Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)

eridani

(51,907 posts)
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 03:27 AM Jul 2012

More employers changing to defined contribution plans for health insurance [View all]

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-07-03/business/ct-biz-0703-corp-exchanges--20120703_1_health-care-health-insurance-deloitte-center

Many employers are quietly considering a move away from traditional defined benefit plans and toward defined contribution plans, which set aside a fixed amount of money each year for employees to use toward health care costs.

Under the structure of defined contribution plans, companies hand an employee a set amount--say $9,000--and employees use that money to buy or help pay for a health insurance plan they choose themselves.

At the heart of the shift is a desire of companies to reduce their exposure to health care costs by shifting the risk of unpredictable expenses to their workers.

Few employers, particularly large companies, are eager to discuss their internal deliberations on the issue because they don't want to raise concerns among employees before final decisions are made, said Paul Keckley, executive director of the Deloitte Center for Health Solutions, the health care research arm of consulting firm Deloitte LLP.

"The only thing that's certain right now is (companies are) doing everything that's legal to shift cost to employees," Keckley said.


Comment by Don McCanne: Just as they did with employee pension plans, employers are now gearing up to convert employee health benefit programs from defined benefit to defined contribution. What does that mean?

Over the past few decades, employers passed on the risks of their pension plans to their employees by switching from a defined benefit (a guaranteed dollar amount that employees would receive monthly in retirement) to a defined contribution such as 401(k) plans (a set dollar amount contributed to the pension account, but with no guarantee of the amount received in retirement - the employee thus bearing the full risk of the uncertain investment returns on the pension funds).

Now many employers plan to do the same with their health benefit programs. They intend to pay a set dollar amount for the premiums, whereas the employees will have to bear the the costs of health care inflation plus the costs of any benefits in excess of the basic program to be offered by the employer.

This will be disastrous. Employees are already being stuck with higher deductibles in order to slow the rate of premium increases for the employer. With defined contribution, premiums can be contained further by limiting the benefits covered, by further increasing the out-of-pocket cost sharing of deductibles, copayments and coinsurance, by tiering cost sharing of different levels of products and services, and by further restricting the panels of approved health professionals and institutions.


My comment: This is exactly what Paul Ryan wants to do to Medicare. An excellent way to get better at bankrupting and killing off sick people than we already are.
24 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
well, this will be a good thing, as people won't feel the same need to stick with shit jobs for the HiPointDem Jul 2012 #1
Not really. You're still dependent on the $ to buy health care. You can't leave... Honeycombe8 Jul 2012 #4
my tongue was in my cheek HiPointDem Jul 2012 #11
Ohhhhhh. Phew. nt Honeycombe8 Jul 2012 #13
Another example of why health insurance shouldn't be tied to a specific employer. n/t PoliticAverse Jul 2012 #2
This is what it looks like when our wages and benefits are patterned after scab wages and benefits NNN0LHI Jul 2012 #3
There used to be no dental ins. at all. And people didn't use health ins. much... Honeycombe8 Jul 2012 #6
It should be no surprise... meaculpa2011 Jul 2012 #8
Yes, that's exactly what it is. A 3rd party payment scheme, wedged into our health care. Honeycombe8 Jul 2012 #14
Yes, and those calling for... meaculpa2011 Jul 2012 #20
Why can't we have what the VA is providing, for all? riderinthestorm Jul 2012 #21
NHS nd VA are not single payer. meaculpa2011 Jul 2012 #23
Nonsense NNN0LHI Jul 2012 #10
Bingo. CrispyQ Jul 2012 #12
You can't argue with my experiences. In southern La. and when I moved to Dallas 1985.... Honeycombe8 Jul 2012 #15
I don't know when your younger days were spinbaby Jul 2012 #16
No maternity coverage? WTF? Are you insane? elehhhhna Jul 2012 #17
Major medical Yo_Mama Jul 2012 #22
Excellent analogy! meaculpa2011 Jul 2012 #24
Exactly: defined benefits was paid for with decades of union blood alcibiades_mystery Jul 2012 #7
Rec for visibility - this is why we need universal care. TBF Jul 2012 #5
Gee, who could have predicted this... riderinthestorm Jul 2012 #9
Ayup, several of us caught hell for saying the same thing. Zalatix Jul 2012 #18
Yeah zoechen Jul 2012 #19
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»More employers changing t...