Medical Costs

[iluvaa]

How much has it gone up since you hired on? And how much has your employer cut your pay? When I hired on it cost us nothing.

Look around ours is still pretty cheap

 

[jimntx]

I hate to say it but we the flight attendants have excellent health coverage. Even with the increase in the companies proposal we will be paying far less then most people. I had lunch with a friend and she was paying a whopping $1200 a month for her, her husband and her daughter. That was her share through her employer. The only thing I have a bone to pick on this issue for us is that in exchange for paying more for health costs we are not getting enough credit on other issues.

For now...Have you seen the company's latest proposal for changes to flight attendant health insurance premiums?

Employee only: Now: $468/yr. Proposed: $1,080/yr. Increase: 130% Proposed monthly payment: $90.00
Employee +1: Now: $930/yr Proposed: $2,160/yr. Increase: 132% Proposed monthly payment: $180.00
Employee +2: Now: $1,231/yr. Proposed: $3,240/yr. Increase: 163% Proposed monthly payment: $270.00

As a single person, the increase will not affect me much, but for a person like one of my classmates who is sole support for 3 small children, this would be extremely hard. She's already flying 120+ hours/month just to keep a roof over her head.

P.S. For that friend who is paying $1200/mo for coverage. I would be willing to bet that is the entire premium. Probably the employer contributes nothing toward the group insurance premium. Hard to believe in this day and age, but it is not required for an employer to offer ANY insurance plan, much less contribute toward the premium.

 

[Bob Owens]

At least in 2003, the TWU's plan was the most expensive out of the four plans, because they negotiated for a higher lifetime max than any other workgroup. The MAS plan had the lowest lifetime max (blowing away entirely the myth that management has a better plan, perhaps?), with the APFA & APA plans somewhere in the middle.

Perhaps it was the most expensive because of all the part timers. Figure each part timer brings 4.1 people onto the plan, so if you have two part timers in the place of one full timer you are covering 8.2 people instead of 4.1.
Another factor is the injury rate for ground workers would be much higher due to the nature of the work and the injuries would tend to be more costly.

So contrary to Bob's assertion that the TWU pays more because there's no cap, I'll suggest it's more likely that the TWU is paying more because their plan has more liability and/or expenses than the other three plans due to the higher lifetime max. Maybe, just maybe, the reason there is no cap on your plan is because there is a higher lifetime max...

Wrong again.

How many people actually hit those lifetime max's? I asked, the company couldnt/wouldnt answer.

The fact is the company admitted that the reason we pay more is because the overage from the other workgroups gets added to our figure. It was their explanation as to why our rates went up so much despite the fact that national figures would have resulted in a lower increase. That was last August, in Miami, at the Benifits meeting. It had nothing to do with the lifetime max.

 

[Bob Owens]

A coworkers wife has been a teacher in oklahoma for 17 yrs and for coverage like ours its over 800 a month so is ours really that bad lets get out of our holes and look around.

Fine, when we get all the weekends, the holidays and the summer off we will pay what she pays.

What does that have to do with the fact that the company is passing its costs for other peoples plans on to us?

The fact is a lot have better plans than we do, even people who work for the same company.

Many of my coworkers have dropped as much as they are allowed of their AA coverage and rely on their wives coverage. I'm considering it myself.

 

[Bob Owens]

(you want to talk about paycuts? How about a 100% paycut for her, and a 40% cut in our household income in January 2003 just before the April paycuts...).

Hmm? How do you figure that a job loss is a paycut?

Did your wife get paid for doing nothing and staying home? I doubt that. The amount of hours that your household worked was reduced by 50% but your household income only decreased by 40%. Sounds to me like you got a fair deal.

We on the other hand really had our pay cut, we get less money for the same amount of hours worked. Our household income has been cut by over 40% without a cut in hours worked.

Your wife has the opportunity to go out and get another job and you have the possibility of restoring your houshold income without having to work more hours.

 

[Birdman]

One of our crew chiefs reported getting his flex benefits package in the mail today. Anyone else?