Posted on 10/25/2010 8:50:14 PM PDT by Dilbert56
Just received an e-mail from IBM HR about 2011 benefits:
You should be aware that health care cost increases for 2011 -- in addition to the normal inflationary trends -- also are affected by health care reform requirements, which affect both IBM and you. For example, raising the age for dependent coverage from age 23 to 26 contributes somewhat to higher costs for businesses, as we must now all extend coverage to greater numbers of young adults.
They should consider switching over to catastrophic coverage with a larger deductible. That’s where we’re going.
IIRC the law does not allow catastrophic policies except for young people.
Liberals love mandates.
If it impacts IBM it impacts America.
Same here. I work for a Fortune 500 company that opened its healthcare enrollment for 2011 today. As of 2012, to get the lower rate, you’ll have to sign up for...biometric monitoring!
This is happening all over. Funny how it’s hardly being covered by the MainStreamMedia.
I was looking for something else and came across this at the Los Alamos Nat’l Laboratory website:
New medical premiums will be in effect for the 2011 plan year. The combination of rising health care costs and a dramatic increase in participant usage of the Plan have contributed to a need for an increase in premium rates. As such, medical plan participants will experience an average premium increase of 30 percent.
http://www.lanl.gov/worklife/benefits/open/index.shtml
**** As of 2012, to get the lower rate, have to sign up for...biometric monitoring! ****
Sounds like coming of “The Mark” to buy or sell...control.
I have a friend who is CFO for a Michigan company. The Blue Cross/Blue Shield quote they received for 2011 includes a 59% increase.
Well, they’re selling catastrophic policies. What statute do you think makes them illegal?
I feel lucky because we are only going up 7%. Of course, we just switched to a new policy that was designed to eliminate the big cost increases, so 7% is a lot more than what was supposed to happen.
The problem with the 26-age rule isn’t really putting older young people into the plans — they still cost less than a lot of employees. The problem is that the employers can’t have an age-based cost schedule, so now the “average cost” for a “child” has really increased.
Which means people who wanted to insure their 5-year-old kids, which cost very little, are now paying more so that other people can insure their 22-year-olds, who would have insurance from their new jobs except that they can’t get jobs under Obama’s rule, and why would anybody take insurance from their new employer if they get cheaper insurnace through their parent’s company?
People are not stupid, my neighbor is 76 and she gets it, she is living proof that Medicare isn't cutting it for her!!
Within a couple of years, catastrophic insurance will not be acceptable to Obamacare - they want full coverage for everyone
The company I work for is supposedly going to offer them also. We just won't get the official word till next week.
I think the new Republican congress should just defund it.
But, Obamacare or no Obamacare, employers are increasingly getting out of the health care insurance business, expecially those companies that have to compete on a global scale. As an individual purchaser of insurance, a catastrophic policy is probably the best way to go for a lot of folks.
But, Obamacare or no Obamacare, employers are increasingly getting out of the health care insurance business, expecially those companies that have to compete on a global scale. As an individual purchaser of insurance, a catastrophic policy is probably the best way to go for a lot of folks.
This was the plan all along to ultimately get everyone moved to government plans and sooner or later you have single payer healthcare - basically crashing the system.
No big company wants to be the first to dump their employees onto gov care, but there will be a lot that won’t mind being second.
I hope you are right and that day never comes
My federal health care plan for retirees is going up seven percent which sucks, esp. since our retirement checks are frozen at the same rate for three years in a row since SS checks are also frozen, no COLA. Why is no politician talking about that. They want SS rates and federal retiree checks to be frozen because it’s another form of a tax. They let the economy tank just so they could decree, no COLA. They think we’re stupid and will just sit and take it without coming to understand who allowed the economy to tank.
And if you can't afford to pay the increase, then you either pay a big fine (which you also can't afford) or you go to jail. We are having our meetings later this week about our coverage. Word is that we are dropping BC/BS and going with Brand-X.
Every time I hear a Democrat brag about how the 'Insurance' bill provides coverage for an additional 30 million Americans, I can just scream. Basically, the bill allows the government to put a gun to the heads of 30 million people who currently choose not to have insurance and force them to get it or go to jail. Ain't fascism great?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.