The Communicator

May 2013

Monday
Aug022010

Cost of Reimbursing Medicare Part B Premiums to be Included as NYSHIP Premium Component

 Memo

 

TO:          Executive Board and Council Leaders     

FROM:       Lorraine Simpkins, Health Benefits Specialist
                Deborah Stayman, Health Benefits Specialist                

DATE:       August 2, 2010

RE:          Cost of Reimbursing Medicare Part B Premiums to be Included as NYSHIP Premium Component – REVISION TO 7/23/10 MEMO

In our memo dated 6/11/10, we advised you that the Assembly and Senate had passed emergency budget legislation mandating that the cost of reimbursing Medicare Part B premiums be included as a component of the New York State Health Insurance Program (NYSHIP) premiums.  Prior to this change in law, the State paid the full cost of reimbursing Medicare Part B premiums to Medicare-primary NYSHIP enrollees.  The law now requires that, retroactive to 4/1/10, the cost of Medicare Part B premium reimbursement be shared by the State and NYSHIP enrollees.  Although this change does not modify the percentage enrollees pay for individual coverage (10%) and family coverage (25%), it will result in NYSHIP rate changes effective 10/1/10.

Special Option Transfer Period

As a result of these rate changes, there will be a Special Option Transfer Period from 8/2-8/31/10.  A flyer announcing the Special Option Transfer Period and notifying NYSHIP enrollees of the rate changes will be mailed to enrollees’ homes no later than 8/4/10.  The flyer will be posted today on the Department of Civil Service website at www.cs.state.ny.us.  Unlike the annual Option Transfer Period at the end of the year, online option changes using MyNYSHIP will not be available during the Special Option Transfer Period.

Employees enrolled in the Pre-Tax Contribution Program may only change options under certain circumstances.  For example, if an employee’s premium cost is increasing, s/he may change to a lower cost option.  Other option changes that are allowed will be identified in the flyer.

The new premium deductions will begin on 9/29/10 for Administration Lag Payroll employees and 10/7/10 for Institution Lag Payroll employees.

 

NYSHIP Rate Changes

For PEF-represented employees enrolled in the Empire Plan, the rates will change as indicated below.

Empire Plan Coverage
 1/1/10 Rate
 10/1/10 Rate
 $ Change
 % Change
 
Individual
 $22.97
 $27.38
 $4.41
 19.2%
 
Family
 $99.60
 $110.57
 $10.97
 11.0%
 

The new rates include the retroactive premium owed for the six-month period 4/1 through 10/1/10 making the rates higher than they would have been had the change been implemented on the effective date of 4/1/10.  In other words, the 10/1/10 increases of $4.41 and $10.97 reflect nine (9) months of the employee’s share of the Medicare Part B component compressed into the monthly rates for the remaining 3 months in plan year 2010.  Had the Medicare Part B component been added to the NYSHIP rates on the effective date of 4/1/10, the increases in the biweekly deductions would have been one-third less as indicated below.

Empire Plan Coverage
 1/1/10 Rate
 4/1/10 Rate

(If premium deductions had changed effective  4/1/10)
 $ Change
 % Change
 
Individual
 $22.97
 $24.44
 $1.47
 6.4%
 
Family
 $99.60
 $103.26
 $3.66
 3.4%
 

When the new plan year for 2011 begins on the closest pay date to January 1st, the employee premium deduction for the cost of the Medicare Part B component will decrease from the $4.41 and $10.97 amounts (which includes the retroactive premium owed) and be closer to the $1.47 and $3.66 amounts (which does not include any retroactive premium owed).  The exact amounts won’t be known until the premium rates for plan year 2011 are developed later this year.

For PEF-represented employees enrolled in an HMO option, the rates will change as indicated on the attached page.  The rates for individual coverage will be decreasing for all but three (3) HMO options and the rates for family coverage will be decreasing for all but one (1) HMO option.

The rate decreases are a result of the method the State uses to:  1) calculate the employer share of the HMO premium rates; and 2) calculate the premium cost of reimbursing Medicare Part B.

  • Employer Share of HMO Premium - For HMO enrollees, the State’s dollar contribution for the non-prescription drug components of the HMO premium does not exceed its dollar contribution for the non-prescription drug components of the Empire Plan premium.  We refer to this as the HMO Employer Premium Cap.  An HMO enrollee pays 100% of the amount exceeding the HMO Employer Premium Cap.  The addition of the cost of reimbursing Medicare Part B in the Empire Plan premium raised the State’s dollar contribution for the non-prescription drug components of the Empire Plan premium.  As a result, the amount an HMO’s premium exceeds the cap is decreasing thereby reducing the employee’s premium cost.
  • Medicare Part B – In calculating the cost of reimbursing Medicare Part B premiums, the State uses separate rating pools for the Empire Plan and all of the HMO options combined.  There are far fewer Medicare-primary individuals enrolled in the HMO options than in the Empire Plan.  The result of this is that the State’s cost for reimbursing Medicare Part B is lower for the HMO options.  The premium cost to HMO enrollees for this component of the rate is, therefore, lower.

PEF has already filed contract grievances challenging in its entirety the change in law allowing the State to include the cost of reimbursing Medicare Part B in the NYSHIP premiums.  In addition, we are also reviewing the method the State has chosen for calculating the premium adjustments necessary to implement this change and whether there are contractual and/or legal justifications for challenging the State’s methodology.

If you have any questions, please contact Lorraine Simpkins or Deborah Stayman at PEF headquarters, ext. 283.

