  |
| |
|
Union fights for retirees' health coverage on federal front Urges opposition to AARP lawsuit March 3, 2005 The AARP is on the wrong side of another national health insurance controversy, NYSUT leaders are warning retirees. Last month, the influential national retirees group filed suit to temporarily block a ruling by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The EEOC, responding to a federal Circuit Court of Appeals decision that would encourage employers to slash health insurance benefits, issued a ruling that exempts employers from provisions of the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act, allowing employers to continue offering different health insurance benefits to retirees once they become eligible for Medicare. Reversing the ruling could harm retirees, said Alan Lubin, New York State United Teachers executive vice president. Dead wrong "The AARP is dead wrong on this issue when it comes to New Yorkers," Lubin explained. "If this ruling were overturned, most employers would be forced to dramatically cut health insurance benefits and would likely stop offering early retirement incentives." "The AARP says we have retiree health benefits because of the age discrimination act, but the truth is we have retiree benefits because groups like ours keep the issue alive before the legislatures," said Bill Cunningham, associate director of legislation for the American Federation of Teachers, NYSUT's national affiliate. NYSUT has worked hard to put protections in place for retiree health benefits. "With the approval of the health insurance moratorium in 1994, retiree health care benefits for NYSUT members are protected," said Lubin, explaining that the bill, which has been annually renewed since 1994, protects retiree benefits by linking them to those of in-service members; that means any changes (reductions) would be subject to collective bargaining with NYSUT local unions. "Any changes in contribution levels for retirees and active employees must correspond to each other," said Lubin. Last month, a bill extending the moratorium until May 2006 was approved by both houses of the Legislature (see related article). "I encourage members to contact the governor's office and ask him to approve the bill," said Lubin. — Kara E. Smith |
|
| | |