<p>
What industry are you describing?? I have worked in several different fields, and never seen a union that either outnumbered or out-aged management!!</p>
<p>My company just joined the industry march to either layoff or buyout older workers. My particular firm skews very old, several employees older than 80, more than a few over 70 and lots over 65. I hadn’t realized how unusual and expensive this was until my neighbor, who is an HR director explained to me the extra costs related to such a high average age. Of course, the partnership has a mandatory retirement age, so the elderly are only staff. I do believe that they will do away with medical benefits next year.</p>
<p>The over-65s have high health care costs, but aren’t most of the costs covered by Medicare?</p>
<p>OTOH, if the company has a lot of people 60-64, those health care costs could be stratospheric.</p>
<p>We recently discussed Medicaid and new immigrant block for 5 years with some exceptions.</p>
<p>Heard it through someone that medi-CAL covers people without the wait.</p>
<p>That’s right. Medi-Cal covers immigrants legally living in California, without a wait:</p>
<p>[California</a> Medicaid Eligibility](<a href=“http://www.medicaidoffice.net/california-medicaid-eligibility]California”>http://www.medicaidoffice.net/california-medicaid-eligibility)</p>
<p>
What kind of disability benefits do you get? It may be that with your age group, when employees get seriously ill, there is a greater tendency to opt to retire early, especially if that kicks in a different set of benefits, and possibly a different risk pool. What kind of health insurance does the company provide to retirees?</p>
<p>The elderly employees don’t have to utilize Medicare, and there are other types of insurance whose rates are higher. Considering that the age of the people who own the firm is so much lower, it is understandable to encourage retirement.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Insurance premiums are set by age. The idea of setting uniform rates is to guarantee that everyone pay their fair share. </p>
<p>The old system left a lot of people uninsured and uninsurable, and another group being charged exorbitant rates for insurance. Sure there were also many who could get favorable rates- but we have been the beneficiaries of an unfair system. </p>
<p>There are other ways to make it fair, but the two broad choices are a government program or a highly regulated market. The open market didn’t work, because of the people left out. (We can add to the “left out” group those who bought insurance products that were patently inadequate, many of whom may not have realized how “left out” they were until they actually needed their insurance. )</p>
<p>Obviously it is not fun for anyone who has enjoyed the benefits of an advantageous market to lose those benefits, but the “harm” has now shifted from stories of sick children who have exhausted the lifetime benefits of their family’s health insurance by the time they are age 5, to stories of upper middle class families having to pay a bigger bite of their income for insurance. The level of subsidy eligibility reaches a lot higher than any other government benefit-- so the increased costs really are reaching only people who probably do have the means to make it work, even if it far more than they would want to pay. </p>
<p>The old system didn’t come with guarantees anyway – I had an ok rate, but I had many same age friends who were being charged a lot more, simply because they couldn’t get the same insurance I could. My policy wasn’t portable: that is, I could stick with my company and swallow whatever rate increases they pushed through each year, but I couldn’t count on going to another company and getting a better rate – anything that required medical underwriting was a potential risk, even though I am pretty healthy. But the older I got, the more precarious that was.</p>
<p>I personally think that if we didn’t have medicare for all, we should at least had an option for people to buy into Medicare at a younger age – say, 55 and up. (By “buy in” I mean premium-based Medicare for the under-65 set). But that isn’t what happened.</p>
<p>I think once a person is collecting social security, even at age 62, they should be permitted to buy into Medicare somehow.</p>
<p>Back to the premiums discussion. Crunching the numbers is a challenge for me. So…if a level 3 RX is $125 monthly…and you have two of them… after a $500 deductible on a silver plan…it might just be smarter to get a higher level plan. Am I understanding this correctly? The higher level would have less…or no deductible and a much lower monthly cost for the RX.</p>
