What's new

Nobody Wins

truckchick1 said:
Oah Harbor or its owners are not in dire straights. They just want more from their employees while they make more money. Have you seen the health care they are offering?? $1500 deductible per person or $3000 per family. Is the raise they want to offer going to cover that coming out of your pocket? The new security system they installed in Portland would help pay for alot of employees medical coverage. I feel that the company is asking the employees to give up way to much while they go out and buy new golf clubs.
Click to expand...

Wait a minute, OHFL offers its non-union employees 2 plans, a high deductable plan and a ppo plan. the high deductable plan is the one your looking at it comes with a health savings account that covers all but 300 of the deductable. the PPO is the plan most people would choose to be under it is comparable to the TMT plans and you can use it most anywhere in the US.

Shifterknob, the VP's don't run their plan any more than the Teamsters run theirs, they pay a company similar to NW administrators to run their plan.:biglaugh:
 
happyltlguy said:
Shifterknob, the VP's don't run their plan any more than the Teamsters run theirs, they pay a company similar to NW administrators to run their plan.:biglaugh:
Click to expand...

While you are correct in what you stated it isn't actually the way it works. In the teamsters plan the trusts consist of employer reps and union reps. The have the money and they must decide how best to use it. Everyone keeps an eye on everyone else. With this company controlled plan while the VP's may not administer the plan they will most definitely be in control and be able to choose lesser benefits, higher deductibles and restructering as they see fit. They will be the customer and with that many people in the plan, they will get what they want.
 
So the high deductible plan covers everything but 300 deductible from a saving plan paid by the employee right? It is still coming out of their pocket.
 
Yes, the Difference between the higher deductable and the HSA deposit is the employees part or deductable. The high deductable plan is for people who want coverage but are not regular users. The company puts a predetermined amount of money into their HSA account the employee then pay the bills up to the deductable and any money they don't spend stays in the account for them to use in the future. Insurance similar to the ppo kicks in if you go beyond the high deductable or if you need the major medical part. It is a great choice for people that don't use their medical a lot and want money set aside for medical when they retire or to pay future costs.

Shifterknob your right, they do have control of the plan. It is worth pointing out that not only has the company not reduced benefits for the non-union employees, the trust has reduced benefits by eliminating the plan we were on two contracts ago.
 
happyltlguy said:
Yes, the Difference between the higher deductable and the HSA deposit is the employees part or deductable. The high deductable plan is for people who want coverage but are not regular users. The company puts a predetermined amount of money into their HSA account the employee then pay the bills up to the deductable and any money they don't spend stays in the account for them to use in the future. Insurance similar to the ppo kicks in if you go beyond the high deductable or if you need the major medical part. It is a great choice for people that don't use their medical a lot and want money set aside for medical when they retire or to pay future costs.

Shifterknob your right, they do have control of the plan. It is worth pointing out that not only has the company not reduced benefits for the non-union employees, the trust has reduced benefits by eliminating the plan we were on two contracts ago.
Click to expand...
Answer these few questions #1 What happens to the employees contribution if its not used in the same calander year ? Remember I already know the answer. #2 What is the max lifetime benifit compaired to the teamster plan ? Remember I already know the answer to that one too!!Now to address the 2 contracts ago theme. The A.B.C. plans came into existance at the beginning of the last negotiations its was said you could only bargain those plans well after most had bargained U.P.S package got the right to keep the plan they were on the xl package that was removed for any other bargaining unit. (Fact). Funny how that works huh.Rremember i know the answers to my questions before I ask them so be careful how you responde.:smilie_132:Oh they cal what the VPS want to do a stop loss plan stops the loss for them and puts it on the back of there bread winners the employees!!:hide:Remember when the company dosent use the money it goes back into there kitty not the employees, just a hint to you on how it really works.:1036316054:
 
happyltlguy said:
"...Shifterknob your right, they do have control of the plan. It is worth pointing out that not only has the company not reduced benefits for the non-union employees, the trust has reduced benefits by eliminating the plan we were on two contracts ago..."
Click to expand...

Well, it depends on how you want to look at it. They change providers like most people change their socks (Wherever they can find a cheaper deal, but we all know cheaper is rarely better when it comes to healthcare), they have reduced benefits and/or upped co-pays several times in the recent past, and most of the non-union employees I know say it SUCKS! They have all told us that WE DO NOT WANT THIS COMPANY H&W!


Your own valued non-union employees DESPISE what you rammed down their throats!

Of course, that's not even getting into the retiree healtcare issue. And while I understand that the company has a third-party that administrates their plan much as the union does with their trust plans, the simple fact of the matter is CONTROL!

David and Edward will be the sole trustees, unlike the union plans where there are an equal number of union and employer trustees, and where decisions are made for the best benefit of all of those involved. It takes ALL trustees to unanimously agree on any plan changes, including reductions in benefits.

In the case of Dave and Ed, they are going to do whatever they feel is best for their bottom-line and their bank balances, and that is very rarely ever going to be in the employee's best interest, in my humble opinion.

And I can tell you this... the union is not bloody likely to ever agree to it, and that's coming from the top levels of the union all the way down the rank-and-file, so stick that feather in your cap...
 
happyltlguy said:
the trust has reduced benefits by eliminating the plan we were on two contracts ago.
Click to expand...
But do you know the how's and why's? The changes were made becasue the plans were so good people would go to the ER and doctors when they really didn't need to. The thought process was to do a few things. First get the costs so members didn't have to pay out of pocket before they ever used it. Second, if you want to use it you would supplement your own use rather than have others that don't use it supplement your usage. That means higher deductibles and co pays. Lastly, hook in a cap for a restructure. 8% increase in the cost of the plan and it triggers an automatice restructure of the plans. That gives the union the ability to know a number that they can bargain and not have to worry about the members needing to pay out of pocket during the life of an agreement.
 
