|
|
Great Sage of the Sea
Posts: 557
| Subject: New Law Affects Employer TRICARE Plans
New Law Affects Employer TRICARE Plans
Many military retirees who work for defense contractors, airlines, and certain state governments are getting letters from their employers that their health coverage options will change as of Jan 1. In many cases, it's a notice that the employer will no longer be able to offer a TRICARE supplement as one of its health plan options.
That's because a provision in last year's Defense Authorization Act (FY2007) bars civilian employers from offering their employees incentives to use TRICARE rather than the company's normal health plan. It specifically bars offering employees a TRICARE supplement.
Congress has no problem with retirees choosing TRICARE on their own initiative, since they earned the right to the TRICARE benefit through their service. But the Defense Department and Congress developed extensive evidence that many employers - including several state governments - have been consciously working to shift their health care costs to TRICARE, sending letters to TRICARE-eligible employees urging them to use TRICARE rather than the employer's plan. And tens of thousands of TRICARE-eligibles across the country have taken up those offers in recent years.
This was part of the reason that the Defense Department proposed raising fees for TRICARE enrollees by up to $1,000 a year - to help stem the tide of people opting out of employer-based plans. So far, Congress has agreed with MOAA that imposing steep TRICARE fee hikes isn't the appropriate reaction.
But the Armed Services Committees took a dim view of employers who seek to cut their costs at TRICARE's expense, and changed the law to try to discourage that behavior.
Initially, the law was interpreted as barring any reimbursement that could be used to cover TRICARE expenses. That strict interpretation would have barred TRICARE-eligibles from participating in company-sponsored cafeteria plans (under which employees can receive a specified amount of cash that can be used to purchase coverage) or plans that pay a flat monthly amount to any employee who elects to use alternative coverage, whether it's TRICARE or a spouse's employer plan.
At MOAA's urging, the Committees included language indicating that these kinds of initiatives should not be barred because they are not specifically aimed at TRICARE. But it's hard to argue that a TRICARE supplement isn't TRICARE-specific.
So what can TRICARE-eligibles do if they get a letter notifying them that their employer is terminating a company-offered TRICARE supplement?
The first option is to ask the employer to offer a flat-rate payment in lieu of the supplement. If the company was willing to pay the cost of a supplement, one would think they'd be willing to pay up to the cash equivalent. But to be allowed under the new law, the payment needs to be non-TRICARE-specific. That is, it should be the same amount for an employee who chooses TRICARE as it is for an employee who chooses coverage under a spouse's employer plan. Many employers already offer such cash payment plans; it's just a matter of including TRICARE-eligibles in them.
Another alternative is to enroll in TRICARE Prime, if Prime is available in your area.
|
|
| |
|
Crew
Posts: 75
| Subject: OR...
|
|
| |
|
Crew
Posts: 75
| Subject: OR...
Sorry, hit the wrong key. You can also do what I did. Get really OLD. Between Medicare and Tricare I only pay $150 a year. Of course they take $40something from my SS payment to cover Medicare. |
|
| |
|
Senior Crew
Posts: 188
Location: Manassas, VA | Subject: RE: New Law Affects Employer TRICARE Plans
I am not effected, but others here will be.
The information is not sufficient. This employer does not offer a TRICARE supplement. They do offer to pick up the fee for TRICARE PLUS.
I have yet to see this program mentioned in the news about the new legislation.
chiefjoe |
|
| |
|
Great Sage of the Sea
Posts: 557
| Subject: RE: New Law Affects Employer TRICARE Plans
Why don't you run to SNOPES and see if it's true? |
|
| |
|
Old Salt
Posts: 338
Location: Oak Island, NC | Subject: RE: New Law Affects Employer TRICARE Plans
http://www.nera.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=18&Itemid=41
Here's a link for you that describes the new law just as reported by Gil. I'm not sure what Congress thinks this is going to change. TRICARE is still a much better deal financially than my employer's health care plan. Even if they finally manage to double my annual premium as they have tried to do for several years now, it still beats the $250 to $300 monthly premium I would pay. It just shows that once again (in my opinion), they are trying to turn their backs on the military retirees. Support the Troops my @$$!!
I maintain that just once, we should vote out every single incumbent in office, so they could get the message the people are tired of self-serving government. Of course, this will never happen, since most people think THEIR congressman is doing a good job, just not everybody else's. Think about it.
Chuck
|
|
| |
|
Great Sage of the Sea
Posts: 602
Location: Visalia, Ca. | Subject: RE: New Law Affects Employer TRICARE Plans
rjs2005 - 2007-11-08 2:41 PM
http://www.nera.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=18&Itemid=41
Here's a link for you that describes the new law just as reported by Gil. I'm not sure what Congress thinks this is going to change. TRICARE is still a much better deal financially than my employer's health care plan. Even if they finally manage to double my annual premium as they have tried to do for several years now, it still beats the $250 to $300 monthly premium I would pay. It just shows that once again (in my opinion ), they are trying to turn their backs on the military retirees. Support the Troops my @$$!!
Chuck
I've seen that same article in emails from MOAA, FRA, and several Shipmates. The horses' posteriors at DOD want to save money by preventing some companies and STATES from shifting some of their healthcare costs to the Federal Government by subsidizing TRICARE supplements for their Veteran employees. If the plan specifically mentions paying for Tricare, it is verbotten. If the plan offers a cash payment for the employee to purchase his/her own health insurance, it is okay. That simple.
Is it fair? Who knows? It's one batch of bean-counters against another, with the veterans caught in the middle - again.
I'm reminded of Robert Heinlein's novel "Starship Troopers", where, among other things, you had to be a military veteran to vote or hold elective office. Now there's a qualification test for prospective Congressmen and Senators - Are you a Military Veteran? If Yes, tell us more about who you are and what you stand for. If No, fageddaboutit.
|
|
| |
New Law Affects Employer TRICARE Plans
