University employees may pay a 100 percent increase in insurance deductibles beginning in January 2003 because of the financial instability of Missouri State Universities Benefits Group, the University's health-care provider.

Nancy Sublette, executive director of MSU Benefits Group, told employees in a series of open meetings Oct. 21 that coverage options are being limited to one plan instead of the previous three because the consortium has inadequate reserve funds. 

Sublette said the costs in all plans were higher than anticipated, and 2002 rates were set before some losses were incurred in late 2001. Employees were notified of the meetings three days earlier.

Truman is one of six Missouri universities comprising MSU Benefits Group. Changes for 2003 affect all universities involved and include doubling individual deductibles from $250 to $500 annually, raising office visit co-pays from $15 to $20, doubling  emergency room co-pays to $100 and mandating pre-certification for inpatient and outpatient services. "It's just an awful lot of money," said Natascha Jewell, a mother of four whose husband, Eric Jewell, is an assistant professor of Spanish. "When you have a family to raise, it's hard to make ends meet when you have to pay so much for insurance."

Jewell said the changes will affect her family, and she would like to have coverage choices.

"I understand why they did it, and if this is a one-year situation, I can live with it," Jewell said. "But if it goes on longer, it will be very frustrating, and we'll probably have to look elsewhere for health insurance."

Michael McManis, dean of planning and institutional development, said Truman is exploring options.

"As far as we know, the consortium will continue, but many of the institutions ... are looking at evaluating their options, and certainly Truman is too," McManis said. Administrators are in the first stages of investigation and plan to hire a consultant, McManis said. If the University changes health care providers for 2004, it will make a decision by the end of March. Jeffrey Osborn, associate professor of biology, said not only do the changes negatively affect his family, but he also sees a potential impact on employee hiring and retention.

"I worry that if the premiums continue to increase, and the benefits continue to be reduced, I worry about retaining faculty and staff here because if it just becomes too expensive, people are going to start looking for better jobs," Osborn said. "I worry that this has a longer effect on faculty and staff morale, and the bottom line is their ability to feed their families."

Osborn said he also was aware some faculty had complaints about the way in which Sublette conveyed the changes in the meetings last week.

"I can see how people reacted negatively to some of her comments and her general attitude," Osborn said. "She deals with this stuff all the time, and she has to come forward and be apologetic, and I think you become sort of immune to it when you're imbedded in it all the time. She kind of sugar-coats it, and for me that's kind of annoying."

Maureen Slaughter, human resources director, said she also has heard complaints about Sublette's approach, especially comments she made in the meetings about employees making drug choices that sometimes result in unnecessary costs.

Sublette presented the top five drug classes: high blood cholesterol, ulcer disease, allergies, depression and pain or inflammation, and said that these drugs are often overused.

Sublette did not return phone calls after the Oct. 21 meetings.

"It may be good if people are more productive [in the workplace], but the thing about these drugs is, they're not a lifetime thing," Sublette said in the 3:30 p.m. meeting.

Slaughter said she is aware of the comments that caused complaints.

"I know what people were saying, that they are placing the blame on the consumer, and I can see how that would happen, and I agree to some extent," Slaughter said. She said while some companies are now making a distinction between "quality of life" prescriptions and necessary medical prescriptions, MSU Benefits Group is not.

"The point we were trying to make is, there have been extreme changes in cost due to people's behaviors, and I think Nancy was trying to make that clear," Slaughter said.

Randy Smith, Faculty Senate president, said Faculty Senate has had no official complaints, but he has heard from colleagues about the effects the plan changes have on families.

"I'd say that it's pretty catastrophic financially for faculty who are insuring dependents and spouses," Smith said.

Jewell said a solution that would work well for her family would be for the University to give employees the money that would be spent on the group plan and let them shop around for their own insurance.

Slaughter responded to this idea, saying it has been considered in the past and rejected for many reasons.

"There are legal issues with not providing the same coverage for all employees," Slaughter said. "I guess this is a personal fear, but what if someone just took the money and got hurt without having any coverage?"

In addition, some employees are happy with the current benefits or are minimally affected by the changes.  Janie Gibbons, a secretary in the education division office, said she fits into both of these categories.

"I understand that health insurance is very expensive, and I wasn't surprised that there were changes," Gibbons said. "I'm happy that as an employee the University is still paying for part of it."

James McCormick, assistant professor of chemistry, said he thinks his family is better off with what MSU Benefits Group is offering because one of his three sons has cerebral palsy and his treatments will not be covered on any plan.

"Coverage for my sons with their medical problems would make health care prohibitively expensive," McCormick said. "I have dealt with individualized health care at various times, and I was never impressed."

Judy Mullins, University comptroller, is the University representative to MSU Benefits Group, and she said she thinks the group is doing the best they can to deal with their economic situation.

"You want everybody to be healthy, you want everybody to be covered, but you also want it to be affordable and something has to squeeze there," Mullins said.

Article Tools