<p>Ours certainly didn’t tell us anything. It was just a huge certificate in an envelope with no explanation (we we thoroughly puzzled at first as it almost looked like they were patting themselves on the back for having insured him in the past - then some vague memory of the uninterrupted coverage thing clicked in). He hasn’t been to the doctor (except for some annual check this week that gets him points towards a discount on his premiums) so we have not heard of any issues yet. If he needs it, we still have it - somewhere.</p>
<p>H’s family plan covers all family until age 26, dependent status or not. DDs employer offers coverage as well. She needs to identify one as primary and the other as secondary so insurer payments do not exceed total billed.</p>
<p>DB, he doesn’t know when his Open Enrollment period is, which leads me to believe it is not now - because there’s usually a lot of publicity and email from HR. He told me he thought it was January 1, but I kind of doubt that. I suspect it may have been October or it might be now, and new coverages/choices become effective 1/1. It’s entirely possible he just wasn’t paying a lot of attention, as he figured his choices were all set when he started working in August, and since he wasn’t planning on making any changes he didn’t need to do anything.</p>
<p>He’s going to talk to his HR office next week. If it’s too late for him to make a change, I’m sure they’ll tell him. </p>
<p>Frankly, there’s a big part of me that would like him to just keep his insurance, because the thought of making a mistake and ending up with NO insurance scares me. But over the next 2 years it would cost him about $2k in premiums, and if he can avoid that and keep our coverage it seems foolish to pay.</p>
<p>have to tell you one bizarre clause about pre-existing… usually they say it is considered pre-existing if the person has been diagnosed, or received treatment within x amount of time prior to coverage (1-2 years usually) but there are a few policies out there that drive us crazy…they include the language… “even if the person has not received treatment or a diagnosis but a reasonable person would have sought medical attention” This one is so open ended but is designed to prevent people from just not going to the doctor until they have insurance.</p>
<p>laf enrollment usually is when their “probation” period is over if the company has one…ie 3 months or so</p>
<p>Our open enrollment is this month. My son’s company all his various plans run April 1st to March 31st (which surprised me as we are used to a calendar year plan), so I’m assuming his enrollment is around February ish (he had something like 3 months to enroll after he first started - he was quite overwhelmed by all the choices he had to make between medical, dental, vision, life insurance, pension, 401k etc etc).</p>
<p>
Good point. The $88 a month my son has been paying could have been going towards his student loans (if he was able to stay on our plan). In our case i think it is too late to worry about it as he turns 26 next August, but I can definitely understand the logic of keeping him on your plan if it is possible.</p>
<p>Ugh, when I read these threads my stomach churns. You all have no idea what you are missing…the only westernized world without universal healthcare. Don’t let the fear mongers fool you— we LOVE living where these are non-issues now and our healthcare coverage has been absolutely fabulous. Collectively we had used a big range of excellent insurers in the US but now for the past decade, we have used canadian medical system extensively, and there is simply no comparison. We have never seen a bill, filled out a form, worried about coverage, fought with insurers, had to know about rules, or been restricted from seeing any kind of doctor or getting any kind of treatment. Our care has been top notch, from ER visits, to hospitalizations, to specialists (one of our kids sees a wide range), to diagnostics, and home visits. </p>
<p>I’m not trying to gloat, nor turn this into a political thread, but I feel compelled everytime I see these threads to encourage you all to push for more.</p>
<p>My company’s plan for a single person is about $28 per pay period; if you waive insurance they pay you $50 per pay period. Many companies I’ve worked for have had a similar benefit when you waive insurance.</p>
<p>That’s almost a $1900 swing per year.</p>
<p>star… i have lived and worked in both systems…there are problems with both… i could give you “horror” stories on both sides.</p>
<p>Which province? Surely you’d know it depends if you’ve lived here. </p>
<p>Yes no system is perfect but that doesn’t excuse the insanity and failure of the American system that seems primarily fantastic for just those who profit from the existing US healthcare industry.</p>
<p>Ontario, and still have all my family up there so fully aware of how the healthcare has evolved there and some of the problems they have faced.</p>
<p>the problem with healthcare here is the insurance companies not the healthcare itself imo</p>
