Stop me if you’ve heard this one before. The government makes promises to those willing to accept pay cuts to work for it. The state doesn’t provide the funding to meet those promises, and then declares that those silly enough to believe them should pay for it.
Okay, that was rude. Many of you tried to stop me and I finished to story anyway, because we’ve <b>all</b> heard this one before. This time, the discussion is on the Group Insurance Commission.
A few years ago, Massachusetts passed a law to help bail out municipalities from the consequences of their actions, allowing them to force employees into the GIC by ignoring bargaining rights of those workers. State employees are also in the GIC, but despite that massive constituency, that Commission is in a deficit because the state is failing to adequately fund employee health care. (Also, the director is blaming the massive growth that municipalities are creating for the problem.)
A naive person would think the state would up its funding in order to keep its word. Nope. The GIC is “exploring” options such as doubling deductibles, doubling copays, hiking premiums by converting the delivery mechanism, discriminating against people who need more expensive medication, or all of the above. So, hey, these fat lazy public employees deserve to be in a worse situation, right? Why complain when they are already a couple steps behind the race to the bottom…about time they caught up!
Here’s one reason: my municipality has had a position open for six months, and can’t find anyone who wants it. Students in need of specialized education simply aren’t receiving it, because we have reached the point where the cuts have made positions completely undesirable. The feel-good bonus for helping your neighbor is no longer enough to make up for the losses public service involves, and we’re moving from having the public workers we need and unsettlingly close to those thoroughly unqualified. Would you want a cop, firefighter, librarian, or teacher who only took the job because it was better than Walmart?
Some like to complain. “My deductible is higher! My premiums are higher, so screw you!” No — you’re the one getting screwed. If public workers’ benefits go up, so do yours. If they go down, you’re hurt in the long run, too. When anyone fights for workers’ rights, you as a worker benefit. That’s the basic principle of justice for all, of “We the People”. Progress is made not when someone says “why do they ‘get’ something” but “how can I ‘get’ that same thing?”
So what now? The MTA has a utility up to email the commissioners and ask them to respect their promises. And we’ll see what happens next…
Sadly.
The co-pays and deductibles are on the rise.
I’m up to $35 co-pay for an office visit and $200 for an ER visit.
One of my kids whacked his head Christmas Eve and bang, $200.
This on top of $5000 a year in family plan premiums.
if you are in a union, and your employer has reneged on fairly bargained health insurance. If you’re in the private sector, like I am – it’s all in what they’re willing to provide.
From my perspective, there’s a contractual obligation here that should be kept. I wonder if the courthouse is the only way to go to enforce these obligations? Seriously – they shouldn’t be allowed to exempt themselves from a bargained position. I am concerned that there will come a time when a GIC card carrier shows up at a hospital for care, and they’re given the same short shrift that Medicare recipients get.
It was new and unvested employees that went from 15% to 20 and 25% for health insurance contributions, for example.
The ‘lower pay’ referred to was 30 years ago; for quite a while, state jobs have had comparable pay to ‘attract better candidates’ with the bonus of working for a company that would never go out of business.
Until Detroit, of course.