September 13, 2007
IAPE FEEDBACK
Friends,
It has been a busy week since Dow Jones presented IAPE with its "Final Offer"and we've been fielding questions from hundreds of members about the proposal and the options.
I spent Tuesday September 11th in South Brunswick, talking to members in small group and one-on-one conversations answering questions about that "Final Offer" and exploring the options. It was similiar sessions at Harborside Wednesday the 12th and Washington DC on Thursday the 13th. The IAPE Board of Directors will meet on Saturday the 15th and I'll be in Chicago, Dallas, LA and San Francisco next week and in Boston, Atlanta and New York the week after that.
I'll have more to say about those sessions in the next couple of weeks, but there were a couple of consistent concerns expressed by members that I thought might be bothering you as well.
First, the question of what's meant by "many" in the description of the proposed changes to the Managed Care program, "Doctor's office visits for those with the Managed Care plan will continue to be paid at 100%, after a $20 co-pay, but "many" in network services will be paid at a rate of 90% instead of 100%. At the same time, out-of-pocket maximums of $2,000 for individuals and $4,000 for families will be created."
In hopes of giving you a clearer picture of what's covered at 90% and what's not, we've posted the Managed Care plan the company imposed on non-union employees January 1, 2007 as a basic guide to the break-downs.
Another point involved a suggestion that the wage increases and premium increases would leave some with less take home pay: that somehow the combination of those two numbers will leave you with a pay cut. That is not the case. Once raises are adjusted for inflation (depending on the projected rate of inflation you might expect) you might "lose ground," but some members had the impression that in just "raw numbers" their take-home pay will be cut— that the bottom line on their check would be reduced— and that's just not true..
There's also the notion that if we keep talking — keep playing out the clock — the company won't be able to change our health care plan and we'll keep it — and the premiums — for another year. That's not true. If a deadlock is declared (even if we challenge any contention that all areas of bargaining have been "exhausted") an impasse can be declared and changes imposed. There's nothing magic about January 1st. Impasse is impasse whenever it's declared and changes can be made whether it's New Year's Eve or Groundhog Day. Can the company get there by January 1st? You have to believe their "best legal minds" set that October deadline for just that reason.
And there's the argument that we have plenty of time, "we haven't even started mediation, yet." There is no provision in law or the contract which requires mediation or arbitration. It's voluntary — and there's been no indication from the company's moves that it's interested in either.
The latest member feedback is on the website... and as always, if you need me, give me a call or send me a note.
Steve Yount
President
IAPE CWA 1096