May 27, 2010: Municipal health care plans

>> TONIGHT ON "GREATER

BOSTON" THE BUDGET BUSTER

CHOKING CITIES AND TOWNS.

A GROWING RESENTMENT OVER

THE COST OF HEALTH CARE FOR

MUNICI CALL WORKERS PLUS

GAYS IN THE MILITARY.

RECONSIDERING DON'T ASK

DON'T TELL.

AND LOOKING FOR WEEKEND

ENTERTAINMENT?

TONIGHT WE GO CENTER STAGE

WITH 2 NEW COMEDIES.

>> GOOD EVENING, I'M JARED

BOWEN IN FOR EMILEY ROONEY.

STRUGGLING UNDER THE WEIGHT

OF THE ECONOMY, CITIES AND

TOWNS SAY THEY COULD SAVE

$100 MILLION THIS YEAR IF

THEY HAD THE POWER TO MODIFY

GENEROUS EMPLOYEE

HEALTH-CARE PLANS WITHOUT

GOING BACK TO THE BARGAINING

TABLE.

TO DO THAT THEY NEED

APPROVAL ON BEACON HILL.

BUT MUNICIPAL UNIONS WILL

FIGHT TO MAKE SURE THAT

DOESN'T HAPPEN.

EMILY ROONEY HAS THIS STORY.

>> ASK SALEM MAYOR KIM

DRISCOLL ABOUT THE CITY'S

MILLION DOLLAR BUDGET GAP

AND SHELL'S TELL YOU EXACTLY

WHAT'S BEHIND IT.

>> HEALTH INSURANCE IS OUR

BIGGEST BUDGET BUSTER GOING

UP 1.2 MILLION NEXT YEAR

WITH THE 12% INCREASE UNLESS

WE CAN GET SOME CHANGES IN

OUR PLAN.

>> BUT CHANGING THE GENEROUS

HEALTH PLANS ENJOYED BY

UNIONIZED CITY WORKERS IS

PRECISELY WHAT SAL ENHANCE

NOT BEEN ABLE TO DO.

THE DOCTOR VISIT COPAY FOR

POLICE OFFICERS, TEACHERSnd

OTHER WORKERS IS STILL JUST

$5.

MUCH LESS THAN MOST PEOPLE

PAY THESE DAYS.

>> I THINK PEOPLE ARE

OUTRAGED.

AND UNDERSTANDABLY SO.

IF YOU ARE NOT, IF YOU DON'T

HAVE THIS GENEROUS A PLAN AS

A PUBLIC EMPLOYEE DOES, AND

YET YOUR DOLLARS ARE GOING

TO SUPPORT THOSE PLANS,

THAT'S COMPETELY HUMAN

NATURE.

>> HAWTHORNE HOTEL GENERAL

MANAGER JULIE LEADERHOUSE

SAYS THE CITY HAS HAD TO

RAISE LODGING AND MEAL TAXES

TO PAY FOR CITY WORKERS

HEALTH CARE EVEN AS HER

EMPLOYEES PAY $30 TO SEE A

DOCTOR.

>> WHEN YOU SEE WHAT YOUR

COPAY IS AND YOU SEE WHAT

THE CITY WORKERS COPAY IS

AND YOU KNOW THAT YOUR

PROPERTY TAXES AND THE OTHER

TAXES THAT YOU ARE PAYING

ARE WHAT IS PAYING FOR THAT,

HOW YOU CANNOT RESENT IT.

>> THESE MIDDLE SCHOOL

PARENTS SEEM TO AGREE.

>> I THINK THEY DO A GOOD

JOB.

BUT I MEAN I JUST DON'T

THINK THEY SHOULD GET SUCH A

GREAT.

>> IT'S CRAZY.

BECAUSE WE PAY, YOU KNOW $20

FOR COPAYS AND IT'S NOT

FAIR.

>> UNION LEADERS IN SALEM

DECLINE TO GO ON CAMERA.

BUT AMERICAN FEDERATION OF

TEACHERS STATE PRESIDENT

TOM-- SAID CITY WORKERS HAVE

SACRIFICED TO GET WHAT THEY

HAVE.

>> THE ANNOUNCE-- MUNICIPAL

UNIONS HAVE TAKEN SMALLER

PAY INCREASES IN ORDER TO

KEEP HEALTH INSURANCE.

BECAUSE HEALTH INSURANCE IS

SUCH A VALUABLE BENEFIT.

>> Reporter: LABOR LEADERS

OPPOSE LEGISLATION THAT

WOULD ALLOW LOCAL OFFICIALS

TO INCREASE UNION

HEALTH-CARE COSTS WITHOUT

GOING BACK TO THE BARGAINING

TABLE.

