Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
The Competition
FedEx Discussions
Enough is Enough (A must Read)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="davidshaner100" data-source="post: 1214601" data-attributes="member: 50513"><p><strong>Is health law really to blame for plan changes?</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>USA TODAY</p><p>October 3, 2013</p><p></p><p></p><p>Elise Amendola, AP</p><p></p><p></p><p>UPS dropped health insurance for employees' spouses if they had insurance from elsewhere.A handful of big-name firms and many small ones are making major<u></u> changes to their health care plans this fall, and while some big companies are blaming the Affordable Care Act, insurance and economic experts call those claims an exaggeration.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Making health insurance changes, including big premium and deductible hikes when the rate of increase in health care costs has slowed, creates a "messaging issue," says University of Michigan business economics professor Thomas Buchmueller.</p><p></p><p></p><p>"That's not an easy conversation," says Buchmueller. "It's convenient to say, 'the ACA is raising our costs.'"</p><p></p><p></p><p><u><strong>Big companies citing the ACA are "using this as cover," says Farzan Bharucha, a health care strategist for consulting firm Kurt Salmon. "Companies are making a business decision that by dropping or limiting coverage you won't have employees leave."</strong></u></p><p></p><p></p><p>"There's nothing in the ACA that would make dropping spousal coverage be an obvious response," says Buchmueller. "That's the type of strategy firms have been doing for a while."</p><p></p><p></p><p>Most large companies made any big ACA-related changes to their health insurance plan two years ago, says Bryce Williams, managing director of global benefits company Towers Watson Exchange Solutions. He says only about one in 10 of the major companies Towers represents are making major changes to their health plans this year. Towers Watson represents about 80% of the companies on the Fortune 500, he says.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Some changes, like the elimination of mini-med plans, can benefit employees. Some workers were shocked to find how little coverage they had when they landed in emergency rooms. Private exchanges, which IBM and Walgreens have also announced they're moving employees to — can be what Williams calls a "win-win" for workers and employers. Many other experts warn that employers' contributions may not keep up with premium increases.</p><p></p><p></p><p><strong>It's far more believable for a small company to cite the new law than for big employers to do so as it's had little effect on them financially this year, says Allen Wishner, CEO of Flexible Benefit Service Corp., which serves insurance brokers for small to mid-sized companies.</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p>These companies have far more regulatory burdens and costs associated with the new law, he says. In July, those employing more than 50 workers were given another year to provide insurance to all full-time workers or face a $2,000-per-employee fine.</p><p></p><p></p><p>"I struggle to see what's different" for large employers, says Wishner, a director of the Employers Council on Flexible Compensation. "The delay kept the status quo for the most first part."</p><p></p><p></p><p>Smaller employers may wind up sending employees to the government exchanges because of the "expense of it and the administrative burden of offering insurance," says Ed O'Malley, president of the corporate client group for National Financial Partners, which advises companies on ACA compliance and health care, and manages private exchanges. "In industries, that are more competitive, it may be more difficult to not offer health insurance."</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="davidshaner100, post: 1214601, member: 50513"] [B]Is health law really to blame for plan changes?[/B] USA TODAY October 3, 2013 Elise Amendola, AP UPS dropped health insurance for employees' spouses if they had insurance from elsewhere.A handful of big-name firms and many small ones are making major[U][/U] changes to their health care plans this fall, and while some big companies are blaming the Affordable Care Act, insurance and economic experts call those claims an exaggeration. Making health insurance changes, including big premium and deductible hikes when the rate of increase in health care costs has slowed, creates a "messaging issue," says University of Michigan business economics professor Thomas Buchmueller. "That's not an easy conversation," says Buchmueller. "It's convenient to say, 'the ACA is raising our costs.'" [U][B]Big companies citing the ACA are "using this as cover," says Farzan Bharucha, a health care strategist for consulting firm Kurt Salmon. "Companies are making a business decision that by dropping or limiting coverage you won't have employees leave."[/B][/U] "There's nothing in the ACA that would make dropping spousal coverage be an obvious response," says Buchmueller. "That's the type of strategy firms have been doing for a while." Most large companies made any big ACA-related changes to their health insurance plan two years ago, says Bryce Williams, managing director of global benefits company Towers Watson Exchange Solutions. He says only about one in 10 of the major companies Towers represents are making major changes to their health plans this year. Towers Watson represents about 80% of the companies on the Fortune 500, he says. Some changes, like the elimination of mini-med plans, can benefit employees. Some workers were shocked to find how little coverage they had when they landed in emergency rooms. Private exchanges, which IBM and Walgreens have also announced they're moving employees to — can be what Williams calls a "win-win" for workers and employers. Many other experts warn that employers' contributions may not keep up with premium increases. [B]It's far more believable for a small company to cite the new law than for big employers to do so as it's had little effect on them financially this year, says Allen Wishner, CEO of Flexible Benefit Service Corp., which serves insurance brokers for small to mid-sized companies.[/B] These companies have far more regulatory burdens and costs associated with the new law, he says. In July, those employing more than 50 workers were given another year to provide insurance to all full-time workers or face a $2,000-per-employee fine. "I struggle to see what's different" for large employers, says Wishner, a director of the Employers Council on Flexible Compensation. "The delay kept the status quo for the most first part." Smaller employers may wind up sending employees to the government exchanges because of the "expense of it and the administrative burden of offering insurance," says Ed O'Malley, president of the corporate client group for National Financial Partners, which advises companies on ACA compliance and health care, and manages private exchanges. "In industries, that are more competitive, it may be more difficult to not offer health insurance." [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
The Competition
FedEx Discussions
Enough is Enough (A must Read)
Top