 

cc:   Robert Carrothers, Director of Labor Relations

       Elizabeth Hough, Director of Contract Administration

Friday
Jun112010

Announced “Potential Government Shut Down” 

 Memo

 

TO:               Executive Board Members and Council Leaders

FROM:          Bob Carrothers
                       Director of Labor Relations

DATE:           June 11, 2010

RE:               Announced “Potential Government Shut Down”

 

The Governor’s Office of Employees Relations notified us today that if an emergency appropriation bill is not passed on Monday, June 14, 2010, non-essential State employees will be directed to remain at home on Tuesday, June 15. Conversely, employees identified as essential will still be required to report to work. Many of you have by now certainly seen information issued by your agency management to this effect.

We are receiving numerous questions regarding what our bargaining unit members should do on Tuesday. Employees should follow the directions they receive from their management regarding whether they are deemed essential or not and whether they are directed to report to work or remain home on Tuesday.

We obviously dispute the Governor’s authority to direct State employees to remain at home in these circumstances and will take all appropriate action to protect our member’s contractual rights. However, the principle of “work now, grieve later” applies here, follow your management’s direction on Tuesday.

Please continue to check the PEF website for updates as this situation develops.

Friday
Jun112010

Retroactive Payment of April Salary Increases

 Memo

 

TO:                 Executive Board Members and Council Leaders

FROM:           Elizabeth S. Hough, Director of Contract Administration

DATE:           June 11, 2010

RE:                Retroactive Payment of April Salary Increases

 

We have received confirmation from the Office of the State Comptroller that the retroactive payment of the April 2010 general salary increases (both the 4% across the board salary increase and, for eligible employees, the job rate parity adjustment) will be included in the August 4, 2010 paycheck for the Administrative payroll and the August 12, 2010 paycheck for the Institution payroll.

Emergency appropriation bills which have already been passed by the legislature contain the necessary authorization to make the retroactive payments. OSC is now working on the administrative processing necessary to actually generate the back pay. The Payroll Bulletins which will contain additional information about these payments have not yet been issued. We will forward them to you when they are.

We will closely monitor the retroactive payment of these monies to assure that our members are appropriately paid. The statewide class action grievance regarding the withholding of the 2010 salary increases includes claims which preserve our rights to recover the retroactive monies. This grievance is currently pending at GOER and we will continue to pursue this grievance to assure that all monies owed as a result of the April 2010 salary increase are appropriately paid.


Cc: Field Services Staff

Friday
Jun042010

Early Retirement Incentive Questions and Answers

 Memo

 

TO: Executive Board and Council Leaders

DATE: June 4, 2010

RE: Early Retirement Incentive Questions and Answers

Attached for your reference is a copy of general questions we have received regarding the 2010-11 Early Retirement Incentive (ERI) as well as a copy the Division of the Budget Bulletin regarding implementation of the incentive.

PEF will be closely monitoring the implementation of the incentive to insure that it is as broadly applied as possible.  As with the Voluntary Severance Package (VSP) we will be keeping track of members who have applied for the incentive and have been denied. Once the ERI window is open members who have been denied can provide this information through the PEF website.  This information will be used to determine whether our members are being unfairly denied participation in the incentive.

If you have additional questions that you feel should be added to the Questions and Answers list please contact PEF at pefonline@pef.org.

 

Kenneth Brynien

President

 

Denied ERI Submission Form 

Wednesday
Apr142010

Governor’s Actions Regarding Negotiated Pay Raises

 Memo

 

TO:               Executive Board Members and Council Leaders

DATE:           April 14, 2010

RE:                Governor’s Actions Regarding Negotiated Pay Raises

 

The governor’s recent actions regarding withholding of pay raises have generated many questions from our members concerning the status of our negotiated pay increases and bonuses, how the state budget process impacts the governor’s actions, and what potential actions are available to PEF to ensure that the state meets the obligations of our contract.

We believe unilateral actions by the governor to suspend any provision in our contract to be a contract violation and an illegal act.

As you may be aware, the governor submitted a supplemental budget appropriation that did not include funding for negotiated raises for the institutional payroll due April 22nd. Unfortunately, due to the fact that the budget bill was a supplemental appropriation the legislature has no ability to amend or modify the bill, only to approve or defeat it. PEF and CSEA chose not to ask the legislature to hold up or defeat the supplemental appropriations bill, because without the bill there would be no authority to issue any pay checks for the state workforce. If no state budget is adopted and additional supplemental budget appropriations are needed the governor has warned that the supplemental appropriations bills will not include funding for negotiated pay raises.

As of now, the governor has indicated in press accounts that once a final budget is in place that the pay raises. negotiated in the contract will be paid. Additionally, at this point in time it is our understanding that both step increases and longevity bonuses will be paid, although the step increases will be based on the 2009 salary schedule, this will also be readjusted once a final state budget is adopted.

PEF’s position regarding the state’s contract obligations remains unchanged — We will do whatever is necessary to ensure the state meets its obligations and we are opposed to reopening our contract.

Yesterday, CSEA issued a press release indicating that they are filing a contract grievance. This option is also available to PEF. PEF will take whatever actions are necessary to ensure that the state lives up to its obligations under the contract, including, filing contract grievances or a lawsuit; if needed, we may call on our members to take action as well. However, the action and timing PEF takes against the state will be determined by what is necessary and what provides the greatest opportunity for success.

Up-to-date information regarding the status of pay raises and actions taken by PEF can be found on the PEF website. I also encourage members to take action and contact their legislators through the PEF Action Center on the PEF homepage and urge them to act as swiftly as possible to address the budget issues affecting the state workforce.

Kenneth Brynien

 

cc:       Statewide Labor-Management Chairs
            PEF Staff