OHSU’s Misrepresentation of Its Latest Insurance Proposal
Throughout these negotiations, our union’s bargaining team has had many internal discussions regarding what we’ve perceived to be OHSU’s mischaracterizations in its Labor Relations emails of what has been discussed at the table, of the actions of our team, etc. We’ve discussed writing rebuttals to these emails, but our members have consistently recognized OHSU’s emails for what they are, and rebuttals have been unnecessary. We’ve said it before — we recognize that in this process both parties will communicate in a way that seeks to persuade the Local 328 membership. However, we believe that OHSU’s June 29 email is a misrepresentation of its insurance proposal, and at this stage of bargaining, the stakes are much too high for this to go unremarked upon. OHSU’s proposal wasn’t confidential, so we’re sharing it below as it was presented to our team, for you to read it — and judge it — for yourselves. We’ll have some additional commentary at the end of this article.
15.2 Insurance Contributions — Defining FT/PT pursuant to current 15.2.1 and 15.2.2.15.2.1 Full Time Employees —
Beginning in 2020 plan year and for duration of contract, reduce Employer share of insurance premiums by 5% except exempt employees making $19.23/hr or less, determined at time of initial enrollment or annually on open enrollment (unless demotion, which would be treated as life event).
If a lower-cost PPO plan is enacted, the benefit dollars calculation will remain tied to the current OHSU PPO. OHSU will guarantee the savings and/or costs, as applicable, in the chart below for 2020, against 2020 premiums. Employees can use the difference between the benefit dollars needed to purchase the lower-cost plan to purchase additional benefits or to place into an FSA.(Wellness incentive remains in EBC, and management supports it.)
Change ODS to Delta Dental.
No additional opt-out for dental or life insurance.
15.2.2 Part Time Employees — P/T will pay 75% of contributions discussed in 15.2.1. Remove sentence about opt-out cash benefit.15.X Spousal Surcharge —
When spouse has insurance available through employer and rejects it to enroll in OHSU as primary coverage, then $50/month surcharge for year 1, $75/month for year 2, $100/month for year 3, $75/month for year 4, $50/month for year 5, unless both parties working at OHSU, or employee making $19.23 or less.
Employees attest at hire and annually on open enrollment. Consequences for falsely attesting.
Appendix C Employee Benefits Council — Current contract language.2020 Employee Savings/Contribution Floor per month — Low Cost PPO [Ed. Note: This information was presented in chart form in OHSU’s proposal.]
Single: <$19.23/hr, $40.00; >$19.23/hr, $20.00
Employee & Spouse: <$19.23/hr, -$70.00; >$19.23/hr, -$140.00
Employee & Spouse w/ surcharge: <$19.23/hr, n/a; >$19.23/hr, -$190.00
Employee & Family: <$19.23/hr, -$100.00; >$19.23/hr, -$200.00
Employee & Family w/ surcharge: <$19.23/hr, n/a; >$19.23/hr, -$250.00
Employee & Children: <$19.23/hr, -$70.00; >$19.23/hr, -$130.00
Here’s a factual summary of this proposal, with no editorializing in favor of either party:
15.2.1: OHSU continues to propose that most AFSCME-represented employees pay an additional 5% toward health-insurance premiums. OHSU continues to propose contract language that differentiates between employees making less than or more than $19.23/hour. OHSU is referencing potential savings/costs associated with a lower-cost PPO that does not currently exist. OHSU has proposed a wellness incentive that would be determined by the Employee Benefits Council. OHSU has proposed eliminating the dental and core-life portions of the monthly cash benefit received by full-time employees who opt out of health-insurance coverage.
15.2.2: OHSU has proposed eliminating the monthly cash benefit received by part-time employees who opt out of health-insurance coverage.
15.X: OHSU has proposed a five-year contract. OHSU continues to propose a spousal surcharge for applicable employees, but at a lower cost than initially proposed (except for year 3 of the contract).
Appendix C: OHSU is now proposing maintaining current contract language for the EBC (where the OHSU president will serve as a tie-breaker) instead of making the EBC an advisory body only.
2020 Low-Cost PPO Chart: The numbers listed are associated with a lower-cost PPO plan that does not currently exist. They are not proposed savings/costs for the current OHSU PPO.
Here’s how OHSU represented the above in its June 29 email: “Before we ended for the day, our bargaining team responded with a counterproposal focused on insurance benefits only. We proposed language that would ensure employees have continued access to a great health plan at a lower cost, with premium costs to employees capped in such a way that employees other than those with a spousal surcharge would actually pay less in 2020 than in 2019. AFSCME rejected this proposal within an hour.”OHSU’s email implies that it has proposed a lower-cost health-insurance plan that would result in savings for most of our members. It has done no such thing. The “great” lower-cost plan that OHSU is referencing does not currently exist, and neither do the savings. That’s not union spin — the very first word of that section of OHSU’s proposal is IF.
With its latest proposal, management is asking our union to agree to make our members pay 5% more for health insurance, in the hopes that some day OHSU will offer a lower-cost PPO that might save some folks some money. OHSU continues to ask employees who are already struggling to make ends meet to shunt their spouses to worse insurance coverage or be financially penalized. Even if OHSU does end up offering a lower-cost PPO plan, it’ll also be a lower-coverage plan. That might be a fine option for some employees, but you should understand that OHSU is not saying that it would offer the current PPO’s coverage at a lower cost. The wellness incentive? That would be a hoop for you to jump through to get back the 5% that OHSU took away. If I stole the tires off your car, but said you could have them back if you agreed to take my car to the car wash every month for the next several years, am I offering you a great deal? And notice that any wellness incentive “remains at the EBC” — that’s the EBC where the OHSU president remains the ultimate decision-maker (under OHSU’s proposal). So even if OHSU were to initially offer to return the full 5% take-back for completing some wellness requirements, there’s absolutely nothing that would prevent management from deciding in the future to only give you back 2% — or nothing at all — for completing these requirements.
Contract after contract, our members have said that affordable health insurance is a top priority, but at no time has that been made clearer than during the current negotiations. Thousands and thousands of you have loudly and repeatedly rejected OHSU’s proposed insurance take-backs — OHSU doesn’t appear to be listening to you, but our union’s bargaining team is. Of course we rejected management’s proposal within the hour! And even though we were incredibly disappointed for our members that OHSU would present this kind of proposal as if it were a gift, we at least respected the bargaining process enough to have stayed in the building until the day’s business had concluded — that’s more than we can say for OHSU.