Lockheed Martin Retiree Medical Cost

[Bikerdude]

Before I became eligible for Medicare I was paying $225/mo for medical (BCBS low deductible with no limits) and dental. They had capped the amount of retiree premium's back in the 90's and I was starting to hit it just before I turned 65.

Now with Medicare, I pay $363/mo which includes retiree supplemental medical, dental and MC part B. So my total cost went up for the same coverage. However I'm sure no one is shedding a tear for me.

[audreyh1]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bikerdude Before I became eligible for Medicare I was paying $225/mo for medical (BCBS low deductible with no limits) and dental. They had capped the amount of retiree premium's back in the 90's and I was starting to hit it just before I turned 65. Now with Medicare, I pay $363/mo which includes retiree supplemental medical, dental and MC part B. So my total cost went up for the same coverage. However I'm sure no one is shedding a tear for me.

Wow - now you know how good you had it!

[BobMax]

Retired from Procter & Gamble at 56 with 28 years of service. I paid $388/mo, low deductible, no limit including dental for me and my DW until DW went on Medicare this year. I now pay $483/mo including a supplemental for DW from P&G. 2014 it will increase to $520/mo.

[Bikerdude]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobMax Retired from Procter & Gamble at 56 with 28 years of service. I paid $388/mo, low deductible, no limit including dental for me and my DW until DW went on Medicare this year. I now pay $483/mo including a supplemental for DW from P&G. 2014 it will increase to $520/mo.

I was able to reduce my costs by increasing the supplemental deductible for 2014. After all, its supplemental coverage and MC is primary. Routine office visits are not subject to deductible and I can change coverage each year. If you have the deductible option (and you're healthy) you might want to investigate.

[misty57]

Quote:

Originally Posted by digger1959 I was wondering if anyone on this forum can help me with a "sanity check" on the cost of LM retiree medical. I took a voluntary layoff early this year from LM and was not yet 55 so I have been paying for COBRA waiting for my birthday in 2014 so I can transfer to the retiree medical. COBRA for myself and my spouse is $1137 per month so I was sure that I would save money with the retiree medical. I received the notice this week that the equivalent coverage would cost me $1583 per month. Can anyone tell me if this seems like an appropriate cost for someone retiring with over 29 years of service? If so, I guess that I am going to be getting ACA! I am getting no help from the LM Service Center. Thanks, DG

DH retired from LM last May with 33 years of service.

The open enrollment materials that we received as retirees from LM show that premiums for LM HealthWorks would be $1520.63/mo. (Participant + One or More) for 2014. The difference between the $1520.63 that we were quoted and the $1583 that you were quoted could be the difference between retiring after 29 years vs retiring after 30 or more years.

We never got into LM HealthWorks. We always felt that it was too expensive. DH talked to several co-workers who seemed happy enough with Kaiser so we opted into that in 2009 (I think it was) when LM no longer offered Blue Cross as an option.

[roman102]

Quote:

Originally Posted by digger1959 I was wondering if anyone on this forum can help me with a "sanity check" on the cost of LM retiree medical. I took a voluntary layoff early this year from LM and was not yet 55 so I have been paying for COBRA waiting for my birthday in 2014 so I can transfer to the retiree medical. COBRA for myself and my spouse is $1137 per month so I was sure that I would save money with the retiree medical. I received the notice this week that the equivalent coverage would cost me $1583 per month. Can anyone tell me if this seems like an appropriate cost for someone retiring with over 29 years of service? If so, I guess that I am going to be getting ACA! I am getting no help from the LM Service Center. Thanks, DG

That's sounds about right, totally outrageous! For me and wife we were quoted right at 1600 per month, that includes the so called subsidy. I can get a Blue Cross platinum policy for 300 less per month, better coverage, no subsidy. I think LM is screwing there retirees. LM just give us the subsidy and wish us luck!

[2retireearly]

Wow. I am so sorry to you all with these huge costs. I just retired this month,at 57, and if my health insurance was that HIGH, there is no way I could do it. I am freaking out as ours is 2 times employee, banded by salary...which upsets me, as my 'high' salary is moot now, as I now have $0 salary, but my premium is based on my salary..So premium is 'only' $315, which I thought was high! With a low deductible (but no choice on that). So...not to be nosey, but those at LM, is the premium so high,as your salary was so high? I still feel bad for you, but that might explain it a bit.

[molly]

I agree totally that LM pulled a fast one on their long term employees. Even now.the promised maximum health care subsidy they have for all practical purposes was reneged on. The honorable thing to do would have been to give retires the $250/month offset as promised. Instead - they have priced everybody out of their promised health plan and kept the $$$ offset because they aren't in the outrageously price plan.

Once Martin Marietta became LM---- it was down the slippery slope.

[audreyh1]

Quote:

Originally Posted by molly I agree totally that LM pulled a fast one on their long term employees. Even now.the promised maximum health care subsidy they have for all practical purposes was reneged on. The honorable thing to do would have been to give retires the $250/month offset as promised. Instead - they have priced everybody out of their promised health plan and kept the $$$ offset because they aren't in the outrageously price plan. Once Martin Marietta became LM---- it was down the slippery slope.

Sounds like their real plan is to push people out since ACA plans appear to be quite a bit less expensive, especially if you qualify for tax subsidy.

I suspect that's their real plan......

In the past, people with pre-existing conditions would have been forced to stick with the LM plan because they couldn't move into a state risk pool since the retiree plan was available to them, and they would be turned down for individual policies that covered pre-existing conditions.