HE SAYS IT ISN'T THAT CITY

WORKERS PAY TOO LITTLE, IT'S

THAT EVERYONE ELSE PAYS TOO

MUCH.

>> I THINK WE ARE NO

DIFFERENT FROM ANYONE ELSE.

IN FACT, OUR POSITION IS

VERY SIMPLE.

THAT EVERY AMERICAN'S

ENTITLED TO GOOD HEALTH

COVERAGE.

>> THAT MAY BE, BUT MAYOR

DRISCOLL SAYS THE DISPARITY

IS DAMAGE THE RELATIONSHIP

BETWEEN MUNICIPAL WORKERS

AND THE PEOPLE THEY SERVE.

>> ONCE THAT TOOTHPASTE IS

OUT OF THE TUBE THAT PEOPLE

LOSE FAITH OR BECOME SUCH

SKEPTICS AROUND WHAT PUBLIC

EMPLOYMENT MEANS, I THINK

THE COST IS FAR GREATER THAN

A 348 DOLLARS ON HEALTH

INSURANCE.

>> A GROWING GAP IN BOTH

BUDGET AND TRUST.

>> JOINING ME NOW IS

GEOFFREY BECKWIT, EXECUTIVE

DIRECTOR OF THE MASS

MUNICIPAL ASSOCIATION AND

AMY DAVIDSON, AN ATTORNEY

WHO REPRESENTS YUNS IN THE

COLLECTIVE BARGAINING

PROCESS.

WELCOME TO BOTH OF YOU.

GEOFF, SPEAKING OF 9

TOOTHPASTE BEING OUT OF THE

TUBE, AT SOME POINT THE

CITIES AND TOWNS DID GO

THROUGH A LEGITIMATE UNION

NEGOTIATION AND GAVE THESE

CONCESSIONS, GAVE THESE

GENEROUS HEALTH-CARE PLANS.

SO WHERE ARE THEY IN THE

BULLS'S EYE AT THIS POINT?

>> WELL, FIRST OF ALL, WE

ARE TALKING ABOUT HEALTH

PLANS THAT ARE OUTDATED.

THE $5 COPAYS ARE REALLY A

RELIC OF THE PAST FOR MOST

PEOPLE.

THEY DON'T EVEN HAVE ACCESS.

THE AVERAGE FAMILY DOESN'T

EVEN HAVE ACCESS TO A PLAN

WITH A $5 COPAY BUT THE WAY

THE LAW WORKS HERE IN

MASSACHUSETTS, COMMUNITYS

WOULD HAVE TO GET OR HAVE TO

GET APPROVAL FROM THE UNIONS

BEFORE THEY CAN INCREASE THE

COPAYS.

SO WE'RE REALLY TALKING

ABOUT PLANS THAT WERE AROUND

BACK IN THE LATE '80s AND

1990s IN THE EARLY 2,000

THAT WERE, WHERE THE COPAY

WAS $5 BUT THE COMMUNITYS

HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO INCREASE

OR INDEX TO INFLATION.

>> BUT THE CONTRACTS

TYPICALLY DON'T LAST THAT

LONG.

SO CERTAINLY THERE HAD TO BE

OPPORTUNITIES WITHIN THE

PAST HERE AT WGBH UNION

CONTRACT GOES THREE YEARS,

SO IS THAT NOT THE CASE THAT

CITIES AND TOWNS THAT THREE

YEARS AGO EVEN THEY HAD THE

OPPORTUNITY TO CHANGE THESE

THINGS?

>> WELL, MOST COMMUNITIES

DON'T HAVE WHAT IS CALLED

PLAN DESIGN.

WHAT THE COPAYS AND

DEDUCTIBLES ARE IN THEIR

COLLECTIVE BARGAINING

CONTRACT.

THERE IS A STATE LAW THAT

SAYS THE COMMUNITYS HAVE TO

GET APPROVAL FROM THE UNIONS

BEFORE THEY CAN INCREASE THE

COPAYS AND DEDUCTIBLES

REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE OTHER

COLLECTIVE BARGAINING

AGREEMENTS ARE.

WHAT IS VERY INTERESTING IS

IN MASSACHUSETTS STATE

GOVERNMENTS EXEMPTED ITSELF

FROM THIS REQUIREMENT.

AND DOES NOT NEGOTIATE AT

ALL WITH PUBLIC EMPLOYEES,

WITH STATE EMPLOYEES FOR

COPAYS AND DEDUCTIBLE ITS.

