Attack on the NYC City Council and the Health Benefits of NYC Workers and Retirees

The battle over health insurance for NYC Medicare eligible retirees is being fought over 126.b.(1) of the NYC Admin Code as well as workers’ contractual rights. This fight, however, effects all NYC retirees and workers.

The key part of Section 12-126 that is in dispute is:

Section 12-126. … b. Payment of health insurance costs. Except as otherwise provided in section 12-126.1 and section 12-126.2 of this chapter, for city employees, city retirees and their dependents: * (1) The city will pay the entire cost of health insurance coverage for city employees, city retirees, and their dependents, not to exceed one hundred percent of the full cost of H.I.P.-H.M.O. on a category basis. Where such health insurance coverage is predicated on the insured's enrollment in the hospital and medical program for the aged and disabled under the Social Security Act, the city will pay the amount set forth in such act under 1839 (a) as added by title XVIII of the 1965 amendment to the Social Security Act. …

The City Council’s Legislative Authority

The City Council is the legislative body for the NYC government.

On June 28, 2001, the NYC City Council unanimously overrode the mayor’s veto and passed Local Law 39 of 2001.This law modified Section 12-126.b.(1) of the Admin Code of the city of New York. Specifically, it made permanent the full refund of Part B premiums to eligible NYC retirees who were paying those premiums to the federal government as part of their Medicare benefits. This vote makes it clear that the City Council has authority over this part of Section 12-126 even in the face of mayoral opposition. As an insight to this law, remember who the mayor was in 2001.

The Proposed MAP Contract

As part of the Medical Advantage Plus (MAP) contract that the City wants to sign with Alliance, there is the following clause (Addendum A, Quoted Stipulations, page 4 ):

“Retirees who opt out of the NYC Medicare Advantage Plus Plan must pay the premium difference between the NYC Medicare Advantage Plus Plan and their selected retiree Medicare health plan, if applicable.”

In its raw form, this an agreement between two parties to damage a third party. The City and Alliance drafted this provision to put in place a mandatory penalty for retirees who choose to leave the MAP plan. The driving force behind Alliance’s profit margin is the number of retirees in the MAP plan. The more retirees that opt out, the less money that comes in from CMS ,the federal Medicare administrator, and the higher the risk of claim losses becomes.

Attack on the City Council

In addition to this attack on retirees, the clause is a secretive attempt to subvert the legislative authority of the City Council. It is my opinion that this clause violates the City Charter. The clause clearly attempts to block the City Council’s legislative authority over Section 12-126 and destroy the purpose of this 54-year-old statute.

At the November 10th City Council contract hearing, the OLR Commissioner made no mention of this penalty clause in the contact. She was there to sell the benefits of the MAP plan and not clearly state the problems with the MAP plan. Specifically, there was no mention of the fact that this would be an almost $4B annual contract. That is the amount that CMS will pay Alliance each year to cover the retirees’ health benefits. According to the stipulations in the contract, the City will only pay a trivial $14M in the first year of this five-year contract ($7.50 per month per retiree). This a dump and run scam if I ever saw one.

What would happen if the City Council chose to begin action to modify Section 12-126.b.(1) explicitly requiring the City to pay for the Senior Care premiums for eligible NYC retirees, like the action it took with Local Law 39/2001?

Would the Law Department argue that the mayor’s contract prevents the Council from passing such a law? I am beginning to think that this contract is illegal as it is currently drafted.

Stupidity and the Medicare Advantage Scam

I am assuming that all NYC retirees and workers know that the City is trying to screw with retirees Medicare benefits. Enough with abuse of power and illegal actions, let's look at the City's stupidity.

Cross Over Retirees

Consider a current 66 year old male NYC retiree with traditional Medicare and GHI Senior Care coverage. He has a 62 year old wife. With respect to Part D coverage at age 65, he continued his family drug coverage with GHI which he started when he retired at age 62. He pays the the family GHI-CBCBS drug premium ($149.96), not the Senior Care family drug premium ($300.60).

In FY-2021 the City paid $2,023.61 per month to GHI for CBP/EBCBS family health insurance. This was for workers and retirees with non-Medicare eligible dependents. This means that the City is paying GHI $2,023.61 for this retiree's family health insurance even though he is Medicare eligible. I am almost dead sure that the City is not paying GHI the $194.14 per month individual Senior Care premium for this retiree, since it is already forking over the $2,023 each month.

