×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Health benefits
4

Health benefits

Health benefits

(OP)
At my current job, I have to pay $185 per WEEK for health insurance.  The employer pays 50%, we pay 50%.  No dental, no vision.  Have any of you ever HEARD if benefits this bad?  It's really starting to tick me off...

RE: Health benefits

That is a lot! I think I pay almost that a month for a family of 5 ... med, vision & dental.
You must be with a small company or small/privately owned.

Chris
Systems Analyst, I.S.
SolidWorks 06 4.1/PDMWorks 06
AutoCAD 06
ctopher's home (updated 06-21-06)

RE: Health benefits

(OP)
The $185/week is for a family plan.

RE: Health benefits

Dexter,

That is pretty common. You are covered for very little money, and your family is usually an additional amound. Depending on how big your family is, this can add up. Depending on what type of company you are with, you could shop around to see if you can get a better plan or less costly plan, and try to negotiate with your employer to pay YOU instead of the insurance company an amound equal to their contribution for you. Chances are, however, that this will cost you much much more $$ for less coverage.

Wes C.
------------------------------
No trees were killed in the sending of this message, but a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.

RE: Health benefits

Is that a pretty good plan? That's $1,500 a month if the employer's covering half, and that's quite a lot. At my last job, our rates were fairly low, ~$600/mo for a family, but it was a major medical plan that had a 35% deductible, $35 copay, and only covered generic medications. In our case, the company covered about half of that $600.

These days, if you don't work for a big company or the government, you're gonna get hosed on the benefits side.

--------------------
How much do YOU owe?
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
--------------------

RE: Health benefits

(OP)
What is considered bigger than a "small" company these days?

RE: Health benefits

I'd say revenues over $100 million, more than about 150 people starts to move you into the low-end of the mid-size range.

You probably need to look at profitability, too.

--------------------
How much do YOU owe?
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
--------------------

RE: Health benefits

At the last 2 companies I was at, we didn't have any health insurance benefits available. No dental, no drugs, no vision, no nothing.

So, I guess your's isn't so bad.

"Do not worry about your problems with mathematics, I assure you mine are far greater."   
Albert Einstein
Have you read FAQ731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?

RE: Health benefits

No health benefits at all.

That is downright immoral given that the US health system is essentially predicated on having insurance.

--------------------
How much do YOU owe?
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
--------------------

RE: Health benefits

That's pretty bad. At my present company, they proclaimed they had health insurance benefits. My "half" is about $600 per month (less than your $185 per week, but still bad). Thais is outrageous.

I stayed on my wife's company's plan. She is actually a co-owner of her company, so I get some insight into the real deal with insurance. Her company of course pays for our insurance, but its only about $300 per month.

Why would my company's inruance be twice what my wife's company's is- for the same type of coiverage? IT makes no sense. I hardly believe that if I put up the $600 per month for insurance through my company that they would actually be putting up the same $600 even theough they claim that they pay half of the premium.

To me it appears that they use this false benefit to make it look like they have all the things other companies have, but when it comes down to it, its really not a benefit at all- just smoke in mirrors.

If they were gonna put up $600 per month towards my insurace if I matched it (again I doubt that seriously), they should give me that amount or at least some amount even if less than that towards an outside policy- if it were a real benefit. But when asked they said they wouldn't and didn't do that.

Its not right. Its a scam.

Ed

www.engineerboards.com

RE: Health benefits

I pay $310 a month (family plan). Employer matches. There are co-payments and the dental plan isn't anything to shout about, so I've suplimented it with an additional $50 a month dental plan through my union.

Good? Bad?

Well, it's something. One thing is for sure: it's a lot easier to walk into a doctor's office and give them my insurance card than to do the processing myself.

RE: Health benefits

$7800 a yr for seems a trifle high, but that's somewhat consistent with Blue Cross of CA rates (see page 8 of 20):
http://www.bluecrossca.com/visitor/noapplication/individuals/researchplans/medicalplans/pw_a082895.pdf

You'd have to compare benefits line-item by line-item to be able to accurately judge.

The biggest cost factor in medical coverage is the risk pool.  In a company like mine, with over l0,000 employees, and self-insuring, e.g., the company is actually the insurance company, you could get contributions a lot lower, say $25 per week, but the benefits might not be as good and the overall payout caps might be different.

TTFN



RE: Health benefits

Wake up.  Healtcare is outrageously expensive.  I'd say that what you are experiencing is, if not normal, then certainly the harbinger of the future.

It wasn't too many years ago that health benefits at any company didn't even exist.  It was a perquisite dreamed up to attract & retain certain talent.  It blossomed to the point that most companies offered it.  Then somebody decided that companies would be the distribution vehicle for healthcare benefits.  Now it appears that everyone thinks they are entitled to health insurance, the best care that it can buy, and for no cost whatsoever.

Hit the net and try to get your own health insurance coverage.  You'll discover how much it costs to have everything you want covered.  You may see what a financial burden is being placed on your company management to provide healt benefits, and still make a profit.  The alternative is governmental healthcare, but it's impossible if everyone wants to pay less taxes.

TygerDawg

RE: Health benefits

I pay $150 each two weeks for family coverage. My employer says they cover 75% of the cost. We have dental and vision but they are not included with the medical, they are addtional plans we can opt for at an addtional premium.

Almost everybody that I know of in town working for an EPC contractor pays much more than I for less coverage.

NozzleTwister
Houston, Texas

RE: Health benefits

Again,
My wife owns her company so we see it from both sides of the fence. Our policy through her company is an excelent one and costs half what my company claims the policy is.

I honestly believe my company and other go with some high-priced deal to be able to say they offer insurance, but no one is going to bite on something that cost twice what it does elsewhere.

I'm not just using my wife's company as a measuring stick. I'm looking at evry place I've worked. $600 per month is twice what I have ever paid.

Why "offer" something that is grossly unaffordable? Could it be to put a feather in your cap so you can act like you're one of the big dogs? Why shouldn't the company put their money where their mouth is and offer a monthly stipend in the amount they claim they would pony up if were to elect to go with their outrageous mock plan?

Awake and wondering.

Ed

www.engineerboards.com

RE: Health benefits

Not sure of the company tax system in the US, but maybe a $1 extra spent on employee health care can be written off or claimed against tax better than a $1 extra spent on employee renumeration.

Just like right now I am better off leasing a vehicle and claiming it as an opex than if I bought it outright and claimed it as an asset.  It's the same item, similar overall costs but the advantage is there.

LewTam Inc.
Petrophysicist, Leading Hand, Natural Horseman, Prickle Farmer, Crack Shot, Venerable Yogi.

RE: Health benefits

I know that state agencies in California will give you a cash payment in lieu of exercising health benefits. It is as lewtam says and they pay you less than the cost of the insurance both because they can deduct insurance costs and they must pay payroll taxes on the cash. Still, it is standard practice for the state.

--------------------
How much do YOU owe?
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
--------------------

RE: Health benefits

Wow I never realised that the costs were that large for employers or employees the OP quotes $9,620 pa, that is a full years salary in some countries for an engineer.

Do employers also have to contribute to nation or state taxes on top of that?

RE: Health benefits

ajack1 - the answer is yes.

RE: Health benefits

wooo!  Am I glad I didn't stay in the US?  When my terminal illness appears for me it won't bleed me and my dependents dry before doing its job on me.

RE: Health benefits

Sounds insane to me...

I pay about $65 a week for a family plan through blue cross and blue shield. My company is small, about 500 employees worlwide at just under 100m per year in sales

RE: Health benefits

I'm in the USA (for reference)

it does sound very high to me too.  My current employer is a large company (fortune 500), so maybe a bad comparison, but I pay $60/mo for a family plan.  $1600/yr deductible.  Could also opt for $300/mo with a much lower deductible.

My last job was $80/mo family plan, with essentially no deductible (just 80/20 co-pays).  That was a small-ish company (~$60M/yr revenue).


RE: Health benefits

I considered the fact that the company could possibly get a better tax break by paying heath care costs rather than increased salary.

That would be OK. They say they would match $600 per month towards my insurance (which I STILL find hard to fathom), then give me $400 towards and outside policy instead. Surely the $200 defecit would more than offset the tax savings. But no cigar.

The inflexibility there and the unbelievable prices (compared to previous jobs, my wife's company, rates I've heard from other people) tells me something doesn't add up. To me, it seems a phantom benefit because no one is really going to step up and devote $600 per month of their own money. So now the company doesn't have to either.

Ed

www.engineerboards.com

RE: Health benefits

Medical insurance is quite Byzantium in general.  However, the biggest differentiator in cost is the benefit.  That is tied in with the the size of the risk pool.  If your plan allows you to go to any doctor anytime, you pay for that privilege and added expense.

We have a similar deal with our insurance.  Go to the preferred provider with pre-negotiated rates and you pay $15 only, while going out of network incurs a 40% of cost copay.

Without spending a few hours of comparison, there's no way to realistically judge the merits of any given plan.  I remember spending about 6 hours trying to sort my way through Medicare Part D last year for my father.  Luckily, his HMO had already taken care of everything.

TTFN



RE: Health benefits

So it's common to have to partial pay for your benefits?  I've been at this company since graduating 2.5 years ago, and haven't paid a penny for benefits.  Medical, dental vision included.

Looking at some of the figures, a prospective employeer would have to offer me a 20% raise just to get me in the same take-home pay ballpark.

That's absolute craziness!!

RE: Health benefits

True enough.  

For companies that have labor-intensive content, reducing medical benefits is a quick and dirty way to stay cost-competitive.

TTFN



RE: Health benefits

Small companies usually get nailed when it comes to health benefits.  Obviously you don't get the volume discounts that some larger employers receive.  I'll be honest, I don't know anybody in WI who is not paying at least a portion of their health insurance costs.  The most lucrative health care plans in my area are for UAW workers and public employees (teachers, city staff, etc.)  For me, it runs around $125 a month (single not family).  There are advantages to being single w/o kids!  Our big disadvantage in my area of Wisconsin is that there are really only two players in town, so prices don't need to be very competitive.  Thus we pay a fairly high price for the services we receive.

One twist that my family experienced when we had our company in Pennsylvania was that health insurance tends to adjust itself to the median age of your company, plus the payments the insurance company is required to pay.  What small businesses often find is that their premiums are much higher when the median employee age is much higher.  The insurance company's logic is that they are more likely to have to payout for older workers.  The same seems to hold true for family plans.  If your company is comprised of single, younger workers in their 20s & 30s, your premiums will likely be much less than a company with a median age of 45 and that is heavily vested in family plans.  If you have someone in a small company have a quadruple bypass (like my machining supervisor had), lets just say you WILL see an across-the-board rate increase the next year around.

RE: Health benefits

triplez,
Good points. I'm not sure about the history of my company before I got here. I do know one guy passed away while here, the owner is 55, there is another 50-somthing year-old guy, a few in their 30's (myself included) and just about evryone is married with kids. I'd say the average age is 40 to 45. Its a small company- about 15 people total.

Ed

www.engineerboards.com

RE: Health benefits

something else to consider . . .

i went for about 2 years or so without insurance.  every time i went to the doctor, i mentioned that i had no health insurance.  as such, i requested a discount and i assured the physician that i would pay his bill, in cash and in full.  not one time did a physician deny my request.  i even had a major examination/diagnosis and told the same to the clinic conducting the examination/diagnosis.  to my astonishment, i receive a 50% discount, agreed to a 90-day contract, and paid the bill, in full, within the 90 days.  now that i think about it, there was one exception, but not a big deal either.

since then, i have always considered just having a catastrophic health insurance policy (for obviously bad/costly health matters).  otherwise, simply pay the physician in cash and do away with the adminstration costs.

not really a good plan/practice, but it met my needs for the time (somewhat still does today.

something to ponder . . .
-pmover

RE: Health benefits

Essentially, that's what our company does.  

They are the insurer, while Cigna manages the plan and money.  Given the size of the company, it's a way to tightly manage the cost of the program by tweaking the benefits up or down year-to-year to maintain a reasonable level of coverage for the outlay.

TTFN



RE: Health benefits

Pmover,

I guess I'm a proponent of paying for health insurance no matter what the cost (although I'm not sure how the catastrophic policy works).  The big risk you have is the difference between hospital bills and doctors' bills.  Sure, the doctors' bills are generally reasonable, especially if it's just a GP visit or a consultation.  The problem you have is surgery or anything that requires an extended stay in a hospital.  

Ask someone who has had a child lately or an operation what their hospital bill reads.  There are usually two sections to the bill: what the hospital would bill an individual and what a hospital bills the insurance carrier.  The amount billed to the insurance carrier is substantially less.  Without that insurance carrier though, you'd receive a pretty hefty bill from the hospital for services rendered.  As most posters on this board are professionals, they'd likely be paying that off over a long period of time.  And with the reformed bankruptcy laws, they wouldn't have an easy out without losing major assets.

To put it in perspective, my cousin's last child would have run her in the mid $20s w/o insurance.  My father's gall bladder surgery and hospital stay 5 years ago would have been in the high $40s without the insurance.

Honestly, I see insurance in the US as a necessary evil in case something really bad happens to you.  Although with many plans having lifetime $1M caps, it doesn't take too many accidents to max out.  And hope to hell you don't have something happen to you prior to attempting to obtain insurance.  Pre-existing conditions can be very costly with regards to rates, and sometimes keep individuals from even getting insurance.

RE: Health benefits

Sounds high but...

I'm from the UK originally and am still getting used to this health insurance malarky.

Also I've been spoilt.  My wifes insurance is really good and costs her nothing.

We decided to add the insurance from my place as second insurance but even for the PPO option with UHC it's a lot less than yours.  If I recall correctly I pay less a month than you do a week.

When we were looking around a year or so ago we could get reasonable insurance for the family for a little over $300 but I guess maybe we didn't read some of the small print.

RE: Health benefits

In Oz, mine is about $55 a month. That is subsidised by the Government (they've got mates in the insurance business), and is some sort of weird overlay over the public health system, which actually does the bulk of the serious stuff.

Luckily I've never had to find out how it actually works.

 

Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

RE: Health benefits

I just heard a clip on the radio this morning discussing health insurance and the difficulties that people are having finding affordable, quality health insurance.

According to them (KGO radio), health insurance premiums have risen by 78% since 2000.

Of course, employers are shifting more and more of that to employees. At the same time, the costs of care are rising dramatically (I've heard on average about 10-15% per year).

There is a health care crisis in the US. Many people don't see it, though, because they have good coverage from their employers.

Along with the folly of US foreign policy and the national debt, this is the most severe and urgent issue facing our country and yet it's not receiving a whole lot of attention.

--------------------
How much do YOU owe?
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
--------------------

RE: Health benefits

It's received plenty of attention, but one side is simply putting their heads in the sand, hoping that it will go away, because they refuse to contemplate universal insurance and the other side doesn't want to contemplate rationing of care.

TTFN



RE: Health benefits

I suppose that's true in a sense.

Here in California, the governor just vetoed a bill that would institute a single payer system.

Meanwhile, the uninsured/underinsured continue to be gouged by hospitals that charge them more because they're not covered by a big group contract or pharmaceuticals, the world-wide cost of which is subsidized by American consumers because most other countries control drug prices.

The patent laws in the US also allow the drug companies to repeatedly reclassify a drug so as to extend its patent protection and their market monopolies.

I think a big part of the problem is that so many people are still covered by so-called "cadillac" plans. To them, there's no crisis.

--------------------
How much do YOU owe?
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
--------------------

RE: Health benefits

Gouged?  More than half the patients my wife sees in ER and urgent care at the county hospital don't pay anything.  The hospital is so poor that it can't afford computerized patient records because it spends all its money funding uninsured patient visits.

Patent rights expire at their normal term.  The companies can submit new applications or modifications of old drugs for new patents, but the old drug is open game for generics, as seen in Rogaine, Claritin, etc., which both have patented successors, but the original products are available as generics.

TTFN



RE: Health benefits

It's got to be said I used to think the national health service in the UK was nothing special.

I hadn't come to use it that much, certainly not for anything too serious.

The bigggest things you'd here about were long waiting lists, mainly for procedures but even several days just to see your GP sometimes, that and the fact that different regions of the country had better health care than others etc.

When I came to the States my Wife (US born & bread) tried convincing me that the health care here was a lot better.  If figured given that except for medicare/county facilities etc as you were effectively 'paying' for it (either direct or through insurance) that maybe she'd be right and they'd be more concerned with patient (customer) satisfaction.

So far I have yet to be convinced.  

Sure if you have great insurance and live near a really good hospital, doctors etc then it's great.

If you don't have good insurance or even just live a ways from any really major medical facilities it sucks.

In Ridgecrest CA the few times I have been I frequently end up waiting an hour or so after my scheduled apointment to actually see the doctor and the repuation of the local hospital isn't that good.

For the majority of Americans I'm not sure it's better than the UK system despite the fact that the UK system is seriously flawed.

RE: Health benefits

Living in the UK, I'm not sure what KENAT heard, but it doesn't seem to be what they experienced. Sadly you hear a lot of things, if you read the wrong newspapers. My experience is that I see my GP either the same day or the next. The recent changes in the NHS is that you now see your GP within 2 days maximum. Sadly some people now complain that they want to see their GP in 3 or 4 days time, when they're not so busy. The aussie expression of wingeing pommes comes to mind. Thankfully I've never had any serious problems but a close relative with a serious illness was diagnosed, admitted into hospital, and operated on within the week, and no bills at the end of it. You never read about those stories in the press.

The frightening thing about reading these posts from americans is what happens when they're not working, or retired say. Who pays the insurance then? For me I have nothing to worry about. I pay my national health insurance of about 6% of my salary while I am working, and that is full coverage from cradle to grave, employed, unemployed, retired, or child. I have yet to see any serious flaws in the NHS, other than from what I 'hear'. Of course if I think the NHS isn't been run properly I can always vote for someone else to run it.

corus

RE: Health benefits

Corus,

I left the UK back in 03 when some of the reforms were starting to come in.  Sounds like at least on getting to see your GP it's got better.  I frequently had to wait several days and then, at least at my Doctor growing up, frequently had to wait an hour or so past my apointment.  I also had to wait weeks for X rays.

As I said I'd never come to use it much but people I'd known had mixed experiences.  I've got to say probably more good than bad, as I tried convincing my wife when I moved here.  However I lived in Hampshire which was supposedly one of the areas with better health care than others.

I was perhaps unfair saying seriously flawed, my wifes propaganda must be taking effectsmile.

There are schemes (Mecicare, County Hospitals etc),  in the US to cover the elderly those on wellfare etc although I'm not sure just how great that coverage is, different people have different views.  The not working thing is more of an issue, I've been lucky so far in that my wife has great benefits but if that changed in the future and I was out of work I'd be worried.

RE: Health benefits

IRstuff: Yes, gouged. The rates that hospitals charge uninsured patients are their basic rates. From my personal experience they include things like $10 for one vitamin pill and $5,000 for a 24-hour period of oxygen therapy.

Of course, the insurance companies negotiate dramatic reductions in these rates for all of their customers. Therefore, even if you've got a very high-deductible plan (mine was 35%), you at least get the benefit of paying the insurance company's rates rather than the rates charged to the uninsured.

I recognize the issues that many hospitals face which include having their ERs effectively function in a primary care capacity to the indigent (whose chronic problems are typically ignored until they become acute). That's just another symptom of how broken is our health care system.

Regardless of those economics, though, charging the uninsured more than the customers of the insurance companies is, to me, gouging. I suppose they do that just on the off chance that one of their patients has some assets that they can take.

It's a lousy choice when you must choose between insolvency and health care.

I don't know what the answer is but the problems are pretty evident.

--------------------
How much do YOU owe?
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
--------------------

RE: Health benefits

The original post was in regards to employee contributions for health.  However, this has turned into a political debate on the merits of various health care systems and I have to add my two cents.  

True, our system has problems.  But so do all the others.  
Whether you, or your employer, pays high premiums or you pay for it through taxes, the bottom line is that those that work pay for those that do not.  I personally do not want a system where care is rationed and I am willing to pay for it.  Also, I do not remember reading about universal health care in the US constitution or bill of rights.

An article about six month ago in the Wall Street Journal pointed out the treatment and survival rates of several cancers in the US, Canada and England.  The differences were astounding.  It seems many people in Canada and England are not given treatment because the costs would be too high.
   
I also had a personal situation where my son needed an MRI to rule out a brain tumor.  The doctor was originally from Canada and stated that we would have waited several months for the MRI (rather than the next morning).  He said if our son did have the tumor the time saved would have been invaluable.  He left there for these reasons.   

Now, back to the original post.  The amount you pay does seem high.  Your employer will start to get the picture when people start leaving for jobs that provide better pay, benefits, etc.  That is how competition works.  If you are happy with everything elese at your current job,  that has to be considered, as well.  I have worked at places with great benefits, yet I was miserable.  I have worked at places where I enjoyed going in everyday, but I payed several hundred dollars more per month for benefits.

RE: Health benefits

Hmmm. And yet I remember reading that the life expectancy of a poor Briton was at least as long as that of a rich American, and that a rich Briton could drink gin and gamble on horses well into another century.

After all, do you actually look at the life expectancy charts for various countries, or do you just make this stuff up?

Here's a source that you may regard as reliable, probably some damn commie plot:

https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2102rank.html

I mean sweetie, Greece has a higher life expectancy than the most expensive health system in the world. Ever been to Greece?

Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

RE: Health benefits

Like having a fast car and being a crappy driver, just because you have the best medical system  in the world doesn't mean that you'll eat and drink what you should.

TTFN



RE: Health benefits

Life expectancy numbers are great until you are the 55 year old patient that is diagnosed with cancer too late or you do not get treatment at all.  As far as the article in the WSJ, I do not recall where the numbers came from.  

My point is that there is no perfect system.  Sure we may pay several hundred dollars per month in premiums and our doctor visits may cost some, but how much are the people in countries with socialized medicine paying in taxes to support the medical system?  Either way, as I said, those that work support those that do not.  

RE: Health benefits

toiap is quite correct, the original post was about employee contributions to health, and as this site is open to everyone from around the world and not just the USA, then my answer is that in the UK I pay about 6% of my salary towards a national health insurance scheme (the figure is capped at some level). If I'm ever unemployed (which has happened), and not paying  then I get the same coverage, thankfully.

corus

RE: Health benefits

6% isn't bad. For family coverage, my company is asking for about twice that. They say they would match it. Ridiculous!

Ed

www.engineerboards.com

RE: Health benefits

In socialist Australia we pay, one way or another, about 9.3% of GDP on healthcare (67 billion). My research assistant is trying to figure out what that means in terms of income tax, other taxes, and health insurance.

OK, this is an odd way to look at it. The total tax take is 166 billion, so roughly 40% of income and payroll tax is spent on health - my overall tax rate is roughly 35%, so that's 12%

Sounds about right.

Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

RE: Health benefits

What a great link, a start for you Greg. Some really interesting comments from both sides of the debate.

One thing seems certain to me health care is hugely expensive however you go about it and no one system is perfect. I do wonder how much more people in the USA pay for the same thing?

In the USA everything seems to be driven by money where as much of Europe seems more “socially responsible” be that health care, public transport, recycling, global warming, unemployment benefits in fact just about everything.

From my experience most Americans earn more than their European counterparts, providing they are in a “reasonable” job, if they have a better quality of life is more debatable. What price do you put on holidays, shorter working weeks and the like?

Are what I see as the inflated prices some of you are talking about for health care just part of the American way, where money is king and little else seems to matter?

RE: Health benefits

Ajack1 - Yes, we Americans are greedy, self absorbed, ignorant and obnoxious.  Give me a break.  

Back to the original issue.  Based on numbers from my employer, between 9% and 10% of my salary is for health insurance.  This includes prescriptions, dental and vision and is for a family of four.  As I said earlier, one way or the other we all pay.  

I personally prefer a system where the consumer has choices.  Also, if employers do not offer competitive benefits they will have a difficult time attracting and/or retaining talented people.  Competition does work.

RE: Health benefits

Ajack1,
What matters most is our families. If I could work 10 hours a week, be able to spend more time with my family and still make enough to provide a greta lifestyle for my family, I would.

If I could do so and be fortunate enough to allot 20 hours a week helping others less fortunate, I would. I hope to have that opportunity.

Like it or not, Americans don't love money in itself. We certainly revere the life it can provide for us and our children.

On topic, it makes no sense that insurance policies are all over the board. The $600 per month that my company's policy demands (and My company CLAIMS to macth) takes away from my children ini my opinion.

Whatever country you are in- do you work for the love of it or the money? If you stumbled across $2MM, would you continue to work? I wouldn't.

Ed

www.engineerboards.com

RE: Health benefits

“Yes, we Americans are greedy, self absorbed, ignorant and obnoxious.  Give me a break.”

I am sorry if my post came over as implying that, it was not my intention. What I meant by paying more for the same was, as an example in the UK if you take your car that has been involved in a collision to a garage you will pay a lower hourly rate if you pay for it rather than through an insurance claim. I wonder if health care is similar in the USA? Many of the replies on Gregs link seem to imply you pay more for the same thing. The same cannot be said for cars, electrical products, and clothes in fact anything else I can think of.

I do honestly believe that “the American way” is that if you can afford it you get the best if you cannot well that is your problem, where as in Europe the welfare of the masses is more important. This may well have come from the mess Europe was in after two world wars. I am not trying to say either way is right or wrong, just different.

I would guess most people would see health care, education, low crime rates, a good standard of living during retirement and such as important, but maybe not as important as tax cuts. As in both the USA and UK our governments are elected it is not until we see these things as more important than tax cuts anything will improve.

RE: Health benefits

Star for you ajack.

From what I've seen in my time here if you can afford good insurance/have a job with it or can just afford to pay out right and, as I said before, live in a location near to some of the better healthcare facilities then you do seem to get better & faster health care than in the UK with the NHS.

If you don't have the money/insurance/location then in many ways you are SOL.  For the poor I think the NHS gives better coverage than no insurance in the US or maybe even some of the state healthcare, Medicare etc.

Of course in the UK if you have the money you can buy extra private health insurance on top of the NHS but should you fall on hard times you still have the NHS.

The UK system is certainly not perfect, the media used to give the impression that some of the other European systems were better although I'm not sure that's true, however the US system isn't perfect either.

Of course I suppose if you are too lazy/stupid.... to get a good job then I guess it's your own fault that you can't take advantage of the 'competition' and get one of the better jobs in the US with great benefits.  Those minimum wage earners get what they deserve. ????

RE: Health benefits

I guess health care talks would eventually have to become political debates.

If we're going to talk about jobless and underemployed people then, yes, I know for a fact that there are many people who don't want jobs because its too easy to be taken care of by the government.

Maybe the government has to be a little more strict about what they hand out and to whom they hand it. Legitimately poor people who try to find jobs, etc... should be better taken care of than those who just don't give a crap. How to screen them and discern one from another is a different question.

A more free market on the insurance thing might help. Why am I being asked to pay twice what others pay? Why is the OP being asked to pay 30% more than that? Its not like we can just look in the phone book, grab a competitor and go from there. You pretty much take what your employer's policy states, use your spouse's employer's policy (which I do), pay enormous rates and extremely limited coverage for a personal policy (which we have done in the past) or you take your chances without it. Or you let the government take care of you. Some would rather lay around and let the gov do it. There are legitimately trying less fortunate people, but certainly there are lazy scam artists.

Ed

www.engineerboards.com

RE: Health benefits

It seems funny to me that people complain about paying several hundred dollars per month for insurance for themselves and their family, yet they do not think twice about paying for cell phones, cable/satellite TV, entertainment, eating out, IPODS, more expensive vehicles, etc.  And don't forget about several dollars per pack for cigarettes.  And yes, many of the uninsured have these items.  Where are our priorities?

RE: Health benefits

Consistency and not having one's hands tied is my complaint. If everyone paiad about $600 per month on family coverage (which could vary some depending on age, health, etc...) or if that's what I always paid any any job (taking into account inflation, etc...) it would be OK. Also, if I had more options from which to choose, it would be OK. But I took a job, regretfully didn't probe them on their insurance prmium costs, regretfully didn't ask them to reimburse me for having to go elsewhere for insruance and now I'm stuck with a "take it or leave it", overly priced, I'd be stupid if I took it, unreasonable insurance premium.

What can be done other than to get all the facts straight upfront when negotiating a job offer? Its a shame that something that should be a commodity should actually affect someone's career path. I bet auto insurance is a lot momre flat across the board than medical. Companies don't say, "come work for us and we have a great auto insurance plan".

I'd like to health insurance opened up into the free market like auto insurance. Maybe that would bring about its own set of problems- I don't know.

Ed

www.engineerboards.com

RE: Health benefits

...I just saved hundreds of dollars on my health insurance by switching to Geico!

RE: Health benefits

Quote:

It seems funny to me that people complain about paying several hundred dollars per month for insurance for themselves and their family, yet they do not think twice about paying for cell phones, cable/satellite TV, entertainment, eating out, IPODS, more expensive vehicles, etc.  And don't forget about several dollars per pack for cigarettes.  And yes, many of the uninsured have these items.  Where are our priorities?"

Those things are for living.  Insurance is to keep you from dieing.  Think Positive!

But, on topic:  I currently pay about $110 every 2 weeks.  This is for a high deductible plan that has a $5,000 family deductible.  I pay 100% of the negotiated price for almost everything, until that point.  My overall cost will be capped at about $7,800 for the year (provided it is in-network).  No extra co pays, etc.  Just for my generic cholesterol pill, I will total over $1,000 for the plan year ($91 per month).  Add in a several doc visits for the kid, a new kid in the plans, and all the rest of what is likely to go wrong with my prematurely aging body, and this is a better deal than the other plans I had available.  I am keeping a spreadsheet to compare the actual costs though.  Also with the high deductible plan, I have a health savings account.  I am funding this to the max this year, and there is no loss of funds at the end of the year (like FSA), so I will pay all tax free.

Talk with your company about what they can do to help.  Often switching providers is needed to get some competition, or they may look into different plans.

RE: Health benefits

Oh, one thing I forgot is that a large part of the Australian health budget is subsidised medicines. We pay between $4 and $28 (typically (that is means tested)) per prescription per month. They also print the real cost of the medicine on the label, ie what they pay. The US drug companies hate that. 600mg Gemfibrozil, 5mg amlodipine and 300 mg irbesartan are all around 35 to forty bucks a month in real costs.

 

Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

RE: Health benefits

Like I said, the US consumers are subsidizing the world's pharmaceuticals.

--------------------
How much do YOU owe?
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
--------------------

RE: Health benefits

Health care in USA is tough. Hospitals and Medical staff are generally trained at their own expense, to work for the living they can bid for on their incomes.
 Medical equipment is partly privatly funded, part Goverment funded. Hospital properties same same plus must be very insured (their rates are no bargain either).
 Any itenerant fruit picker can walk into a hospital for surgery/trauma care and take off without paying a bill.
 Yet I a citizen and tax payer can have my home and property seized if I want the same service and can't pay.
 But I prefer it this way than if the government ran things. Could you imagine be'ing sick or hurt and "having to go to DMV".

RE: Health benefits

For the most part I've been happy with the healthcare I've received in the US.  As a kid, I broke about 7 different bones, on different occasions (about half from fighting and the other half from so-called "extreme" sports).  

There was, however, one time when I went into a hospital with a broken bone, and might as well have gone to the DMV.  It took 6 hours for someone to even see me, and another 4 hours before I was out the door, without treatment.  They couldn't find anyone who could read an x-ray, so they finally picked a doc to give it a try, and he didn't notice the fracture.  He wasn't impressed when I told him that after 5 or 6 broken bones I could tell the difference between what was and what wasn't broken, and that he must've missed something.  They did at least have the sense to mail the x-rays back to the hospital in my hometown, who eventually called up to ask whether I'd like to get a cast on my broken arm (about a week later).

On the plus side, stitches and a tetanus shot usually only took about 20mins.  

RE: Health benefits

ivy,
So how bad did the other guys turn out after the fights? Did you win any? smile

Ed

www.engineerboards.com

RE: Health benefits

heheh... I learned the tough lesson that "boxers' fractures" are easy to come by if you punch straight ahead instead of around the corner.  That said, if you break two carpals in your left hand while mashing the nose and cheek of your assailant, he may be disinclined to find out whether you're right handed (I am).  You won't feel it much 'til the buzz wears off anyway.  

RE: Health benefits

Checked my check stub I'm paying about $80 biweekly for pretty good PPO, Dental & Vision for my family (wife & 2 kids).

Even being from the UK originally though I'm aware this is actually very good and not typical.

Ken

RE: Health benefits

I just learned that the owner's wife had cancer. I think she is in remission or looking to go into remission. You wouldn't know anything was wrong by looking at her.

She is actually on the payroll as the Executive Director. She does the finances and such.

Perhaps her illness (hopefully its behind her soon if not already) contributed to the high rates we are asked to pay here?

Ed

www.engineerboards.com

RE: Health benefits

insurance is one of the few things that i will gladly pay for and hope i never have to use...im a contractor, so i pay a bit over $200(US)/week...but when i need it, its there...

-nadz

RE: Health benefits

nadam,
That's about $870 per month. Is that your medical insurance? For the family?

Why so high? How does that compare to other premiums you've paid in the past?

If all insurance premiums were within say +/-10% of an average, it might be OK. But it seems they can be all over the board for similar coverage.

Ed

www.engineerboards.com

RE: Health benefits

In Canada, we are lucky-for comprehensive coverage for Federal or Provincial govt. emplyees, rates are very reasonable. We pay $80 to $90 (Cdn) per month (dental, medical and some vision) - depending on level of hospital coverage and depending whether it is family or single. Of course the employer puts in a good deal more.

RE: Health benefits

If we got family insurance through my employer, $600/month for family w/ high deductibles and vision/dental extra.

Our family insurance is through my wife's employment, she's a public school teacher, so we pay around $150/month for everything.  Her job is worth the lower salary just for the insurance and retirement benefits.

Brian

RE: Health benefits

There again. Why not just have employers quit playing games with lower salay vs higher insurance costs? If your wife's school can offer $150/month insurance why can't anyone? Why is your company insurance $600?

It makes no sense.

Ed

www.engineerboards.com

RE: Health benefits

HVAC, I know I'm opening a can of worms here, but:
 
Public school systems are state/local/federally funded, and our businesses are not.  Sure, some states have low paid teachers (VA and NC come to mind).  Other states like PA have really lucrative teaching jobs.  I'm in WI.  Here the local board just passed the teacher pay raises/healthcare raises.  The teachers' union opted for the guaranteed 3% annual increase (lower than what they'd like) and a small increase in healthcare, probably because the union figured that with the way healthcare has increased in the past 8-10 years, this was a safer bet w.r.t. overall compensation.  

Now, that's written into a contract.  If the insurance goes up more than planned/budgeted, the money has to come from somewhere.  So they re-assess your property or raise the millage rate.  Budget crunch solved.  

My employer doesn't have the luxury.  We've got automotive customers slamming us for price decreases constantly, yet our raw material prices and the extemporaneous costs continue to rise.  To maintain the margins, the cost has to come from somewhere.  They won't consider lowering the margins, so the benefits cost is the easiest thing to play with.  And frankly, you as an employer can always point to Delphi/GM/Ford/Visteon/etc. and say, "See what happens if we don't take some of the brunt?"

Plus, as I said in an earlier post, company size has a lot to do with the type & cost of insurance you can obtain.  Teachers' unions are negotiating oftentimes for the whole school district.  This employee number is often much greater than that of the typical small business (25-50), so you get the nice economies of scale.

I really wish I had a viable solution to this one, but I think it's just one amongst a few problems the US is going to be forced to deal with in upcoming years.  Baby boomers and SS are really going to throw another wrench into the cogs, especially for us young folks.

RE: Health benefits

$185.00 per week?

I've heard of this before.  You need to get some details from both your employer AND the insurance provider.
Not too long ago here in the middle US, a company got itself in some hot water for mis-representing insurance costs to its employees.  Basically, the entire cost of the monthly premium was being paid by the employees while they were being told that the company  was paying a percentage.
The whole thing was scam that resulted in zero cost to the company for its employees' insurance.

Where I'm employed, there are approx. 230 people. We have decent benefits with some moderate co-pays. Eyeglasses and dental are ok with a small max pay per year per person.
($150 eyeglasses and $ 500 dental)
There are three in my family and my monthly deduction is about $150.
You need to do some investigating.    

RE: Health benefits

tripleZ,
I can respect that arguement.

Maybe its just an anomoly, but my wife's company with 4 full time employees (2 of whom are the owners), one part time employee and 2 1099'd contract salespeople has a great insurance plan and only $300 per month for a family.

That's a small company.

I believe your points, but I just don't see a consistent pattern throughout.

Ed

www.engineerboards.com

RE: Health benefits

How about those of you who have good insurace at low rates for small companies post your insurance carrier's name and phone number or URL so the rest of us can try to lower our rates?

RE: Health benefits

Here, try this:

http://www.ehealthinsurance.com/

This was posted on our HR itranet site.  They actually had rates similar to what I pay now.  I did not look to see how they compared to other plans offered.  

If anything, it will give you a look at what you could get on your own.  Provided you are healthy, I believe at least the OP could save some money.

RE: Health benefits

.
Confirmation of an interesting way of alt-healthcare.

CODE

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/24/eveningnews/main2395899.shtml

pmover wrote:

Quote:


i went for about 2 years or so without insurance.  every time i went to the doctor, i mentioned that i had no health insurance.  as such, i requested a discount and i assured the physician that i would pay his bill, in cash and in full.  not one time did a physician deny my request.  i even had a major examination/diagnosis and told the same to the clinic conducting the examination/diagnosis.  to my astonishment, i receive a 50% discount, agreed to a 90-day contract, and paid the bill, in full, within the 90 days.  now that i think about it, there was one exception, but not a big deal either.

==========================================
Business Card     http://mech.e.tripod.com
__________________________________________
Cycle Heaven.......www.tailofthedragon.com

RE: Health benefits

A comment regarding the skip the health insurance and pay in cash etc. etc....

My experience although not exactly like that was much different. My young child was taken to the dentist for a first check up, X-rays the whole bit and they recommend a whole host of treatments. About $1000 worth with out insurance. He didn't have dental insurance since he is just 4 and I forgot to add him to my dental last go around. Long story short when I asked what the price would be if I chose to have the work done, paid in cash, and in full.

They looked at me like I was on crack and repeated the figure $1000.

RE: Health benefits

https://www.signaturewellnessplan.com/sigwellness/jsp/Login.jsp

I've had the Signature Dental Plan for over 10 years.  For $14.99 a month you get various discounts for dental, optical, etc.  I rec'd 40% off a crown which was an awesome savings, more than paid for having the plan.  Only certain providers are part of it, though - ask your provider if they accept it before you sign up.

This isn't insurance, but it gets you discounts direct from your dentist, optical, etc.  

RE: Health benefits

As far as the political side of this discussion goes, we here in Canada pay 57% of the US health care costs on a per capita basis and live two years longer.  Part of the problem, with US health care costs is the high insurance costs due to your out of control legal system but that’s another debate.

The amount quoted in the OP is high. I pay less that $1,800 for full health (no dental or vision) which included excavation and reparation from Afghanistan should I get sick or hurt. It covers me world wide but only for 60 days a year in the USA.

Google health coverage and you should be able to get a quote from any number of companies that will offer you a personal plan. The up side of a personal plan is that should you develop a medical condition you will not lose coverage should you change jobs and the condition becomes a pre-existing condition for the new insurance.

Can you opt out of the employer plan? If so then you should be able to negotiate that the employer increase your pay by the employer share and you can buy the coverage you need.

If you cannot opt out of the plan then consider your share part of the cost of doing business and decide if your net after health insurance is worth your time. If so the accept things as they are; if not polish up your resume and look for a different job.

Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion
www.kitsonengineering.com

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources