Healthcare cost raised for the retired

[10 point]

I would wager that the company's premium costs have gone up for their plan(s) since losing 250,000 members.

I was told by someone in HR that the company may want to take back the insurance next CBA.

 

[Inthegame]

I was waiting for someone to post something dumb like that. That is why I said, "in a sense."

No, there is no insurance. It is self funded. But, UPS also did not pay to the Teamsters a premium for all employees in the UPS plan. There was no premium. So, in a sense, there was money to be paid for benefits from the premiums not paid to the Teamsters. They could take the millions in dollars they did not pay for premiums and use it for claims.

Now, UPS is paying premiums to the Teamsters for all the employees that were in there plan. So now, UPS is out millions of dollars that it has to pay in premiums yet still self fund the retirees.

Ah the classic opening with an insult response. Usually precipitated by an embarassingly weak position.
OK you're all pissed off, I get it but take a deep breath Francis and remember I'm not the one that raised retiree rates. I posted a matter of fact answer. You didn't like that I inserted facts into your imaginative musings.

Your illustration neglects to factor in prior to TeamCare, UPS also had ALL of the claim obligations for actives, which they apparently no longer wanted. But TeamCare has had zero impact on UPS's retiree claim obligations, didn't change their cost a penny either way, no more, no less.

BTW since I'm a bit of a nitpicker...the correct term is "negotiated contribution rates" not premiums, and they're paid to the H&W Trust funds, not to the Teamsters. But "in a sense" you're almost right...

 

[cosmo1]

His pension plan, as well as mine are way under funded. We are under 50%. So you take that in account along with how much healthcare is going to cost you. How soon. Would you run out the door?

I feel for you, Gumby, and understand your frustration.

What irks me is when people like Milkman whine about healthcare expenses rising for $50, to $100 to more. What he conveniently forgets is some of us have no retirement healthcare.

When I was paying $1400 a month for two of us and he started bitching about another $50, I gave up on him.

 

[IVE GOTTA PACKAGE 4U]

I feel for you, Gumby, and understand your frustration.

What irks me is when people like Milkman whine about healthcare expenses rising for $50, to $100 to more. What he conveniently forgets is some of us have no retirement healthcare.

When I was paying $1400 a month for two of us and he started bitching about another $50, I gave up on him.

I understand that. Bit the rules were changed in the middle of the game.Brown made a record 4th quarter....no excuses for that.

Not trying to down play what you are saying.

 

[10 point]

Ah the classic opening with an insult response. Usually precipitated by an embarassingly weak position.
OK you're all off, I get it but take a deep breath Francis and remember I'm not the one that raised retiree rates. I posted a matter of fact answer. You didn't like that I inserted facts into your imaginative musings.

Your illustration neglects to factor in prior to TeamCare, UPS also had ALL of the claim obligations for actives, which they apparently no longer wanted. But TeamCare has had zero impact on UPS's retiree claim obligations, didn't change their cost a penny either way, no more, no less.

BTW since I'm a bit of a nitpicker...the correct term is "negotiated contribution rates" not premiums, and they're paid to the H&W Trust funds, not to the Teamsters. But "in a sense" you're almost right...

Do you forsee (a hypothesis of course) a huge change in the retiree's premiums if there's a mass exodus of members retiring before July 31, 2018?

That's going to be a huge boat anchor the way it appears to be heading.

 

[Bubblehead]

Your illustration neglects to factor in prior to TeamCare, UPS also had ALL of the claim obligations for actives, which they apparently no longer wanted. But TeamCare has had zero impact on UPS's retiree claim obligations, didn't change their cost a penny either way, no more, no less.

Could this be playing a role?
Had the company kept in place what it had, or if all Teamsters would have been brought into the company plan, would the company have had the "buying power" to take care of the retirees?
Had all these members not been pulled from the company plan and placed in Teamcare, is it possible that the retirees may not have been left behind?

 

[Orion inc.]