<p>First: “so the insurers can jack up the rates like crazy.” In my state, not without the approval of some or other govt branch or committee. My point being, this is not entirely left to the insurers.</p>
<p>But, the Busdriver question. Is it possible her rates are subsidized by the employer? Ie, our monthly premium was around $750 or so. A union faculty that negotiated desperately, for years, to have the U assume as much of the costs as possible. When we had to explore Cobra, turns out our family cost, at 100%, would have been $2000/month. I am assuming that means, the employer was picking up roughly $1250. ? (I don’t remember what BD actually pays, if anything.)</p>
<p>Then, with individual, until ACA takes effect, we are now paying $1150/month- for us, with our pattern of needs (right now, jut routine,) it is a comparable benefit to us. But, you can see, far less than the employer Cadillac actually cost.</p>
<p>I like how some here dismiss the unsubsidized middle class as these people who had it so good before ACA and were somehow complicit in the suffering of those who did not have insurance.</p>
<p>My 20 something kids will both be signing up. However neither has the time to deal with the website issues so both are waiting. Both currently have coverage so are not in a rush. I’m wondering how many other 20 somethings are in the same boat and feel the same way?</p>
<p>One kid will qualify for a subsidy, and the other will not.</p>
<p>[Health</a> exchanges slow to attract young, healthy](<a href=“http://news.yahoo.com/health-exchanges-slow-attract-young-healthy-152354603.html]Health”>http://news.yahoo.com/health-exchanges-slow-attract-young-healthy-152354603.html)</p>
<p>This is the reference which I didn’t provide in my prior post. Essentially, younger healthy people are presently not coming into the exchanges. It may still happen but it is not a sure thing by any stretch of the imagination.</p>
<p>You see the entire cost on the w2, LF. We’ve been thru that. </p>
<p>Here’s the thing. I’m happy to pay higher taxes and higher premiums to subsidize those with health issues or those who have been less financially fortunate. But don’t tell me I have to pay my fair share. I pay my fair share. I’m healthy. I resent the fair share statement as long as we have insurer CEO pay in fifty states in the 8 figures.</p>
<p>Hospital accounting reminds me a lot of film industry accounting – very, very squishy numbers. Imagine if hotels calculated the “uncompensated lodging” loss based on the rack rate published on the back door of each room vs. what people actually paid to stay in that room. Hospital accounting seems to follow that as a principle, with many hospitals claiming the equivalent of charity care for the difference between what they collect and the “rack rate” nobody pays except at Superbowl time. </p>
<p>H works for a mid-size company with lots of 30-something employees; family coverage for a HDHP costs the company about $16K/year based on the W-2, plus employee-paid premiums of about $1.5K/year. Rates for next year just came out; they went up a little, but pretty much in line with what they had been going up. The plan is ACA compliant. 20-somethings would probably be cheaper; they’re mostly not having babies.</p>
<p>So its not paying one’s “fair share,” when some pay $1,000s in premiums for insurance they don’t use, while others pay nothing and get healthcare for next to nothing?</p>
<p>arabrab, the W2 number is the total premium that is paid to the insurance company for your insurance. It includes both the employer portion and the employee portion. Thus it’s incorrect to add in what the employee paid, since that is included already.</p>
<p>I’m not sure whether Mr. Fang’s W2 number is an age-adjusted number, or an average number for all employees at his job. It seems high for an average. The average age at his company is probably 30. All those youngsters should be cheap to insure.</p>
<p>Anyone that had their policies cancelled, have you heard if your insurance company will allow you to continue your policy? I read in the local news my insurance company said they will but haven’t heard anything directly from the insurance company yet.</p>
<p>"Buy a gold plan instead (no deductible).:</p>
<p>Here’s why Calmom: The premium is $1602 a month. The additional premium I would pay exceeds the deductible in the bronze policy.</p>
<p>That’s a family plan, right, Goldenpooch? Check the first plan you talked about, which I think was a Bronze plan. I think that $5000 deductible is PER PERSON, and there’s a total out-of-pocket which is something like $10K.</p>