SO FOR THE PAST DECADE THE

STATE HAS BEEN INCREASING

COPAYS.

AND SO FOR THE AVERAGE STATE

EMPLOYEE, GOING TO THE

DOCTOR HAS A $20 COPAY BUT

STATE LAW MANDATES THAT

CITIES AND TOWNS HAVE TO GET

APPROVAL FROM THE UNIONS

BEFORE THEY CAN MAKE A

SIMILAR CHANGE.

SO THERE A DOUBLE STANDARD

THAT WE NEED TO ELIMINATE

BECAUSE IT IS UNSUSTAINABLE.

>> LET ME BRING AMY IN HERE.

THE $5 COPAY REALLY IS SORT

OF THE FLASHPOINT HERE.

MOST PEOPLE DON'T HAVE THAT

KIND OF COPAY.

AS JEFF JUST SAID THE STATE

HAS CHANGED IT SO THAT EVEN

STATE EMPLOYEES DON'T GET

THAT.

WE JUST HEARD WHAT SOME OF

THESE PARENTS SAID THEY FIND

IT INCOMPREHENSIBLE THAT

CITIES AND TOWN OFFICIALS

HAVE A $5 COPAY.

IS THAT NOT UNREASONABLE TO

SHIFT THAT AT THIS POINT IN

THIS ECONOMY?

>> I WOULD SAY WITH RESPECT

TO THE 2K8 5 COPAY IT IS

REALLY AN ANOMALY EVEN IN

THE UNIONIZED PLACES.

SALEM IS AN ANOMALY.

>> MOST CITYS AND TOWNS

DON'T HAVE $5.

>> MOST HAVE NEGOTIATED

HIGHER COPAYS.

AND I WILL TELL YOU, I DID A

QUICK STUDY THIS MORNING OF

SOME OF THE CONTRACTS THAT

WE HAVE NEGOTIATED IN OUR

FIRM, AND I CAME UP WITH 20

MUNICIPALITIES JUST IN LESS

THAN AN HOUR WHERE WE HAD

NEGOTIATED CONCESSIONS IN

HEALTH INSURANCE, WHETHER IT

WAS INCREASING COPAYS, AND

OFTEN IT WAS.

IN SOME CASES IT WAS AN

AGREEMENT TO GO INTO THE GIC,

THE STATE GROUP INSURANCE

COMMISSION TO SAVE THE

MUNICIPALITY MONEY.

IN EVERY SINGLE MUNICIPALITY

THAT HAS COME TO MASS COP OR

ANY OF THE OTHER UNIONS WE

REPRESENT AND SAID WE NEED

SOME RELIEF HERE FROM HEALTH

INSURANCE, WE HAVE SAT DOWN

AND NEGOTIATED WITH THEM.

AND THAT'S THE PROCESS.

THEY DON'T HAVE TO GET THE

UNIONS TO AGREE TO IT BUT

THEY DO HAVE TO NEGOTIATE

WITH THE UNIONS ABOUT IT.

AND IT'S A BACK AND FORTH

PROCESS.

AND IF HAS WORKED IN MANY

COMMUNITIES.

IN MOST COMMUNITIES.

NOW IT MAY NOT GIVE --

>> THERE IS AN AGREEMENT

THAT UNIONS HAVE MADE THIS

CONCESSION.

WHY NOT ALLOW FOR-- THERE IS

LEGISLATION ON BEACON HILL

TO GO FORWARD TO ALLOW THE

CITIES AND TOWNS TO ADOPT

THESE MEASURES AND HAVE

THEIR OWN GREATER POWER IN

REGULATING THE HEALTH-CARE

PLAN.

WHAT IS THE RISK IN HAVING

THEM HAVE THAT SORT OF

DISCRETION.

>> WELL, HEALTH INSURANCE

ESSENTIALLY IS WAGES.

SO IF-- IF THE UNIONS WERE

TO AGREE THAT MUNICIPALITIES

COULD ADOPT ANY PLAN DESIGN

THEY WANTED TO ADOPT, IT

WOULD ESSENTIALLY MEAN THAT

THE MUNICIPALITY KOS GO OUT

AND GET A HIGH DEDUCTIBLE

PLAN.

LET'S SAY THEY ARE JUST

GOING TO IMPLEMENT A $3,000

DEDUCTIBLE PLAN.

AND THE UNIONS HAVE, THE

UNIONS REPRESENTING THE

EMPLOYEES IN THE CITY OR

TOWNS HAVE NO INPUT INTO

THAT.

