribution would have increased by the entire $69.47, or 46%.

It sucks to have to pay a greater and greater share of your medical premiums each year - and it doesn't make it any easier just because nearly every company has adopted the "we'll split the increase with the employee" attitude. But that's what it's like nearly everywhere - and I'd bet even at Former ModerAAtor's new gig.

As for drug coverage - in a few months, that's not likely to matter once Wal Mart rolls out its $4 generic prescription program nationwide, which some articles say happens next year:

http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/Stor...p;siteId=google

If a generic prescription is less than a pack of smokes (except maybe on the reservations), then who cares what your drug coverage co-pay is?

 

[eolesen]

Y'all piss and moan about your $170 per month, and have no clue about how good the plan really is compared to the rest of the world.

Rather than pay a higher employee contribution, my new employer adopted a high deductible plan... I'd kill to have AA's coverage again.

Try a $4000 family deductible on for size (with no such thing as copays for services or prescriptions, so it's a real deductible), and then perhaps you have some room for complaining.

 

[formeraa]

Y'all piss and moan about your $170 per month, and have no clue about how good the plan really is compared to the rest of the world.

Rather than pay a higher employee contribution, my new employer adopted a high deductible plan... I'd kill to have AA's coverage again.

Try a $4000 family deductible on for size (with no such thing as copays for services or prescriptions, so it's a real deductible), and then perhaps you have some room for complaining.

Exactly! My employer is also doing this sort of large deductible plan. However, for 50% more per month, I can stay on a plan which still has $20/$35 office visit copays. Good grief!!

Hey, FormerMod, does your employer contribute an HRA or HSA?

 

[Birdman]

Assuming you're asking a serious math question, here's the answer:

Thanks FWAAA. I actually was puzzled about the math and not just "piss and moaning", although I'm not throwing a party over the increase. I suppose UnitedHealthCare charges a premium (even though we're selfinsured) amounting to an average cost per employee. My math says $10,596.39 for 2006. It would be interesting to know what their cut is.

 

[jimntx]

Y'all piss and moan about your $170 per month, and have no clue about how good the plan really is compared to the rest of the world.

Not trying to be a company man, but AMEN, BROTHER. My premium for PPO coverage for next year employee only with the $150 deductible (the most expensive PPO plan) is only about $5.00/mo more than what I was paying for PPO coverage at Texaco back in the 80's when PPOs first started up.

By the way...for those of you considering a PPO plan for next year and think you want to take the higher deductible in order to get a lower monthly premium, think twice about that, then think again. I know the f/a plan is different from pilots, management or TWU, but I bet you will find the same gotcha in all of them.

The Benefits section of Jetnet seems to be inop at the moment, but as best as I can remember the monthly premium for $150 deductible plan was approx. $37/mo (employee only). The premium for the cheapest plan ($1000 deductible) was about $12/mo. Now, do the math on how much money you would actually save by increasing your out of pocket expenses by $850 next year. The answer is about $300. You would be spending $850 to "save" $300. Kinda of like my investment account at Merrill Lynch.

 

[FWAAA]

Thanks FWAAA. I actually was puzzled about the math and not just "piss and moaning", although I'm not throwing a party over the increase. I suppose UnitedHealthCare charges a premium (even though we're selfinsured) amounting to an average cost per employee. My math says $10,596.39 for 2006. It would be interesting to know what their cut is.

No prob. Percentages can be a very tricky item when there's mixing and matching of the items subject to various percentage increases. About 10 years ago my law firm began passing on a portion of the increases in medical coverage to the employees - and when the firm says that the premium is going up 15% a year, but the staff sees their contribution increasing from $0/mo to $25/mo to $50/mo to $100/mo, the same issue arose. It wasn't pretty.

AA could have expressed it better - it could have said:

"the overall premium is going up 7.9% but that AA will pick up 63.2% of that increase, leaving the employees holding the bag for the other 36.7%, which will cause the employee contribtution to go up 17%, from $150/mo to $175.50/mo."

 

[AMFAMAN]

"the overall premium is going up 7.9% but that AA will pick up 63.2% of that increase, leaving the employees holding the bag for the other 36.7%, which will cause the employee contribtution to go up 17%, from $150/mo to $175.50/mo."

That would fall in line with the AA/twu spin jobs we are used to around here. Never give them the real numbers, it might wakeup the sheep.

Here's another good math formula for you:

AA and the twu anounce a $400 million breakthrough goal for MCI. DFW is told to take a chunk of this work. How much of the work DFW does for MCI count towards the line breakthrough goal? Zero, not a penny. MCI gets all the credit. Not that I actually care about this, but just another AA math spin job.

 

[Birdman]

OK, I'm not trying to stir the pot on the increase in our premiums this year, because, as you know some would kill to get our plan. But, in light of UnitedHealth Group's financial strength of $1,873,000,000 net profit for the first 6 months of 2006 and who's CEO made $124,000,000 last year, would it be to much to be asked of UNH to just chill on the increases by the largest airline in the world struggling to make ends meet???

 

[A/C FIXER]

Just kinda wondering here, since I'll be paying more for family coverage and since we are self insured, will UHC still be denying claims constantly as they do for me. It sometimes seems that AA has told UHC to deny claims that have even the slightest irregularity, and then wait several weeks before they send you a denial, by then you are so fed up you want to say "F*** IT, which is what they want you to do anyway. Has anyone else had this happen to them on a regular basis? :angry:

 

[eolesen]

would it be to much to be asked of UNH to just chill on the increases by the largest airline in the world struggling to make ends meet???

Don't blame UHC. Blame the health-care providers, drug companies, and to some degree (don't slap me on this, OK?), employees who use their healthcare benefits a lot more than they should.

AA's plan is self-funded, meaning ALL expenses paid out for employee health care comes out of AMR's pocket.

UHC handles all the claim filings, evaluates whether or not services rendered are covered, and issues payments to providers, for which AMR either pays UHC a flat rate per year or a variable rate based on the volume and makeup of claims processed (i.e. some claims will be more complex and require more of UHC's time).

 

[AMFAMAN]

AA's plan is self-funded, meaning ALL expenses paid out for employee health care comes out of AMR's pocket.

What exactly is the benefit of self funding as compared to negotiating a plan for 80,000+ employees?