That's just human nature. But maybe , just maybe , current employees will read a thread like this and say "ya , they're right, maybe i should make the contract a little stronger for when i retire ."

years ago people just looked at social security for retirement until pensions , IRA's and 401k's and other retirement vehicles came along . with them came public service announcements encouraging people to take advantage of these options and think more about their future retirement.

and it has been slowly working. what we retirees are doing is the same thing. trying to make people aware of the problem. it's not going to fix itself.

rolls eyes...

 

[The Milkman]

I feel for you, Gumby, and understand your frustration.

What irks me is when people like Milkman whine about healthcare expenses rising for $50, to $100 to more. What he conveniently forgets is some of us have no retirement healthcare.

When I was paying $1400 a month for two of us and he started bitching about another $50, I gave up on him.

Why no healthcare? your local members let it get away?

 

[Inthegame]

Do you forsee (a hypothesis of course) a huge change in the retiree's premiums if there's a mass exodus of members retiring before July 31, 2018?

That's going to be a huge boat anchor the way it appears to be heading.

No, these rates are contractual. Not sure if a mass exodus is coming as I believe the average age of a UPS FT is around 47. I believe members will continue to retire as their personal situations allow. Nobody will go broke paying the retiree rates in this contract.

 

[cosmo1]

Why no healthcare? your local members let it get away?

Not every local/supplement has it.

 

[Bubblehead]

No, these rates are contractual. Not sure if a mass exodus is coming as I believe the average age of a UPS FT is around 47. I believe members will continue to retire as their personal situations allow. Nobody will go broke paying the retiree rates in this contract.

Will the retirees also have to pay the new annual deductible, $200/400, like the rest of us next year???

(I know they don't, but couldn't resist)

 

[Bubblehead]

Your illustration neglects to factor in prior to TeamCare, UPS also had ALL of the claim obligations for actives, which they apparently no longer wanted. But TeamCare has had zero impact on UPS's retiree claim obligations, didn't change their cost a penny either way, no more, no less.

Could this be playing a role?
Had the company kept in place what it had, or if all Teamsters would have been brought into the company plan, would the company have had the "buying power" to take care of the retirees?
Had all these members not been pulled from the company plan and placed in Teamcare, is it possible that the retirees may not have been left behind?

@Inthegame, any thoughts.

 

[The Milkman]

Not every local/supplement has it.

That stinks!! When I was hired at UPS who would of thought that some of us would have no health benefits when you retired. That's sad and I can understand some people are looking at me like a whiner. So some NEVER had healthcare? Just a Pension? That is wrong for UPSER's to not have that negotiated into their supplements. That's when the Union which is the people should of banded together like in the past for at least some sort of healthcare pkg. At that time of your life you need it more than ever. Now I know why some don't want to retire...Sorry to all those I may have irked but I honestly thought every Teamster who worked at UPS had some sort of H&W benefits. I know some Locals have friend/T inside clerks etc and some do not, again bargained and gained in previous supplements. We also had Porters and car washers friend/T in my old Local.

 

[Inthegame]

Could this be playing a role?
Had the company kept in place what it had, or if all Teamsters would have been brought into the company plan, would the company have had the "buying power" to take care of the retirees?
Had all these members not been pulled from the company plan and placed in Teamcare, is it possible that the retirees may not have been left behind?

The company has plenty of money to keep rates low, they just don't want to spend it on retirees.
Realistically, $50 a month wasn't going to last indefinitely. Years ago that $50 represented 20-25 pct. share on the retiree for the total cost of a retiree plan. Now a retiree break even is closer to $1500 a month, making a $150 a month charge only 10%.
Remember as we age, healthcare utilization kicks up so retirees actually account for a disproportionate amount of the "pools" cost. Even with the increases on the retirees, UPS still increases their H&W outlays for retirees every year.
They also have the conundrum of wanting the old guys out, but not wanting to pay their H&W in retirement.
But they broke em, they should fix em, and they got the money.

 

[Inthegame]

Had the company kept in place what it had, or if all Teamsters would have been brought into the company plan, would the company have had the "buying power" to take care of the retirees?

To your point...they would have greater bargaining power with various provider networks as the pool increases. So yes I believe they could have negotiated lower rates with providers. That's exactly how TeamCare (which is bigger than the UPS plan) was able to increase benefit levels from the regular C-6 plan.
My view is UPS wanted out of the uncertainty of H&W and would rather allocate a fixed number.

 

[IVE GOTTA PACKAGE 4U]

To your point...they would have greater bargaining power with various provider networks as the pool increases. So yes I believe they could have negotiated lower rates with providers. That's exactly how TeamCare (which is bigger than the UPS plan) was able to increase benefit levels from the regular C-6 plan.
My view is UPS wanted out of the uncertainty of H&W and would rather allocate a fixed number.

You can thank us no voters for that.

 

[Inthegame]

You can thank us no voters for that.

OK... Thanks "no" voters, and Thanks TeamCare for not just building reserves.

 

[IVE GOTTA PACKAGE 4U]

OK... Thanks "no" voters, and Thanks TeamCare for not just building reserves.

We got a raw deal here...just wait.

 

[cosmo1]

That stinks!! When I was hired at UPS who would of thought that some of us would have no health benefits when you retired. That's sad and I can understand some people are looking at me like a whiner. So some NEVER had healthcare? Just a Pension? That is wrong for UPSER's to not have that negotiated into their supplements. That's when the Union which is the people should of banded together like in the past for at least some sort of healthcare pkg. At that time of your life you need it more than ever. Now I know why some don't want to retire...Sorry to all those I may have irked but I honestly thought every Teamster who worked at UPS had some sort of H&W benefits. I know some Locals have friend/T inside clerks etc and some do not, again bargained and gained in previous supplements. We also had Porters and car washers friend/T in my old Local.

Our healthcare was always administered by our local. When working, it was probably among the best plans. Thirty-four years, and two kids, I don't think we ever spent more than $100 a year on anything medical or dental.

It just wasn't carried on to retirees. We all knew it and accepted it.

 

[Mugarolla]

Ah the classic opening with an insult response. Usually precipitated by an embarassingly weak position.
OK you're all off, I get it but take a deep breath Francis and remember I'm not the one that raised retiree rates. I posted a matter of fact answer. You didn't like that I inserted facts into your imaginative musings.

Your illustration neglects to factor in prior to TeamCare, UPS also had ALL of the claim obligations for actives, which they apparently no longer wanted. But TeamCare has had zero impact on UPS's retiree claim obligations, didn't change their cost a penny either way, no more, no less.

BTW since I'm a bit of a nitpicker...the correct term is "negotiated contribution rates" not premiums, and they're paid to the H&W Trust funds, not to the Teamsters. But "in a sense" you're almost right...

It wasn't an insult. I expected someone who didn't know any better to ask a dumb question. I believe you are smarter than that and do know better. But from your response, you still don't seem to get it.

You are correct in the terminology. I was just trying to keep it simple in terms of insurance "premiums."

You are also correct in that UPS was responsible for ALL the claims.

I am going to assume that you understand that the bigger the "pool" (participants covered under a single plan) the cheaper the premium.

The main reason for this is not the negotiated discount for a huge pool. The main reason is that not everyone uses all the money paid on their behalf in premiums. Actually, the majority don't.

Insurance companies have to stay in business, and this is why they can afford to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for one person and still remain viable. They make money on most people.

There is a formula for the premiums based on many factors, including the size of the pool.

With a huge pool, UPS was able to pay all the claims with the money collected from the retirees and from the money not paid to the Teamsters (CSH&W) in premiums (negotiated contribution rates.)

They were able to keep the retirees at the $50/mo due to the huge pool of participants. You see, the retirees were included in this pool. They lost money on the retirees but made money on the actives. It all balanced out.

Now, lose 95% of the pool, leaving only the retirees. A few people at $50/mo is nowhere near enough money to pay all the claims.

So UPS has a choice. Start digging into their pockets, or raise the rates.

If it was your company, what would you do?

And UPS no longer wanted the insurance because it was an uncertain future. They could see themselves paying more in claims than the money saved by not paying the Teamsters a premium.

They weren't sure, but did not want to gamble on an unknown expense. They wanted to be able to forcast their expenses without any unknowns. A detriment of going public, having to appease the stockholders.