AND IT HITS THE PEOPLE WHO

ARE LEAST ABLE TO AFFORD THE

INFIRM AND THE ILL AND

DISABLED, THE HARDEST.

THE PLAN.

SO ALL WE'RE SAYING IS, AND

IN FACT THERE ARE TWO BILLS,

TWO COMPETING BILLS UP AT

THE LEGISLATURE NOW THERE IS

THE MMA HAS A BILL THAT SAYS

GIVE US COMPLETE CONTROL

OVER PLAN DESIGN.

AND THE UNION, THERE IS A

SENATE BILL ESSENTIALLY THAT

SAYSED UNIONS ARE WILLING TO

AGREE THAT WE CAN USE THE

STATE PLAN, THE GIC PLAN AS

A BENCHMARK IN TERMS OF WHAT

IT COSTS.

>> LET ME BRING JEFF BACK IN

ON THE COST ISSUE.

WHY IS THIS THE TO CALL

POINT HERE.

IN SOME OF THE UNION

ARGUMENTS HAVE BEEN THAT

THEY'VE MADE CONCESSIONS

ELSEWHERE BECAUSE THEY WANT

TO HOLD ON TO THEIR

HEALTH-CARE BENEFITS.

SO HAVE WE GOTTEN TO THE

POINT WHERE CITIES AND TOWNS,

WHERE THIS IS THE-- THEY

CAN'T WORK AROUND THIS KIND

OF COST?

>> WELL, CITIES AND TOWNS IN

FISCAL DISTRESS AND MANY ARE

IN FISCAL CHAOS AND CRISIS.

WHY?

LOCAL AID WAS CUT BY $750

MILLION LAST YEAR.

ANOTHER $160 MILLION THIS

YEAR.

AND WE'RE LOOKING AT

LAYOFFS.

THE ELIMINATION OF SERVICES.

AND COMMUNITIES STRUGGLING

JUST TO BALANCE THEIR

BUDGETS.

INCREASING CLASS SIZES AND

LAYING OFF PUBLIC EMPLOYEES.

THE FACT IS THAT THE STATE

GOVERNMENT DOES NOT

NEGOTIATE WITH EMPLOYEES

OVER WHAT THE PLAN DESIGN

LOOKS LIKE.

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

DOESN'T NEGOTIATE WITH

FEDERAL EMPLOYEES.

PRIVATE EMPLOYERS DON'T

NEGOTIATE REGARDING THE PLAN

DESIGN, THE COPAYS AND

DEDUCTIBLES.

IN MASSACHUSETTS THERE IS

ONE SEGMENT AND THAT IS THE

MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES HAVE

THIS EXTRA COLLECTIVE

BARGAINING RIGHT.

AND WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE?

THE DIFFERENCE IS THE

COMMUNITIES ARE PAYING OVER

$100 MILLION MORE THAN THEY

SHOULD FOR HEALTH INSURANCE

PLAN AND THE MMA, LOCAL

OFFICIALS FROM AROUND THE

STATE, ARE ACTUALLY PUTTING

IN PLACE AND WE HAVE IN OUR

LEGISLATION A GUARANTEE THAT

NO MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES WOULD

HAVE HEALTH INSURANCE PLANS

THAT ARE LESS GENEROUS THAN

WHAT STATE EMPLOYEES HAVE.

BUT THAT FLEXIBILITY STILL

WOULD ALLOW COMMUNITITES TO

SAVE MONEY.

AND WHAT WOULD THEY DO WITH

THAT MONEY?

THEY WOULD PREVENT LAYOFFS

OF TEACHERS, POLICE OFFICERS,

FIREFIGHTERS.

>> WHEN YOU HEAR THAT.

CERTAINLY THESE UNION

EMPLOYEES ARE LOOKING AROUND

LIKE EVERYBODY IS EVERYWHERE

IN THE COUNTRY AT THIS

POINT.

THEY ARE SEEING COLLEAGUES

GET LAID OFF.

YOU HEAR AN ARGUE LIKE THIS

WHERE MONEY COULD BE SAVED F

IT IS TRUE.

TOWN MANAGERS AND CITY

MAYORS WILL PRESERVE JOBS

BECAUSE PEOPLE IN THE UNION

GET THE SAME BENEFITS THAT

EVERYBODY ELSE IS GETTING.

WHY ISN'T THAT A REASONABLE

ARGUMENT?

>> WE HAVE HEARD ARGUMENTS

LIKE THAT.

AND WE HAVE NEGOTIATED IN

MANY COMMUNITIES LIKE FOR

INSTANCE WEYMOUTH.

