Saturday, October 20, 2018

A READER OBTAINED APPENDIX B SO WE CAN TELL YOU MUCH MORE ABOUT HEALTHCARE GIVEBACKS

Our new contract definitely includes real healthcare givebacks, most of which haven't been announced and aren't in the Memorandum of Agreement which led to speculation about what was involved.

Appendix B of the MOA is a letter from the City Office of Labor Relations to Municipal Labor Committee Chair Harry Nespoli. This document outlines savings in healthcare but the UFT omitted it from the posted MOA. A reader asked the UFT and the UFT provided him with a link to the letter. He forwarded it to me.

$1.7 billion is the savings for the city from the MLC agreement that the Chief Leader reported through the end of the contract and then the city saves another $600 million annually thereafter. The UFT spin that it is $1.1 billion is technically not correct because they are not adding in the recurring $600 million savings for 2022 which is the year the contract ends. If we add in the recurring yearly $1.3 billion in savings from the 2014-18 MLC deal with the city, we will be saving NYC on a recurring basis $1.9 billion annually forever. In return, we get a bigger contribution to our Welfare Funds and money from the savings is used to self fund some of our meager raises.

This is how the city boasted about their savings:

Healthcare Savings
Continuing to build off the health care savings reached during the first four years, this agreement incorporates the second health savings agreement with the Municipal Labor Committee reached in June of this year. The agreement will provide total health care savings of $1.1 billion through Fiscal Year 2021 and $1.9 billion of annual savings thereafter.

Since there are around 350,000 city employees, if we divide $1,900,000,000 by 350,000 employees, each individual city employee's contribution comes to around $5,429 per year. That will cut into your raises a bit!

In the last round of bargaining, we paid for the givebacks with significantly higher copayments for ER and urgent care visits and HIP members were stuck with copays for the first time for a new category called non-preferred providers. What will be next?

I'm not being an alarmist here by pointing out that right in the city's OLR letter to the MLC we learn that the MLC and the city are forming a committee along with an arbitrator to figure out modifications to our health plans that must be recommended for implementation by June 30, 2020. From the OLR letter to the MLC:

The Committee shall study the issues using appropriate data and recommend for implementation as soon as practicable during the term of the agreement but no later than June 30, 2020, modifications to the way in which healthcare is currently provided or funded.

Funding changes? What does that mean? Will we be funding more?

And what will the modifications be?

Here are some of the proposals that are in the OLR letter to the MLC that will be discussed:

Centers of Excellence for specific conditions; Hospital and provider tiering; Precertification Fees; Amendment of Medicare Part B reimbursement; Reduction of cost for pre-medicare retirees who have access to other coverage; Reduction of cost for Pre-Medicare retirees who have access to other coverage; Changes to the Senior Care rate; Changes to the equalization formula.

Some of the changes look like they won't hurt us but others like the Centers of Excellence for specific conditions and the tiering of hospitals are downright scary. Putting new employees on HIP managed care for year one is a step in the wrong direction. Charging us more for certain hospitals and having Centers of Excellence for certain conditions are definitely on the table. Now is your only chance to have a voice in this process.

Active members of the UFT have the ultimate say on our contract including this OLR letter to the MLC which will become a part of the contract if we vote yes. You are voting for unknown changes to healthcare that will be implemented between 2019 and 2020.

I hope we have made you more informed voters on the contract ratification ballot.

24 comments:

  1. Mulgrew said, on podcast that the dc37 deal was 2, 2.25, 3. We got 2, 2.5, 3. He said that the extra .25 in the 2nd year is huge because that compunds and stays with you forever. Amazing. So why did he accept a zero and then another zero in 2011 and 2012? Instead, we gota one time $1000. If we got .5 total for those 2 years we would have, on a 100k salary, not including compounding, $500 per year, forever.

    ReplyDelete
  2. DC 37 got extra money for each of their many bargaining units to distribute according to their needs in addition to the raises. That came to .6%. .6% is greater than Mulgrew's .25% the last time I looked. Our contract is a month shorter and theirs doesn't spread out the raises for as long as we did. It's all the same in the end.

    ReplyDelete
  3. What does amendment to Medicare Part B reimbursement mean? Will retiree's lose the reimbursement that they currently receive each year for their Part B???

