Mesa Legend - ARCHIVES - Vol. 40, Issue 7


Volume 40, Issue 7. Today is .

You are viewing
Volume 40, Issue 7.
December 3, 2002

To return to the current issue please click here.

MCC faculty takes on district proposal
By Joseph Luchenta
Mesa Legend

“Due to the projected 16 to 37 percent rise in health care premiums alone next year, employers are being forced to find a way of cost sharing with employees who use services at a greater degree than the rest of the employee pool. This way, those utilizing the coverage will realize more of the actual cost.”

This is a statement found in a letter from Dr. Rufus Glasper, Maricopa County Community College District CFO, to all benefits eligible district employees sums up the nationwide shift occurring in health care.

Employers are adopting, either by choice or by force, health care packages that allocate a portion of the ballooning costs of medical care to those more inclined to its use.

“The next time we hear from the board
will be in January when they give
their final decision.”

– Greg Pratt, EBAC member

Local mega employers Wells Fargo, Arizona, and Intel will be including options known as “consumer-driven health plans,” placing ceilings on money provided annually for employee health care.

Those employees who spend more than the allotted yearly amount will have to pay out of pocket.

Wells Fargo and Intel are not alone in this approach; an expected 29 percent of large employers will be adding similar options according to Mercer Human Resources Consulting.

The trend of change in health insurance infrastructure as well as premium costs has infected more than just the private sector.

Our own Maricopa County Community College District (MCCCD) has been presented with new proposals for health care packages that include “core plans” and “buy up plans.”

Core plans will be weighted with deductibles and co-payments higher than those currently offered, but provide some reprieve in lower monthly premium costs.

The buy up plan is free of deductibles and has co-payments and coverage nearly identical to the current provisions.

The buy up plan does of course require higher monthly premiums for those who wish to buy in.

The greatest concern faculty has for themselves, as well as other district employees who will be affected, is the loss of income that would be caused by such a cost increase.

These concerns are amplified when coupled with the lack of guarantee for any real wage increase next year.

Current forecasts reveal the possibility of a wage increase as low as 1 percent for district employees.

Three funding arrangements are in the works among the district’s Employee Benefit Action Committee (EBAC).

One arrangement provides that the district pick up is 100 percent of the increase in cost for employees resulting from escalating benefit costs.

Two other possibilities would require the district to provide 50 or 75 percent of the funding.

EBAC announced that it would hold a presentation to the District Board of Governors on Nov. 26 at 6:30 p.m.

EBAC member Greg Pratt openly invited all faculty members to attend and show support for the EBAC’s proposal that the district provide 100 percent of the funding for the benefit cost increase.

Pratt emphasized the importance of faculty support at the presentation, saying, “The next time we hear from the board will be in January when they give their final decision. The proposal (for 100 percent district provided funding) is being made on the twenty-sixth. If nothing happens in December and January, they will come back and tell us what they are doing.”

Situations similar to that being faced by the MCCCD, Wells Fargo, Arizona, and Intel employees are presenting themselves to employees across the nation.

A 12.7 percent increase in health care premiums between 1996 and 2002 reveals little hope for price leveling in the health care market.
As for our district’s own benefit issues, a strenuous negotiation process is likely to ensue through the end of the year.

A strong district, worthy of attracting and retaining quality instructors and employees, is dependent on a package both fair and economically logical.