>> SO WHY ISN'T SALEM

FOLLOWING THEIR LEAD.

>> I'M NOT SURE WHAT SALEM'S

CIRCUMSTANCES ARE, I DON'T

REPRESENT ANYTHING IN THE

CITY OF SALEM.

BUT I WILL TELL YOU FOR

INSTANCE IN WEYMOUTH, THE

UNIONS IN WEYMOUTH

NEGOTIATED A REDUCTION IN

THEIR HEALTH INSURANCE

BENEFITS IN ORDER TO SAVE

JOBS.

THEY DIDN'T GET ANY WAGE

INCREASES IN EXCHANGE FOR

IT.

THEY WANTED TO SAVE JOBS.

ALL WE'RE SAYING IS THESE

ARE ISSUES IN A UNIONIZED

PLACE THAT SHOULD BE SUBJECT

TO COLLECTIVE BARGAINING.

SIT DOWN WITH US.

WE WILL WORK WITH YOU.

WE HAVE WORKED WITH YOU.

THE UNIONS HAVE A PROPOSAL

AT THE SENATE TO CONTAIN THE

COSTS FOR THE MUNICIPAL

EMPLOYERS, TO THE GIC

AVERAGE COST OF THE GIC

PLAN.

BUT WE'RE SAYING GIVE US AN

OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE INPUT

INTO THE ELEMENTS OF THAT

PLAN.

>> ARE YOUR UNION

MEMBERSHIPS, WE'RE TALKING

ALSO ABOUT THE RISKS HERE N

COMMUNITIES LIKE SALEM AND

ELSEWHERE WHERE RES DIDN'TS

ARE STARTING TO GET REALLY

FRUSTRATED.

AND I IMAGINE THAT IS WHAT

IS HAPPENING HERE IN BOSTON

WITH THE FIREFIGHTERS

GETTING THEIR RAISE,

OBVIOUSLY DOESN'T HAVE TO DO

WITH HEALTH CARE BUT GETTING

RAISES FOR WHAT SOME PEOPLE

SAY IS THE AGREEMENT TO STAY

SOBER, IT'S GOT TO BE GIVING

UNIONS AND UNION MEMBERS A

BAD REP.

IS THAT BEING COMMUNICATED

TO YOU.

DO THEY FEEL, IS THERE

SOMETHING PALPABLE OUT

THERE?

>> WE'RE DEFINITELY

MUNICIPAL UNIONS ARE

DEFINITELY UNDER ATTACK AND

HAVE BEEN FOR SOME TIME.

THROUGH THE MEDIA.

IN MUNICIPALITIES.

WE SEEM TO BE MUNICIPAL

UNIONS SEEM TO BE THE

SCAPEGOAT FOR ALL THE

FINANCIAL DIFFICULTIES.

THAT MUNICIPALITYS ARE

FACING.

>> BUT THE LEGISLATION THAT

WE ARE OFFERING IS NOT

ANTI-PUBLIC EMPLOYEE.

IN FACT, IT IS PRO PUBLIC

EMPLOYEE BECAUSE IT IS

DESIGNED TO PROTECT AND

PRESERVE JOBS AND GUARANTEE

REALLY GOOD HEALTH INSURANCE

PLANS FOR MUNICIPAL

EMPLOYEES.

BUT DO IT WITHIN REASON.

SO THAT THE PUBLIC

RECOGNIZES THAT IT'S GOOD

FOR EMPLOYEES TO HAVE REALLY

GOOD HEALTH INSURANCE PLANS.

BUT WE HAVE TO HAVE A LEVEL

OF COST SO THAT-- THAT IS

AFFORDABLE AND SUSTAINABLE

SO THAT WE CANNOT LAYOFF

TEACHERS AND LAYOFF POLICE

OFFICERS AND FIREFIGHTERS IN

ORDER TO ENJOY OR HAVE

HEALTH PLAN HAS ARE SO MUCH

MORE EXPENSIVE AND SO MORE

MUCH GENEROUS THAN WHAT THE

AVERAGE PERSON GETS.

>> WE'LL SEE WHAT COMES OUT

OF BEACON HILL WHERE THIS

ISSUE IS THERE PRESUMABLY

THIS WEEK AND MAYBE EVEN

TODAY, SO JEFF BECKWIT, AMY

DAVIDSON, THANK YOU FOR

JOINING US ON THIS ISSUE.

>> THANK YOU.

AND IN A MOMENT, DON'T ASK,

DON'T TELL, ALL TOLD, IT'S

BEING RECORD.

-- RECONSIDERED.