Now consider that in 2021 this retiree and his wife adopted two newly born children. The retiree now has three dependents on his health insurance coverage and the City now has a 25 year liability for family GHI CBP/EBCBS health insurance costs. As I stated above the monthly cost for the GHI family coverage is $2,023.61. That is $24,283 per year. Even when the retiree's wife turns 65, the City will still have to pay the $2,023 per month

The New MAP Plan for January 1, 2022 - With a Court Stay in Place

On January 1, 2022 the City wants to jam this retiree, along with all other Medicare eligible retirees (not HIP-HMO), into a Medicare Advantage plan with the express purpose of avoiding paying the Senior Care $194.14 per month premium. Of course, the City is not actually paying for this retiree. The City then wants to give the "savings" to the union welfare funds (the MLC).

In fact the City will probably never save any money on this retiree.

Political Blowback

Since the City can not escape paying the $2,023.61 per month for this retiree, would it not be more politically advantageous to leave this retiree in his current "Senior Care". You know this family is going to be radically motivated to rip the heart out of the scum that are screwing up their health insurance. Of course all effected retirees are going to want to get revenge but the City is not even getting any "savings" in this case.

I created this exaggerated case to highlight the complications of the Medicare Advantage scam. There about 158,000 Medicare eligible city retirees covered by Senior Care. I guarantee you that 25% of those retirees fall into this cross over scenario to some extent. Just think of a 66 year old retiree marrying a 55 year old. Happens all the time. All of a sudden the cost goes from zero to $24,283 per year.

Catch-22

The City has created a Catch-22 for the Medicare eligible retirees. The City will not be saving anything on these cross over retirees and yet the City is punishing them by reducing their benefits.

The retirees are either forced into the new inferior "free MAP" plan or pay the Senior Care $191 a month premium each for themselves and everyone of their Medicare eligible dependents plus $125 month each, for Part D coverage, for themselves and everyone of their Medicare eligible dependents.

Of course the new free MAP plan is not totally free since the drug coverage will cost $125 per month each for the retiree and any of his/her Medicare eligible dependents. In addition, the retiree can not choose to buy the Part D drug coverage on the open market since CMS gives Medicare Advantage plans a monopoly on Part D coverage. Interestingly, the retiree in Senior Care plan can shop for a better Part D drug plan.

How About a Little Intelligence

The City has pressure on it health insurance costs. Instead of picking on a party that the City thinks it can walk over, how about bringing all parties together. That means the insurance companies, the workers, and the retirees. Get the insurance companies to offer better coverage at lower cost and require all the workers and the retirees to make a monthly payment. That would also mean that the City would have to be totally transparent. That is a big problem. Don't feel sorry for the City. The federal government gave the City $1.02B in FY-2022 to pay for workers health insurance.

FY-2021 Was a Very Good Year for the City Pension Funds -- $57.5B Increase

Short and sweet, read pages numbered 218 and 219 from the NYC FY-2021 CAFR.

Pages 136 to 144 are interesting reading about the cost of non-pension benefits to retirees.

A Simple Look at the Pro's and Con's of Medigap Insurance and Medicare Advantage Insurance From the Wall Street Journal

I have previously written about the City's Medicare Advantage scam. That is the one where the City saves money by taking away traditional Medicare/Medigap insurance from retirees over age 65 and dumping them into a Medicare Advantage plan. The City then gives the money saved to City unions for their patronage welfare funds.

It is really difficult sorting through the pros and cons of the Medicare/Medigap versus the Medicare Advantage plans. This is especially hard since the insurance companies, who run the Medicare Advantage plans, spend huge amounts of money promoting their extremely profitable businesses.

I recently, however, came across a very simple straight forward explanation in the Wall Street Journal, of all places. Please read the article.

The basic conclusion is that if you can afford it, the Medicare/Medigap program is the better choice, since soon or later we all have signification health issues. For decades the City, by statute, has been paying for the Medigap insurance for its retirees. Now it wants retirees to pay for the insurance and give the savings to the union welfare funds.