    ReplyDelete
  4. You know as much as I know. Anything is on the table.

    ReplyDelete
  5. That's outrageous. We have to opt out in large numbers to show them they can't do this. How do we opt out?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Same comment every post. Do the Koch brothers pay you?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Actually Mulgrew works on behalf Koch brothers anti-union agenda. Keep paying Mulgrew and support the Koch brothers. Only fools will vote for this new contract and the large cuts in health care benefits. Fools, keep paying Mulgrew! Vote for the new contract!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Seems like all retirees need to be informed of this secret document left out of the MOA the UFT is pushing as it will eventually effect all of them possibly in a significant way and UFT retirees have a fair amount of contract voting power.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I am a retiree and can't stand what Meathead Mike is doing. UFT retirees don't vote on a contract. They need to realize Mulgrew needs to go.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Ironic. Retirees keep voting for Mulgrew.
    Now, Mulgrew is throwing the retirees under the bus by making them pay for Medicaire Part B.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Retirees are a most significant voting block and they do vote for UFT officers. If they negotiate away the Part B Medicare reimbursement ,many retiree's will vote against them.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Is that Medicare Part be guaranteed?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Everything is on the table once we say yes.

    ReplyDelete
  14. we will say yes, as usual

    ReplyDelete
  15. Yes, te amó mulgrew, ooh, pregunta questions tarde

    ReplyDelete
  16. The proposed contract’s across-the-board pay increases of 2 percent, 2.5 percent and 3 percent produce a three-year compound rate of 7.7 percent over 43 months, above predictions of inflation. (The new contractual raises are in addition to lump-sum payments negotiated as part of 2014 contract, including the payment this month and others payable in October 2019 and October 2020.)

    ReplyDelete
  17. Sawdust-for-brains Mulgrew Is banking on UFT members being as dumb as Nancy Pelosi was prior to voting on Obamacare when she said "We'll just have to pass it to see whats in it"

    ReplyDelete
  18. Mulgrew is banking on uninformed retirees voting YES, when they are not informed how it effects them and their particular
    concerns. Has potential to be an abomination for all.

    ReplyDelete
  19. 7:42, We already went to the IMF website to debunk the UFT lie that the salary increases beat expected inflation. They do not.

    If you are counting getting paid back for an interest free loan we made to the city as a salary increase, then I will probably not ever get through to you.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I have been bombarded by messages this weekend from students and parents in jupiter grades about first MP grades. Is this the job? Its pathetic. It doesnt stop. As if grades werent posted since Sep 10. As if my grades are wrong. And of course I dont even have to respond at all or post on jupiter in the first place. More abuse...

    ReplyDelete
  21. James, Waiting to hear back from Assistant director of the UFT. He insists that the only changes are HIP for 365 days for new teachers and ambulatory facilities for procedures such as colonoscopy, cataracts. He said that the agreement was announced in June 2018, therefore there is nothing up in the air, other than whether or not it’s ratified by the members. He says no changes for Medicare B reimbursement. He’s looking for the June 2018 announcement by the Munical Labor Committee of the agreement.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I took what I posted right from Appendix B which is the letter from the city to the MLC. The UFT finally posted it. I wasn't born yesterday. Putting new city employees on HIP in year one is not saving $1.1 billion.

    ReplyDelete
  23. James, I agree with you re: savings on health care. Would you consider calling Joe Wohl at the UFT for his explanation? He said that he’s on the OLR committee, and insists that there are no additional concessions as mentioned in the letter to Nespoli. We reviewed reference to Medicare B reimbursement, Medicare Advantage plan, non Medicare eligible retirees using other plans etc.

    I’m certainly not suggesting supporting the contract as it’s written. The lack of transparency is once again astounding. Given the wealth that is in NYC at the present time, one would think that a mayor who likes to call himself progressive would want to do better by the hardworking backbone that makes this city function.

    ReplyDelete

●Comments are moderated.
●Kindly use your Google account. ●Anonymous comments only from Google accounts.
●Please stay on topic and use reputable sources.
●Irrelevant comments will not be posted.
●Try to be respectful; we are professionals.