Well, it depends on how you want to look at it. They change providers like most people change their socks (Wherever they can find a cheaper deal, but we all know cheaper is rarely better when it comes to healthcare), they have reduced benefits and/or upped co-pays several times in the recent past, and most of the non-union employees I know say it SUCKS! They have all told us that WE DO NOT WANT THIS COMPANY H&W!

Shifter, maybe this statement hits on a different topic, and one that is much more important in the end. In today's world, there is no longer anything that even looks like "cheaper" in healthcare. There have to be, however, ways to provide decent coverage while paying only for the services that are being used. During the current negotiation, has there been any move on either side to try to find middleground on this issue? Everything that I have read here sounds as if both sides are not interested in any level of compromise.

There was an earlier posting referring to the employee contribution, and what happens at the end of the year if all of that money has not been used. Many years ago, when these types of health savings plans were started, they were all use it or lose it plans. The laws have been adjusted to allow money to carry over in the plans. An employee can contribute in these plans for a number of years while never going to a doctor, and after a time frame can stop contributing because he or she has a balance that will cover any amount of co pay or deductible.

The company has suggested that the contract that was recently signed by USF Reddaway has a lower level of total employee benefits than what the Oak Harbor teamsters are asking for. Is this accurate?

Thanks.
 
chuckandbob said:
The company has suggested that the contract that was recently signed by USF Reddaway has a lower level of total employee benefits than what the Oak Harbor teamsters are asking for. Is this accurate?

Thanks.
Click to expand...
The plan you are referring to is for the members under the California contract that was ratified last year. Unfortunately, that plan will be going up 80%. Yes, 80% and both the union and USF Reddaway are looking to move to a different plan so nobody gets screwed.

My understanding of the Oak Harbor negotiations is that the union has made several attempts to get the company something different but not give them complete control of the medical. Bottom line is that the company wants complete control. They will not get it. There is no way the union could sign off on such a deal with the way these people have shown how they will treat their employees if they get control. It just can't happen.
 
chuckandbob said:
Well, it depends on how you want to look at it. They change providers like most people change their socks (Wherever they can find a cheaper deal, but we all know cheaper is rarely better when it comes to healthcare), they have reduced benefits and/or upped co-pays several times in the recent past, and most of the non-union employees I know say it SUCKS! They have all told us that WE DO NOT WANT THIS COMPANY H&W!

Shifter, maybe this statement hits on a different topic, and one that is much more important in the end. In today's world, there is no longer anything that even looks like "cheaper" in healthcare. There have to be, however, ways to provide decent coverage while paying only for the services that are being used. During the current negotiation, has there been any move on either side to try to find middleground on this issue? Everything that I have read here sounds as if both sides are not interested in any level of compromise.

There was an earlier posting referring to the employee contribution, and what happens at the end of the year if all of that money has not been used. Many years ago, when these types of health savings plans were started, they were all use it or lose it plans. The laws have been adjusted to allow money to carry over in the plans. An employee can contribute in these plans for a number of years while never going to a doctor, and after a time frame can stop contributing because he or she has a balance that will cover any amount of co pay or deductible.

The company has suggested that the contract that was recently signed by USF Reddaway has a lower level of total employee benefits than what the Oak Harbor teamsters are asking for. Is this accurate?

Thanks.
Click to expand...
The RETL California contract is a FIRST contract for them A starting point if you will. our contract up here is 100 dollar first of the year deductable for the first three of my family and 90 + % coverage. Bluecross blueshield plan. AND no copays. Good luck Guy's.
 
Yeah, that's pretty moronic. "Let's go to the OHFL boards and make ///// of ourselves and talk about something we're totally ignorant about." Keep learning cause you obviously haven't learned enough d//////.
 
let me say this about the healthcare premiums,this is a national issue not just one company.OD dropped our most expensive plan which was the best one because the cost was skyrocketing because like said before instead of seeing the family doctor they would go to the emergency room.this is something that needs to be taken a look at but by who.companies will want it one way and employees will want it another way and doctors a third way,so how do you solve it.unfortunately government gets involved and everyone gets reamed.
 
Nero, I'm not sure who you are talking about, but since your post was the one right after mine, I guess you are referring to me. All I'm doing is asking questions to try to get some information moving back and forth. And, yes, I'm trying to learn, and I'm willing to admit that I don't know everything. I'm just glad that you are here to educate me.
 
chuckandbob, I am referring to all the 'tards that think its smart to come on this board and try to argue against and have nothing to do here. If that is you sir, then it is for you. These events aren't therapeutic and soothing, we are long overdue on our contract. This monkey business is BS and directly affects the future and welfare of not only OHFL employees but of our children. So please excuse us if in the process of 'slaying the beast' we are hostile toward stupidity! If this sounds foreign to you, then it wasn't meant for you sir. Do you get what I'm trying to communicate though?
 
chuckandbob, I think you're doing the right thing by asking questions.

There are a lot of people on here, like Nero said, that argue a point, even if they don't have any actual information to back it up or its all just based on personal opinion. I don't think he was really pointing a finger at you.

I've read the proposal, I don't think it's anything the Teamsters will agree on but from what I understand, the Union is tired of playing games. I believe after the next negotiation meeting, if the company is not willing to compromise, we will probably end up going on strike.

What I can say for sure is Blue Cross/Shield is horse s***! I've had it before and I'm still paying medical bills 3 years after I went to the hospital. I think they only covered like $300.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top