That constraint went away with ACA (being able to buy individual policies that covered pre-existing conditions).

[samclem]

Quote:

Originally Posted by audreyh1 Sounds like their real plan is to push people out since ACA plans appear to be quite a bit less expensive, especially if you qualify for tax subsidy. I suspect that's their real plan......

I think that will become fairly common, and is entirely rational from the company's perspective. Lots of retirees will actually be better off, after the subsidies. It is cost-shifting to taxpayers, but that's the way the law is written, so it would be dumb not to take advantage of it.

When figuring their compensation and deciding who to work for, employees should probably reduce the estimates of what this employer-provided employee health coverage is worth.

[travelover]

Quote:

Originally Posted by samclem ........ It is cost-shifting to taxpayers, but that's the way the law is written, so it would be dumb not to take advantage of it............

I think that we saw the first half of this a few years back when retirees over 65 with company paid health insurance were shuttled into Medicare, often with a stipend to pay for a Medigap or Advantage policy.

[target2019]

Quote:

Originally Posted by molly Once Martin Marietta became LM---- it was down the slippery slope.

Some might say that once RCA became MM, it was down the slippery slope!

I believe that LM is self-insured. I don't have figures, but expect the company would like to see all retirees go elsewhere for insurance. Must be a very uncertain part of their business.

[unclemick]

Quote:

Originally Posted by audreyh1 Wow! You all must be getting some terrific health benefits for that price! I guess it depends on your state.

1993 New Orleans. Single. Layed off. Age 49. Cobra about 729/mo to the best of my memory.

heh heh heh - one of the reasons I went 12 yrs in ER without health insurance - too cheap and too mean to get sick. LM was a great place while working though.

[audreyh1]

Quote:

Originally Posted by unclemick 1993 New Orleans. Single. Layed off. Age 49. Cobra about 729/mo to the best of my memory. heh heh heh - one of the reasons I went 12 yrs in ER without health insurance - too cheap and too mean to get sick. LM was a great place while working though.

Wow - I remember paying 384/mo for the two of us for Cobra in 2000, so yes your Cobra cost was rich!!!

[Theduckguru]

The premiums foy my pension's health plan for married couple is $21,936 per year ($914 per month each). And I don't think its that great of a plan.

[misty57]

Quote:

Originally Posted by samclem I think that will become fairly common, and is entirely rational from the company's perspective. Lots of retirees will actually be better off, after the subsidies. It is cost-shifting to taxpayers, but that's the way the law is written, so it would be dumb not to take advantage of it. When figuring their compensation and deciding who to work for, employees should probably reduce the estimates of what this employer-provided employee health coverage is worth.

When we were in our 30s we dialed out SS as far as retirement planning is concerned, but always thought that we would have retiree health insurance and that it would not be nearly as expensive as it has turned out to be.

This is one of the problems with planning for retirement. Corporations and the government, etc. can change anything at any time. If we had known then what we know now, we would have dialed out any subsidy for health insurance (retiree medical and/or medicare). Despite the increased costs for retiree medical, DH took early retirement anyway (this year at age 56). We may have to cut down on some of the world travel that we had wanted to do to pay for medical insurance/care; and if that is the case, so be it. We decided we'd rather he be retired.

There is a lot in the US to see!!

[meierlde]

Quote:

Originally Posted by misty57 There is a lot in the US to see!!

I agree, and further if your over 62 you can still get the $10 lifetime pass to national parks monuments and the like.

In particular if you drive rather than fly you can see a lot of small towns which are still different one from another. Since one is retired there are at least no time constraints on travel.

[digger1959]

Quote:

Originally Posted by misty57 When we were in our 30s we dialed out SS as far as retirement planning is concerned, but always thought that we would have retiree health insurance and that it would not be nearly as expensive as it has turned out to be

We dialed out SS/pension and estimated based on our savings only but like you we did not plan for the insurance costs to be so high. Now we are very glad for ACA (assuming that it will be as advertised) and just hope that will be available to us. If not, one or both of us will be going back to work despite all of our years of planning to retire early.

[nvestysly]

I didn't work at LMT but another mega-corp establishment. For the last 10 years I worked there I obtained the retiree medical insurance information every year in anticipation of FIRE. I watched with amazement as the retiree premiums increased every year (faster than the heavily subsidized employee premiums). It became obvious that we needed to plan for our own medical insurance so we compared policies on ehealthinsurance.com and bought a policy from/through the online site.

I'm still eligible for retiree medical from mega-corp. Their premium for 2 adults is just over $1200/month for a high deductible health plan that is HSA compatible. We pay just under $500/month through the individual market for a similar HDHP HSA plan.

[Bigbass]

2014 retirees Kaiser coverage for self, is $45 a mo, adding spouse is $345, up from $22/$245 from this year. But since I'm still working, coverage from my new employer is still a little cheaper than my retirees coverage, plus it's before tax $. But since my retiree high deductible plan for self is still $0 for next year, I did enrolled for myself only...just in case I needed a second opinion.

I grow up in a family that had no health coverage and watched my parents worry about losing their life savings in their fifties and early sixties till they reached 65.(They were lucky, no major illnesses, till after 65) That's one of the main reason I stayed with the same company for 31 years so I can get retiree benefits...actually, I would still be working for them, had they not sold my dept to my new employer. But looks like the benefits I worked all these years for will start costing some $$$...still grateful I have the coverage!