Medical Premium's

[xmarlin]

I've had experiences with both our system and Socialized medicine, I recieved better treatment in the Socialized plan.

Here the primary concern is not what ails you but how you are paying. I spent around six hours before getting any treatment, at least two hours on a gurney in a hallway, however for the same ailment, while on vacation , it took no longer than 15 minutes before I was given medication and a room-which was private. So you can believe all the BS scare tactics put out by the "for profit" Hospitals, insurance and pharmaceutical companies, who stand to lose a lot if we socialize but I've been through both and I can tell you they are lying.

I rarely agree with you Bob, but in this case I agree with you completely having had exactly the same experience.

If "socialized medicine" is so bad, why aren't the people in Canada, Britain, Germany, France, Italy, Japan etc. voting out the leadership and installing governments that will privatize?

 

[TWU informer]

Bingo! If i remember correctly it was a small one liner in the 2003 giveback. It said take away the Pilot Cap. Which many twu representatives did not know what that meant. The Pilots have limitations on how much their cost can increase, like Informer said a me too clause. Sorry but it is time to use a well worn out twu slogan ...... "they can do that brother"

Actually the language covered both Pilot Group and Flight Attendant Group:

It was Article 41 (a)

(7) The Company agrees, if necessary, to reduce the option price of any Medical or Dental Plan currently offered in the Flexible Benefits Enrollment to the same contribution level set by the Cafeteria Plan for Pilots and Flight Attendants for equivalent plans.

The cost of the 2003 concessions and the Dennis Burchette working together changes keep piling up on the TWU represented group. There is no end or shame in what the TWU will forfeit on the company be-half.

HERE IS THE NEW Article 41 (a) (7)

(7) The TWU and the Company have agreed that a review committee will be established to review planned administrative changes to the negotiated Medical Plan, and for planned changes in the Point of Service Plan contribution rates, so long as Point of Service Plan continues to be offered. This committee will have the right of appeal to the Sr. Vice President – Human Resources in the event of a dispute.

I wonder if the review committee looked into our current increase? Doesn't matter that language leaves no remedy for dispute. So the TWU can appeal to Sr. Vice President - Human Resources, what do you suspect we would gain using the contract language to resolve a dispute? BINGO! NOTHING!

 

[Bob Owens]

Actually the language covered both Pilot Group and Flight Attendant Group:

It was Article 41 (a)

(7) The Company agrees, if necessary, to reduce the option price of any Medical or Dental Plan currently offered in the Flexible Benefits Enrollment to the same contribution level set by the Cafeteria Plan for Pilots and Flight Attendants for equivalent plans.

The cost of the 2003 concessions and the Dennis Burchette working together changes keep piling up on the TWU represented group. There is no end or shame in what the TWU will forfeit on the company be-half.

HERE IS THE NEW Article 41 (a) (7)

(7) The TWU and the Company have agreed that a review committee will be established to review planned administrative changes to the negotiated Medical Plan, and for planned changes in the Point of Service Plan contribution rates, so long as Point of Service Plan continues to be offered. This committee will have the right of appeal to the Sr. Vice President – Human Resources in the event of a dispute.

I wonder if the review committee looked into our current increase? Doesn't matter that language leaves no remedy for dispute. So the TWU can appeal to Sr. Vice President - Human Resources, what do you suspect we would gain using the contract language to resolve a dispute? BINGO! NOTHING!

Jittle would argue that you "have the right to appeal"-ie BEG. A lot of good that does for us.

Does anyone recall what the "value" placed on the elimination of the pilot cap was?

 

[Boomer]

Again, you need to remember that AMR is fully self-funded for medical insurance on their employees and retirees.

I've been told that AMR/AA is near or at the top of the amount they can fund their self-insured accounts and still benefit from designating those funds.

Ergo, the new plans being offered to employees: they allow AMR/AA to place additional funds into the same accounts to now pay claims from outside health insurers in addition to the payments made to the claims manager.

Since the negotiated delivery of medical services will vary wildly: state to state, jurisdiction to jurisdiction, municipality to municipality, etc...It will be virtually impossible to know what AMR/AA is placing into these accounts and then show whether they are legitimately funded or excessively funded therefore subject to some type of internal or external claim.

Could politics be evidenced by the move? In the current national debate, during an election year, both sides talk of nationalized health care to one extent or the other.

One side believes that affordable health care is an individual right and proposes a nationalized system for distribution, paid for by an indeterminate increase in taxes; the other side treats negotiated or granted health care as a taxable asset, creating a pool of funds affording those not covered by either of the above the same opportunity.

Either way, those that fought for a unionized contract or a corporate position will pay through an increase in taxes.

 

[TIME FOR CHANGE]

We have a Teamsters pension plan which is great and a 3% matching 401K from the company. So we have two plans, coming from 17 years with USairways it is awesome. My family (Wife 1 kid) pay $ 9.00 per week for health and dental. We have Kaiser here in CA and it is great. $ 5.oo visits and $ 5.00 presc. Why so interested???
From the UPS forum