On health care, Kaplan rejects a money-saving Guild proposal
06/18/2013
At Monday's bargaining session between Kaplan’s Guild-represented English teachers and company managers, one of the biggest sticking points was health insurance – who would be eligible for it and exactly what it would consist of.
Guild negotiators proposed a health care plan for all teachers, full-timers and the 90 percent of the staff considered part time, that would be cheaper than management's plan, not only for teachers but for Kaplan. Management promptly rejected it.
BARGAINING UPDATE
The Guild-proposed plan, priced specifically for the workforce at Kaplan International Centers (KIC) in New York, would offer participants access to the Blue Cross/Blue Shield network of doctors and hospitals, the largest such network in the country. One reason the plan is so inexpensive is that it would be underwritten by a non-profit entity, the United Furniture Workers, which is affiliated with the Guild's parent union, the Communications Workers of America. UFW plans are already widely used in CWA contracts, including some between the Guild and New York-based employers.
The Guild plan would be open to every employee who works at least 20 hours a week. It would carry a $500 deductible for individuals (as opposed the $2000 deductible for current full-time teachers). And even if KIC paid the entire premium, it would cost the company less than the 80 percent share of each full-time employee’s premium it currently pays. The plan is so much better than KIC’s current plan that Guild negotiators offered to make it available to managers and non-Guild employees too. No dice.
A COSTLIER MANAGEMENT MEDICAL PLAN Management negotiators had a proposal too. Theirs would simply do as the law requires. It would lower the minimum eligibility requirement from 37 hours a week to an average of 30 hours, determined retrospectively, for the current KIC plan – the exact minimum under the new Affordable Health Care Act. It was the least they could do, literally. As Guild Representative Anthony Napoli pointed out, “We don’t need to negotiate the law; the law is the law.”
Many teachers still would be excluded from coverage. Even part-timers lucky enough to have a core class and four days of specific skills or structured study classes would reach only 22 hours a week, meaning that experienced teachers with less than eight hours of prep time would not qualify.
Despite covering fewer teachers, offering less coverage and charging higher premiums, the plan that the managers proposed would cost KIC more – at a minimum, by more than $2000 per year per individual – than the Guild plan. That's right, Kaplan teachers and their union are offering to save the company money, but KIC managers won't hear of it. Are you getting this, Washington Post Co. shareholders?
At Monday's bargaining session between Kaplan’s Guild-represented English teachers and company managers, one of the biggest sticking points was health insurance – who would be eligible for it and exactly what it would consist of.
Guild negotiators proposed a health care plan for all teachers, full-timers and the 90 percent of the staff considered part time, that would be cheaper than management's plan, not only for teachers but for Kaplan. Management promptly rejected it.
Guild negotiators proposed a health care plan for all teachers, full-timers and the 90 percent of the staff considered part time, that would be cheaper than management's plan, not only for teachers but for Kaplan. Management promptly rejected it.
| BARGAINING UPDATE |
The Guild-proposed plan, priced specifically for the workforce at Kaplan International Centers (KIC) in New York, would offer participants access to the Blue Cross/Blue Shield network of doctors and hospitals, the largest such network in the country. One reason the plan is so inexpensive is that it would be underwritten by a non-profit entity, the United Furniture Workers, which is affiliated with the Guild's parent union, the Communications Workers of America. UFW plans are already widely used in CWA contracts, including some between the Guild and New York-based employers.
The Guild plan would be open to every employee who works at least 20 hours a week. It would carry a $500 deductible for individuals (as opposed the $2000 deductible for current full-time teachers). And even if KIC paid the entire premium, it would cost the company less than the 80 percent share of each full-time employee’s premium it currently pays. The plan is so much better than KIC’s current plan that Guild negotiators offered to make it available to managers and non-Guild employees too. No dice.
A COSTLIER MANAGEMENT MEDICAL PLAN Management negotiators had a proposal too. Theirs would simply do as the law requires. It would lower the minimum eligibility requirement from 37 hours a week to an average of 30 hours, determined retrospectively, for the current KIC plan – the exact minimum under the new Affordable Health Care Act. It was the least they could do, literally. As Guild Representative Anthony Napoli pointed out, “We don’t need to negotiate the law; the law is the law.”
Many teachers still would be excluded from coverage. Even part-timers lucky enough to have a core class and four days of specific skills or structured study classes would reach only 22 hours a week, meaning that experienced teachers with less than eight hours of prep time would not qualify.
Despite covering fewer teachers, offering less coverage and charging higher premiums, the plan that the managers proposed would cost KIC more – at a minimum, by more than $2000 per year per individual – than the Guild plan. That's right, Kaplan teachers and their union are offering to save the company money, but KIC managers won't hear of it. Are you getting this, Washington Post Co. shareholders?
'The fact that you guys want us to do more for part-timers doesn’t mean that we need to do that'
- KIC lead negotiator Jay Kennedy
Why did management reject the Guild's money-saving proposal? For one thing, management negotiators said they didn't know if the Guild plan would comply with the Affordable Health Care Act. Guild negotiators assured management it would. They even offered a provision in the new contract that would automatically switch employees over to the management plan if the Guild plan were found to be out of step with the new law. But that wasn't good enough.
Why else did management negotiators reject the Guild's plan? In a word, control. They said they're “not willing to give up control.” What that means is they want the legal right to increase premiums or cut back on coverage during the term of our contract. And they want that right even if the company they’re supposed to be representing has to pay more money.
STICKING IT TO PART-TIME TEACHERS
Besides health care, the Guild offered counter-proposals on salaries, vacation, sick leave and leaves of absence. In all areas, the Guild offered movement toward agreements. But management representatives had no comments or counterproposals on our salary or vacation proposals.
Most striking was their continued refusal to address important benefits for part-time teachers. In one case, they tried to make them worse. Management now wants to reduce leaves of absence to a maximum of 30 days from 90 days and deny them to part-timers entirely, even though many have used them. Management’s excuse: “There’s a benefit to having certainty in staffing.” What happened to “operational flexibility?” Further, lead negotiator Jay Kennedy said, “The fact that you guys want us to do more for part-timers doesn’t mean that we need to do that.”
With one of management’s lawyers texting for a good part of the bargaining session, Guild Bargaining Committee member Shana Dagenhart of Empire State Building mentioned how it’s difficult to see how “Kaplan Cares” is a true statement. KIC managers’ lack of care and concern for their workers might be best illustrated by their refusal to extend bereavement leave to part-time teachers.
The next bargaining session is scheduled for June 26 at the Guild's offices in Times Square at 1501 Broadway, Suite 708 at 10:30 a.m. All Guild members are welcome and encouraged to attend.
Why did management reject the Guild's money-saving proposal? For one thing, management negotiators said they didn't know if the Guild plan would comply with the Affordable Health Care Act. Guild negotiators assured management it would. They even offered a provision in the new contract that would automatically switch employees over to the management plan if the Guild plan were found to be out of step with the new law. But that wasn't good enough.
Why else did management negotiators reject the Guild's plan? In a word, control. They said they're “not willing to give up control.” What that means is they want the legal right to increase premiums or cut back on coverage during the term of our contract. And they want that right even if the company they’re supposed to be representing has to pay more money.
STICKING IT TO PART-TIME TEACHERS
Besides health care, the Guild offered counter-proposals on salaries, vacation, sick leave and leaves of absence. In all areas, the Guild offered movement toward agreements. But management representatives had no comments or counterproposals on our salary or vacation proposals.
Besides health care, the Guild offered counter-proposals on salaries, vacation, sick leave and leaves of absence. In all areas, the Guild offered movement toward agreements. But management representatives had no comments or counterproposals on our salary or vacation proposals.
Most striking was their continued refusal to address important benefits for part-time teachers. In one case, they tried to make them worse. Management now wants to reduce leaves of absence to a maximum of 30 days from 90 days and deny them to part-timers entirely, even though many have used them. Management’s excuse: “There’s a benefit to having certainty in staffing.” What happened to “operational flexibility?” Further, lead negotiator Jay Kennedy said, “The fact that you guys want us to do more for part-timers doesn’t mean that we need to do that.”
With one of management’s lawyers texting for a good part of the bargaining session, Guild Bargaining Committee member Shana Dagenhart of Empire State Building mentioned how it’s difficult to see how “Kaplan Cares” is a true statement. KIC managers’ lack of care and concern for their workers might be best illustrated by their refusal to extend bereavement leave to part-time teachers.
The next bargaining session is scheduled for June 26 at the Guild's offices in Times Square at 1501 Broadway, Suite 708 at 10:30 a.m. All Guild members are welcome and encouraged to attend.
With one of management’s lawyers texting for a good part of the bargaining session, Guild Bargaining Committee member Shana Dagenhart of Empire State Building mentioned how it’s difficult to see how “Kaplan Cares” is a true statement. KIC managers’ lack of care and concern for their workers might be best illustrated by their refusal to extend bereavement leave to part-time teachers.
The next bargaining session is scheduled for June 26 at the Guild's offices in Times Square at 1501 Broadway, Suite 708 at 10:30 a.m. All Guild members are welcome and encouraged to attend.
________________________________________________________
Corresponding Update from Management:
KIC Proposes Company-Sp
When KIC and the Guild last met for bargaining on May 7, they closed the day with commitments to address certain issues of importance to the other side: KIC agreed to address health insurance benefits, and the Guild agreed to address KIC’s modified proposal on flexible work assignments. In this week’s bargaining session, KIC met its commitment: it opened with a proposal to provide full-time and part-time teachers averaging 30 paid hours a week with the same package of insurance benefits at the same cost – including medical, dental, prescription drug and other benefits – that all other full-time KIC employees at any KIC location receive. The Guild, however, didn’t live up to its commitment: despite saying it would come prepared this week to address work assignments, it made not one single proposal on that issue. That’s not the way to bargain in good faith to reach an agreement.
KIC’s insurance proposal represented further movement on KIC’s part to address benefits for part-time teachers, following KIC’s offer at the last session to provide part-time teachers with up to 15 hours of paid sick leave a year. KIC’s proposed insurance benefit program includes a wide array of benefits that are offered across all Washington Post Company divisions to provide stable, affordable and comprehensive insurance options to full-time and covered part-time employees. That includes medical insurance, prescription drug coverage, dental insurance, employee and dependent life insurance, accidental death and dismembership insurance, long term disability insurance, and wellness programs, among others. In terms of benefits and premium cost-sharing, KIC offered to treat full-time and part-time teachers averaging 30 paid hours per week (meaning teaching time, prep time and all other paid time) in New York the same as all other full-time KIC managers, supervisors and employees under these programs.
In offering KIC teachers a large, sound, company-sponsored insurance program, KIC told the Guild it was not willing to put its employees in the insurance plan that the Guild proposed, the “United Furniture Workers Insurance Fund.” Fundamentally, at a time when employers’ obligations under the new insurance laws are undergoing dramatic change, KIC candidly told the Guild that it would not put its fate, and the fate of its employees, in the hands of a union-run insurance plan that gives employers no control over benefits, premiums or plan design, and that could expose KIC to increased costs and even penalties under the new insurance laws.
While the Guild thinks that the United Furniture Workers Insurance Fund is a good deal for KIC and its teachers, we could not disagree more strongly. Based on the Fund’s financial records, we are concerned about the Fund’s long-term stability and its significant liabilities – a red flag that the plan may have to increase premiums and/or change the plan’s benefits (which it could do unilaterally). In addition, the summary plan document that the Guild proposed provides for medical and drug coverage, but not dental, life, disability, and other coverages that KIC has offered. The Guild’s proposed insurance plan, moreover, includes a number of coverage limits that may not comply with the new federal law, like annual limits on the amounts of claims and exclusions of pre-existing conditions from coverage. When we pointed out some of these issues to the Guild, the Guild’s negotiators suggested that the written plan description didn’t mean what it said – another red flag. There are just too many concerns about the Fund, particularly given the new insurance laws, for KIC to agree to rely on the Fund to provide insurance benefits to its employees and to depend on the Fund to satisfy KIC’s responsibilities under the insurance laws.
This week’s session ended unproductively, when the Guild said it had no more proposals to make – even though the Guild’s negotiators had promised a work assignment proposal “before the end of the day.” Rather than do the hard and serious work of bargaining, the Guild, once again, wasted valuable table time with the same type of unconvincing rhetoric and tirades that have failed to advance the bargaining process. We hope for more a productive session next week, with serious discussion and serious proposals on the important issues that remain.
Bargaining committee
No comments:
Post a Comment