[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Chabria: ICE arrested a California union leader. Does Trump understand what that means?Anita Chabria

White House Staffer Responsible for ‘Fanning Flames’ Between Trump and Musk ID’d

Texas Yanks Major Perk From Illegal Aliens - After Pioneering It 24 Years Ago

Dozens detained during Los Angeles ICE raids

Russian army suffers massive losses as Kremlin feigns interest in peace talks — ISW

Russia’s Defense Collapse Exposed by Ukraine Strike

I heard libs might block some streets. 🤣

Jimmy Dore: What’s Being Said On Israeli TV Will BLOW YOUR MIND!

Tucker Carlson: Douglas Macgregor- Elites will be overthrown

🎵Breakin' rocks in the hot sun!🎵

Musk & Andreessen Predict A Robot Revolution

Comedian sentenced to 8 years in prison for jokes — judge allegedly cites Wikipedia during conviction

BBC report finds Gaza Humanitarian Foundation hesitant to answer questions

DHS nabbed 1,500 illegal aliens in MA—

The Day After: Trump 'Not Interested' In Talking As Musk Continues To Make Case Against BBB

Biden Judge Issues Absurd Ruling Against Trump and Gives the Boulder Terrorist a Win

Alan Dershowitz Pushing for Trump to Pardon Ghislaine Maxwell

Signs Of The Tremendous Economic Suffering That Is Quickly Spreading All Around Us

Joe Biden Used Autopen to Sign All Pardons During His Final Weeks In Office

BREAKING NEWS: Kilmar Abrego Garcia Coming Back To U.S. For Criminal Prosecution, Report Says

he BEST GEN X & Millennials Memes | Ep 79 - Nostalgia 60s 70s 80s #akornzstash

Paul Joseph Watson They Did Something Horrific

Romantic walk under Eiffel Tower in conquered Paris

srael's Attorney General orders draft for 50,000 Haredim amid Knesset turmoil

Elon Musk If America goes broke, nothing else matters

US disabilities from BLS broke out to a new high in May adding 739k.

"Discrimination in the name of 'diversity' is not only fundamental unjust, but it also violates federal law"

Target Replaces Pride Displays With Stars and Stripes, Left Melts Down [WATCH]

Look at what they are giving Covid Patients in other Countries Whole packs of holistic medicine Vitamins and Ivermectin

SHOCKING Gaza Aid Thefts Involve Netanyahu Himself!


All is Vanity
See other All is Vanity Articles

Title: Question about emplioyee health coverage
Source: /
URL Source: http:///
Published: Oct 16, 2007
Author: /
Post Date: 2007-10-16 02:35:33 by Artisan
Keywords: None
Views: 229
Comments: 7

Thought I'd tap into the wealth of knowledge and experience here.

Can anyone offer any thoughts on the following? It sounds screwy and blanantly illegal to me. I'm trying to help out a friend with this. (By the way don't bother saying 'get a lawyer'. I have a feeling this is too easy to waste money on, and i'm a do-it-yourself-er with a proven track record.)

A new employee of a company is told that now is the time of the enrollment period for the company offered health plan. The new employee (stupidly) signs up (on the phone automated system) but are not given the premium price until after 'agreement' and then a premium quote is given,. (Why anyone would agree to anything without a price quote is beyond me). The employee then decides she does not want the coverage because it is too expensive. and she doesn't want to opt to join their health plan.

The benefits dept then insists that it's too late to refuse coverage, and they contend that the reason they will not stop deducting $50 per week from her check is not because she initially agreed, but because the employee is 'not covered by any other group plan". So they are contending that not only can their company plan be forced on an employee against their will, but that even if the employee had other private coverage ., it wouldn't be adequate grounds for refusal of the corporate plan, unless it was specifically 'GROUP' coverage from a former employer or spouse.

There is nothing at all in the employement contract about this. The employee never agreed to such terms. The ''benefits' woman answers this by insisting that the benefits dept 'has nothing to do with human resources'. she insists there is no way out of it. It is as if they are contending that employment is contingent upon purchasing their own overpriced health plan. The employee also did not give consent for automatic deduction of this amount from her check.

Now i'm no lawyer but i have sued several companies, govt agencies, etc. in the past and won every time without counsel. and it sounds to me like in this case, they can sue the shit out of them. as well as labor board issues. what do you think? ever heard of anything like this?

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: Artisan (#0)

Sounds fishy. First, $50 a week (deducted from your pretax income, so really about $20) is reasonable. Second, any company would be happy to be rid of her, since she costs them money.

I'd go back and look again. This is bogus. She has some agenda. She is getting a good deal. If she has other coverage, fine. Otherwise, she's a moron.

Honi soit qui mal y pense

Mekons4  posted on  2007-10-16   2:40:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: Mekons4 (#1)

It's not a matter of 'she's getting a good deal'. You think over 200 bucks a month is reasonable for a young lady- have you shopped around?

The larger issue is not if it's a good deal but that she doesn't want it. I don't think company offered health care can be a condition of employment if not agreed to in advance. since no contract is valid without consent, this is not a contract and thus not enforceable.

Second, any company would be happy to be rid of her, since she costs them money.

Foolish to fire someone they just hired; plus, they'd need legit grounds to fire her at this point. If they tried to fire her in retaliation for not accepting to purchase their health plan, she probably wouldn't need to work for a long while after getting paid on that one.

Artisan  posted on  2007-10-16   3:05:31 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: Artisan (#0)

I’m thinking your friend has found herself in the murky world of ERISA (Employee Retirement Income Security Act). This legislation is as messy as it comes, and altho initially intended to ensure that corporate retirement plans weren’t raped by the CEOs, etc, thanks to lobbyists today it’s tentacles extend into company sponsored HC plans. Basically your friend has no rights and resistance is futile because no lawyer worth their salt would touch an ERISA matter (no punitive damages are allowed in a victory - all that is recovererable is the $50 a week she is spending on her benefit package). Add in the attorneys fee and the consumer loses in this battle. IMO, have her bite the bullet and bail out of the program during the next open enrolment period.

Jethro Tull  posted on  2007-10-16   7:37:36 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: Artisan (#0)

If you work for the railroad, you have to pay for coverage whether you want it or not.

angle  posted on  2007-10-16   10:16:21 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: Artisan (#0)

You'd have to read all the rules and regs the federales have imposed........and then do the same for the state she is in.

You may think this is expensive for a young woman, but young women get pregnant. Pregnancy is one item that has caused premiums to rise.

rowdee  posted on  2007-10-16   12:00:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: Jethro Tull (#3)

Yes, the hack mentioned ERISA. Seems like one would have to wade into the murky waters of all this BS in order to sort it out. The most galling part is that the person acts as if they are doing it 'in the persons best interest'.

'compulsory health care, whether you like it or not'.

Coercion & deciept is never in anyone's best interest.

Here is a proposed law in CA: Mandatory Health Insurance: SB 48 would require employers to provide health insurance. Non-employees would be required to purchase insurance from the state.

Thanks for the reply, when I find an answer I'll let you know what it was.

Artisan  posted on  2007-10-16   12:16:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: Artisan (#6)

ERISA

I thought so. ERISA, in effect, makes *every* HC plan issued by an employer to an employee a *government* program. It's become a shield for corporations to hide behind and it’s virtual impossibility to dent it. I have extensive personal experience w/ERISA and that's why I suggested that your friend bite the bullet and wait until the open enrollment period to opt out. Good luck!

Jethro Tull  posted on  2007-10-16   12:37:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]