Posted on May 30, 2011 by Tiffany Schmidt

Unique Ways to Save Money on Health Insurance

Last week, there were two interesting articles in the St. Paul Pioneer Press about providing medical care on-site at businesses.

The first article was about school districts which have started free on-site clinics for teachers and staff. In Minnesota, the Brooklyn Center school district has an on-site clinic and the Farmington and Minneapolis school districts have approved on-site clinics and are working at getting them established. The Brooklyn Center school district program is run by NeoPath Health. The clinic is staffed one day a week by a doctor who sees patients and dispenses free generic drugs. The rest of the week, the doctor is available by phone, e-mail, or webcam. The goal of the clinics is to prevent illnesses and manage chronic conditions, such as diabetes. The school districts involved in this new endeavor hope the use of these clinics will not only save on increases in insurance premiums by having fewer doctor’s visits, but also save the cost of replacing teachers and staff who need to take time off in order to go to their normal physician.

The other article profiled a new business called OnSite Care Doctors PLLC. The purpose of this company is to provide work-site health and wellness services to small and medium size businesses. They provide on-site educational services as well as treatment services including chiropractic and acupuncture. The purpose of this company is to combine the convenience of care in the workplace, and reduce health care costs by reducing stress, reducing injuries and preventing illnesses.

These are fascinating new developments in how to deliver healthcare to employees. It will be interesting to watch how these end up benefitting workplaces in the long run. Thinking outside the box can cut costs and improve productivity.

Tags: , ,
Posted on April 15, 2011 by Marylee Abrams

Retiree Health Insurance Case Heading to the Minnesota Supreme Court

The Minnesota legislature has provided certain retiree health insurance benefits to public employees through state statute. For example, former public employees and their dependents must be allowed to continue to participate indefinitely in the employer-sponsored insurance group that the employee participated in immediately before retirement. Additionally, until the former public employee reaches age 65, they must be permitted to be pooled in the same group as active employees for purposes of establishing premiums for health insurance. Finally, public employers and employee unions may negotiate over employer contributions to retiree health insurance premiums. It is safe to say these statutorily created benefits are unique to the public sector, and not typically available in the private sector.

In today’s economy, health insurance costs are crippling the budgets of public employers. Limited to income from property tax revenues, levy referendums, and in some cases local government aid, public employers are struggling to control mounting costs of employee health insurance. My law partner blogged about a recent arbitration case she presented where retiree health insurance was the central issue in dispute. In that case, the arbitrator put a sunset on retiree health insurance, persuaded by the mounting unfunded liability facing the city.

The issue of retiree health insurance benefits is now going up on appeal to the Minnesota Supreme Court. This class action lawsuit, filed by 800 retired Duluth, Minnesota city employees, challenges the changes the City made to health benefits provided to retirees at the time of their retirement. The City had been faced with overseeing about 100 different health plans for former employees, who had retired over the years. The City streamlined the system, taking the position the labor contracts required the employer to provide the same coverage to retirees as it does to current employees, not the coverage the retirees had when they retired. Over the span of 30 years, Duluth Mayor Don Ness estimated the changes would save the city approximately $205 million dollars.

District Court Judge Sandvik ruled in favor of the City of Duluth in October 2009, which was upheld by the Court of Appeals in 2010. The Supreme Court accepted review and oral arguments are scheduled for May 2, 2011. I will of course keep my eyes on the case and update you with the results.  This is going to be an important decision for public employers.

 

Tags: , ,
Posted on May 6, 2010 by Marylee Abrams

Oddities of Health Care Reform

Understanding the scope and impact of the recent health care reform legislation is difficult for any employer. The law itself is several thousand pages long and spans 8 years of phased-in implementation to reach its full impact on the health care system.

The new health care reform legislation includes some errant twists which on their face, do not appear to involve health care. These include requiring unpaid employee lactation breaks for one year after the birth of a child which amends the FLSA, and a new mandate requiring fast-food chains to disclose the calorie count of foods they serve.

The new health care law also removes student loan processing from private banks and institutions and places the job in the hands of the federal government, much to the dismay of my college age son who lost a great summer job processing student loans.

The best phase-in discussion I have seen outlining what employers need to know right now is in a blog from the Texas law firm Hutton & Williams. It outlines what to expect now, and each successive year in the future.

This massive piece of legislation can only be understood if you take it one bite at a time, otherwise you could choke on the massive overhaul coming our way.

 

Tags: