... another ObamaCare success story.
One of the largest union-administered health-insurance funds in New York is dropping coverage for the children of more than 30,000 low-wage home attendants, union officials said. The union blamed financial problems it said were caused by the state’s health department and new national health-insurance requirements.(italics, ours)
The fund is administered by 1199SEIU United Healthcare Workers East, an affiliate of the Service Employees International Union. Union officials said the state compelled the fund to start buying coverage from a third party, which increased premiums by 60%. State health officials denied forcing the union fund to make the switch, saying the fund had been struggling financially even before the switch to third-party coverage.
The fund informed its members late last month that their dependents will no longer be covered as of Jan. 1, 2011. Currently about 6,000 children are covered by the benefit fund, some until age 23.
Considering there have been quite a few pro-ObamaCare union entities and locals that were granted temporary exemptions from having to comply with ObamaCare by the Department of Health and Human Services, one wonders whether the big cheeses at 1199SEIU were merely incompetent or simply were not bringing enough to the table to get themselves off the hook.
“In addition, new federal health-care reform legislation requires plans with dependent coverage to expand that coverage up to age 26,” Behroozi wrote in a letter to members Oct. 22. “Our limited resources are already stretched as far as possible, and meeting this new requirement would be financially impossible.”
Behroozi estimated that the fund faced a $15 million shortfall in 2011 and more in the following years for the coverage of workers’ children.
Well, well, well. Berhoozi who runs 1199SEIU's pension and benefit plans is learning the hard way that all these extra bennies mandated by ObamaCare and which were cheered on by many of these same unions comes with a real price attached. A price that is causing this particular union to start dumping coverage.
Lest anyone think we're engaging in gratuitous union-bashing, let us be clear we have a tremendous amount of sympathy for these home attendants as they provide a valuable service to society in tending to the sick and elderly. It is their leadership we are excoriating and for which we have no need.