Public Retiree Health Benefits

[kyounge1956]

Public employees and retirees, does your retirement system pay for your health coverage after you retire?

I'm going to have to call the benefits office before I can vote in my own poll.

Seattle retirees pay for health insurance or self-insure, but I think we are considered part of the same group as active employees, which I think would mean we pay less than if buying an individual policy. I also don't know if I can continue my long-term care insurance after retirement at the same rate I'm paying as an employee.

I forgot to mention another health-related benefit. Seattle retirees can receive a tax-free rollover of 35% of the value of our unpaid sick leave in what's called a VEBA account, which is sort of like an HSA, except you can't add to it after retiring. As I understand it this gets voted on each time there is a new contract. If it passes, everyone who retires while the contract is in effect gets the VEBA. If it doesn't, I think each retiree can choose between getting 25% of the balance in (immediately taxable) cash, or roll over 25% tax free into your 457 plan. I believe under the current contract, the VEBA option was approved. Since I've got over 1000 hours of unused sick leave, that will be a nice little addition. I plan to use it to pay for my dental care out of pocket. I haven't had a cavity since I was 11, so I don't plan to get dental insurance, since the premiums are (I think) more than what it would cost just to pay the dentist for my periodic clean & polish.

 

[W2R]

I voted, "Retirees have partly paid health insurance in addition to pension"

Federal employees retired under FERS (such as me) get the same deal as active employees. Right now I am paying $175.09/month for my part of the health insurance payments on my individual BCBS Standard policy. In 2011 I believe it is going up to almost $190/month. I am still glad that I worked the extra two years beyond FI to earn it, since this is much less than I would otherwise pay.

I don't have LTC insurance, but I am pretty sure that those who do, can keep it for the same payment amount as well.

 

[haha]

Public employees and retirees, does your retirement system pay for your health coverage after you retire?

I'm going to have to call the benefits office before I can vote in my own poll.

Seattle retirees pay for health insurance or self-insure, but I think we are considered part of the same group as active employees, which I think would mean we pay less than if buying an individual policy. I also don't know if I can continue my long-term care insurance after retirement at the same rate I'm paying as an employee.

I have a friend who was employed by KC Metro. He retired, and he does not get any health insurance. He has a private high deductible policy to tide him over to Medicare. I am not sure if this is typical, or if it is something about his individual job or funding that denies him retiree medical.

Ha

 

[martyb]

I voted, "Retirees have partly paid health insurance in addition to pension"

Federal employees retired under FERS (such as me) get the same deal as active employees. Right now I am paying $175.09/month for my part of the health insurance payments on my individual BCBS Standard policy. In 2011 I believe it is going up to almost $190/month. I am still glad that I worked the extra two years beyond FI to earn it, since this is much less than I would otherwise pay.

I don't have LTC insurance, but I am pretty sure that those who do, can keep it for the same payment amount as well.

Except...you're paying for your FEHB coverage with taxable money, while mine (still working) is with non-taxable money. Small difference, I know. Once I retire in 2 yrs, my FEHB deduction will be like yours, taxable. Also, I have family coverage BCBS, for which I pay $185 every 2 weeks. I believe mine's gonna go to $199+ after January.

 

[Khan]

Like W2R, retired federal employee.

 

[kyounge1956]

I have a friend who was employed by KC Metro. He retired, and he does not get any health insurance. He has a private high deductible policy to tide him over to Medicare. I am not sure if this is typical, or if it is something about his individual job or funding that denies him retiree medical.

Ha

I don't know anything about the King County system—maybe health insurance, even self-paid, just isn't part of their package. I'm rather surprised that the City of Seattle and King County systems are not AFAIK reciprocal with each other.

 

[GregLee]

Mine (Hawaii state) reimburses for Medicaid part B premiums and pays for supplementary medical, prescription drug, vision, dental, and life coverage.

 

[haha]

Mine (Hawaii state) reimburses for Medicaid part B premiums and pays for supplementary medical, prescription drug, vision, dental, and life coverage.

This seems good, and it has the advantage from the POV of a typical Medicare recipient/taxpayer that the government worker is not being covered under a separate and often superior system. Your funding is subsidized, but Medicare is the basis for your benefits, if I understand correctly your post.

Ha

 

[utrecht]

I'm not sure of the difference between choices 2 and 3.

 

[kyounge1956]

I'm not sure of the difference between choices 2 and 3.

Option 2: your retirement system pays for part of your health insurance coverage—a fixed amount, a percentage, or for some types of coverage, but not others—in addition to your pension benefit.

Option 3: health insurance is available through your retirement system (presumably at lower rates than an individual policy), but you pay for it out of your pension benefit.

 

[GregLee]

Your funding is subsidized, but Medicare is the basis for your benefits, if I understand correctly your post.

Medicare is my primary insurer. I'm not sure what "basis for your benefits" means. The doctor/hospital/pharmacy get whatever they can from Medicare, then get whatever else they can from HMSA (my supplemental insurer), then whatever of the bill is left over, I pay. Usually, I pay nothing. Well, I just retired August 1, so I don't have a lot of experience with this system personally, but I did have charge of my mother's affairs for several years, and she had a very similar deal with the Ohio PERS. Except for an occasional glitch, it was always just a matter of handing 2 or 3 insurance cards over, then letting the health provider figure out where to get the money from. A $100,000 hospital bill for recovering from pneumonia? No problem.

 

[utrecht]

OK, I voted incorrectly then. I voted option 3, but I get no insurance benefits from my pension plan. I get subsidized retiree insurance from my employer just like most current workers do. The subsidies must not be a whole lot though because a single retiree currently pays about $450 per month for a 70/30 plan with $3000 deductible.

 

[W2R]

OK, I voted incorrectly then. I voted option 3, but I get no insurance benefits from my pension plan. I get subsidized retiree insurance from my employer just like most current workers do. The subsidies must not be a whole lot though because a single retiree currently pays about $450 per month for a 70/30 plan with $3000 deductible.

OK, I moved your vote from option 3 to option 2 so it is corrected now.

 

[utrecht]

W2R...I dont think that correct either. The question asks "Does your Public Retirement System pay for Retirees' Health Insurance?" I dont receive any Health Insurance benefits at all from my Public Retirement System so shouldnt my answer by #4?

 

[WhoDaresWins]

In addition to receiving a pension, retirees where I work pay half of the group rate for health insurance until Medicare. My friend who retired in February told me she was paying $207.00 a month for her BC/BS plan.
Current employees pay nothing for health insurance beyond a $100.00 a year deductible (single) or $200.00 (family).

 

[W2R]

W2R...I dont think that correct either. The question asks "Does your Public Retirement System pay for Retirees' Health Insurance?" I dont receive any Health Insurance benefits at all from my Public Retirement System so shouldnt my answer by #4?

OK, corrected further by moving your vote again, this time from option 2 to option 4.

 

[Rustic23]

Are you sure you got his vote and not mine?

 

[W2R]

Are you sure you got his vote and not mine?

I'm not telling!

(actually all I changed was the number of votes for each selection)

 

[Rustic23]

Good Answer!

 

[ziggy29]

One other thought, though -- just because someone selected " Retirees receive neither paid health coverage nor preferred rates " - it doesn't mean they *necessarily* get nothing. They may also have the option to stay in the group plan if they pay the premiums -- something only rarely offered to private sector retirees. For someone with significant health problems or preexisting conditions that can be extremely valuable even if the group coverage isn't subsidized.

 

[Sue J]

DH is given a health care allowance amount based on years of service. His 26 YOS earns him 86.67% (and 59.92% for me) of the cost of the best policy offered. From there we can choose between 3 levels of medical insurance. By choosing the lowest option with higher deductibles he gets a credit to his Retiree Medical Account of the amount not used. This credit is reduced by the low option dental coverage that we added on. This year his RMA credit is $72/mo. For 2011 the costs are going up and his RMA credit will be reduced to $45/mo.

New for 2011 is the option to also cover our 23 year old son under the new laws. That will be $40/mo, reducing the RMA credit to $5/mo but our son will reimburse us for the cost. It's a good opportunity for him to get high deductible insurance at a good price, he's been off of our policy since he graduated from college in 2009 and he's been without health insurance.

 

[jdw_fire]

One other thought, though -- just because someone selected " Retirees receive neither paid health coverage nor preferred rates " - it doesn't mean they *necessarily* get nothing. They may also have the option to stay in the group plan if they pay the premiums -- something only rarely offered to private sector retirees. For someone with significant health problems or preexisting conditions that can be extremely valuable even if the group coverage isn't subsidized.

isnt that option 3?

 

[Emeritus]

Medicare is my primary insurer. I'm not sure what "basis for your benefits" means. The doctor/hospital/pharmacy get whatever they can from Medicare, then get whatever else they can from HMSA (my supplemental insurer), then whatever of the bill is left over, I pay. Usually, I pay nothing. Well, I just retired August 1, so I don't have a lot of experience with this system personally, but I did have charge of my mother's affairs for several years, and she had a very similar deal with the Ohio PERS. Except for an occasional glitch, it was always just a matter of handing 2 or 3 insurance cards over, then letting the health provider figure out where to get the money from. A $100,000 hospital bill for recovering from pneumonia? No problem.

Why would you have to pay if medicare is primary and you have s suitable supplement?

"Balance billing" means charging or collecting from a Medicare beneficiary an amount in excess of the Medicare reimbursement rate for Medicare-covered services or supplies provided to a Medicare beneficiary, except when Medicare is the secondary insurer. When Medicare is the secondary insurer, the health care practitioner may pursue full reimbursement under the terms and conditions of the primary insurer, but the Medicare beneficiary cannot be balance billed above the Medicare reimbursement rate for a Medicare-covered service or supply. "Balance billing" does not include charging or collecting deductibles or co-insurance required by the program.

Medicare Balance Billing Main Page

 

[Emeritus]

One other thought, though -- just because someone selected " Retirees receive neither paid health coverage nor preferred rates " - it doesn't mean they *necessarily* get nothing. They may also have the option to stay in the group plan if they pay the premiums -- something only rarely offered to private sector retirees. For someone with significant health problems or preexisting conditions that can be extremely valuable even if the group coverage isn't subsidized.

I would call this preferred rates but otherwise agree.

 

[GregLee]

Why would you have to pay if medicare is primary and you have s suitable supplement?

I doubt that I understand the question. Insurance won't pay all possible medical bills -- right? If a bill isn't fully covered by Medicare plus supplementary insurance, I have to pay it. If I have to pay, I suppose you might say my supplement was not totally suitable -- is that what you're getting at?