<p>Have to say I agree with starbright. I am originally from a country that has universal healthcare. Not a perfect system at all, but having lived in both systems I definitely prefer the universal healthcare. No one dies because they keep putting off going to the doctor for financial reasons. The medical system here terrifies me. My husband is retired and between what we pay for my and my (student) daughter’s health insurance, his medicare + med supplement + med D + out of pocket prescription expenses (thousands) - we are paying out somewhere in the $15,000+ a year range for medical (not dental or vision) - and that’s in a healthy year where no additional expenses arise. That is a huge chunk of our income and it goes up every year. It’s crazy and really frightening</p>
<p>I am covered by both my own insurance plus my parents’ insurance. I initially took the insurance through my work because I thought I wasn’t going to be carried by my parents anymore. Then I found out this summer that my parents planned to leave me on their plan (already paying for dependents anyway). </p>
<p>My health insurance is only costing me $120 for the year through work plus I am building an HSA account in the process ($42 per paycheck). It’s my dental insurance that is on the expensive side ($300something for the year) but I have already found being double-covered has paid off so I will maintain that…</p>
<p>swimcat tried to send you pm…inbox is full</p>
<p>Hey, I know about this stuff … this is in my new job field!!!</p>
<p>Unless the state has its own rules (like MA), the federal rules are different for grandfathered and non-grandfathered health plans. You need to find out if your health plan is GF or NGF. GF plans don’t have to cover those under 26 who have access to health care through their own employers. NGF plans have to cover dependents to 26 regardless of whether or not they have access to their own health care through their employers. In 2014, all plans will be NGF, and all will be required to cover all dependents up to 26 (some will cover just until the 26th birthday, while others will cover through the end of the year in which they turn 26 - that part is employer choice in conjunction with the insurance carrier). </p>
<p>Check with your employer, because even if the plan was GF last year, it might be NGF this year … so you might not have been able to cover your kid last year but can this year.</p>
<p>I am not going to bore you by explaining what GF and NGF actually mean. Just find out which it is for your plan & you will know the dependency rule. If the plan is GF, that should be on all your plan information, by the way.</p>
<p>How could a plan be GF last year, and then become NGF this year? I’m curious.</p>
<p>The GF clause expires after a proscribed time?</p>
<p>The primary way in which a plan will lose grandfathered status is if certain major changes are made in the plan to the disadvantage of enrollees. If it changes to NGF, you would see preventive care covered at 100% (but even some GF plans have this …), dependents covered through age 26 even if they have access to their own health care insurance through their employers, and they have to have an expanded appeals process. </p>
<p>I was wrong about all plans losing GF status in 2014, though - sorry. Plans can actually remain GF indefinitely.</p>
<p>On a similar note, starting this January, my employer is going to charge a $70 per pay period up-charge for employees who choose to put their spouses on our plan when their own employers offer insurance. I’m sure we are going to see a lot more of this in the future as employers are trying everything they can to reduce health insurance costs. My employer does offer the option of insurance for employer and children only.</p>
<p>^ My employer is now charging $50/pay period extra if you and your spouse smoke, $25 extra if only one of you smokes.</p>
<p>When asked in a benefits meeting if they were going to start charging for being overweight, they avoided the question.</p>
<p>You are correct … we will be seeing a lot more companies adding a spouse surcharge for spouses who have access to their own health insurance. </p>
<p>Studies show that the extra cost of obese employees is greater than that of smokers (although the extra cost of smokers is not insignificant) … but calling folks fat & charging them for it is harder to do than charging smokers. </p>
<p>I have been absolutely astounded by the cost of poor health. I have only been in my job a few short months, but I have quickly discovered how much our unhealthy nation costs in terms of lost productivity. Health care itself is a HUGE cost to companies, and obviously they pay more for insurance (down the road) if claims are high. Many employers are now self insured, and they pay the actual claims cost, which is pretty scary when huge claims come in.</p>
<p>While I am not a fan of the way our government is approaching health care, I do feel something needs to be done. I am not savvy enough to suggest just what, but I know it’s not what has been proposed.</p>