UNION LEADERS BLAST MISLEADING AON STUDY CALLING ON INCREASED HEALTH INSURANCE FEES FOR PUBLIC WORKERS

Flawed Study Was Slanted From The Start & Failed To Include Input from Union Reps To Design Committee

(TRENTON, NEW JERSEY) – Below, please find statements from Union Leaders in New Jersey in response to a misleading report by AON – a consultant for the State Treasurer’s Office – that unfairly calls for raising health insurance fees for public employees.  This flawed study was slanted from the start and failed to include any input from the Plan Design Committee’s union representatives.

“The AON report is disingenuous, deceiving and misleading,” said Fran Ehret, CWA NJ State Director.  “First off, it is absolutely ludicrous to shift the burden to workers in such an unfair manner.  Moreover, the report is simply sloppy – as it doesn’t even compare apples-to-apples in terms of comparing New Jersey’s numbers to Northeastern, neighboring or even similar states. In fact, the report is flawed because it doesn’t provide any data to back up their claims.  This isn’t the first time AON has been wrong. We don’t think this so-called report is worth the paper it’s written on. Last year, it came to light that Horizon had paid out millions of dollars in over payments to hospitals. We want to know when the State is going to do a thorough audit of Horizon and go after hospitals for price gouging. The Aon contract is up. Rather than extend it, the State should be putting it out to bid. It’s time to hold Horizon and Aon accountable.”

“Unfortunately, this report comes as no surprise,” said Steve Tully, Executive Director of AFSCME NJ Council 63. “Aon’s go to playbook is to recommend worker’s pay more for health care instead of holding insurance companies accountable. This report fails to consider the commonsense reforms union representatives have recommended that would save money for the taxpayers and result in fewer profits for insurers. We are also outraged that the Department of Treasury would commission a study months ago and never once ask for input from the union representatives on the Plan Design Committee. That makes no sense unless your goal from the start was to have a one-sided report that puts the burden of higher costs on the backs of workers.”

“The legislature created plan design committees for SEHBC and SHBC to assure labor had a voice at the table in decisions involving their healthcare,” said Donna Chiera, AFT President.  “Over the years we have seen efforts to silence that voice by selective sharing of information.  Unions have stepped up and offered cost saving solutions that would put saving for taxpayers over profits for shareholders.  Our members are taxpayers and they deserve a quality healthcare system that doesn’t cost them more in tax dollars, and more in cost sharing of their plan.  Shareholders should not profit on the backs of public employees.”

“It is deeply disappointing that the Treasurer’s office would go behind the backs of the SHBC and SEHBC to commission a report with no input from the people charged with overseeing public employee health benefits,” said Sean Spiller, NJEA President. “It’s a waste of taxpayer money and a betrayal of the partnership that we have worked hard to build. It is intentionally misleading about the premiums paid by public employees. It’s hard to imagine a less productive approach to dealing with the challenges of the American health care system.  The report itself contains nothing to point toward authentic cost savings. It only talks about how to shift costs to already-struggling working families. Cost shifting has no net benefits and many, many downsides. It will undoubtedly exacerbate the current educator shortage by driving out talented educators and deterring promising students from entering the profession. Increasing the cost to use health insurance discourages preventative care and early treatment of diseases, which increases long term costs to everyone. This Treasury report points to a lose-lose outcome that would make health care unaffordable for middle class families and lead to a less healthy workforce that has higher health care costs in the future. We are always prepared to talk about win-win solutions that preserve affordable access to high-quality health care. The Treasurer’s decision to commission and release this report demonstrates lack of good faith and makes it much harder to work productively together.”

“The State of New Jersey needs to negotiate fairly with the Public Employees represented by Local 195, IFPTE who are the backbone which provides the essential services that keep New Jersey operating daily especially during all crucial and times of economic stress such as now,” said Deborah Spencer, IFPTE 195 President.  “Their compensation for this dedication to their work are the lowest amounts in the State, some being at poverty level. Contractually, it is hard enough to get the State to recognize their accomplishments, but to add insult to injury, the insurance companies are looking to gouge them even more. We are now about to reopen the wounds of previous health care decisions made for NJ Public Employees, and cause further economic catastrophes to all of our hard-working men and women.”

“The Fraternal Order of Police-New Jersey State Lodge is disappointed and dismayed by the AON comparative report,”said Robert W. Fox, Fraternal Order of Police President, NJ State Lodge. “This report was done without the knowledge and input of the unions and places the burden of healthcare costs solely on the membership. The lack of accountability, oversight and transparency are evident in the conclusions drawn from this manipulated data.”

“It is unsettling to learn that the report was requested without the knowledge or input of the Plan Design Committee (PDC), as well as the unions that represent the membership,” said Steve McConlogue, Professional Firefighters Association of NJ President. “It is even more grievous that said report was never provided to the PDC. The complete lack of transparency and accountability is unacceptable.”

“I’m disappointed AON compared healthcare costs to a completely different regions and I’m perplexed how the Plan Design Committee didn’t see this, or even know about it until it came to them through a press release. said Pat Colligan, New Jersey State Policemen’s Benevolent Association President.  “But once again, AON seems to be more concerned with allowing the vendors and providers to run around with no accountability while shifting more costs on to the backs of the employees.”

.

“The State Troopers Fraternal Association is deeply disappointed to learn the report commissioned by the Administration was not first distributed to the SHBC Plan Design Committee,” said Mike Zanyor, State Troopers Fraternal Association.“As the current holder of the labor co-chair position, the STFA is keenly aware that the PDC was explicitly created by statute to examine and implement health care plan designs which are not only cost effective, but beneficial to employees and the employer.  Not providing the report to the PDC, but instead only to the legislature, undermines the rapport built between the management and union representatives appointed to the PDC.  We are hopeful this inexplicable misstep will not cause a setback in fulfilling the PDC’s mission nor rekindle the acrimony seen during the rate renewal discussions of last year. We believe only a collaborative effort between management And labor will be able to find a solution to containing healthcare costs without undermining access to quality care.”

From Patrick Nowlan, Executive Director of Rutgers AAUP-AFT: “After last year’s debacle with rates, we would have thought that the Division of Pensions and Benefits and AON would have learned a lesson – six of the twelve members of the State Plan Design Committee are labor representatives, by statute, and are entitled to transparency and respect. For the Division and AON to again withhold information from PDC members when we just met on May 24 is beyond problematic. It seems to be more of a pattern after PDC members once again heard of critical reports and recommendations in the press first. Last year there were historically high rate increases that weren’t shared with PDC members or made public until mid-July. The withholding of this report seems to be another setup for increases to rates without proper discussion and debate. Commitment to process and respect for partnership are musts if we expect to work together to control costs and also provide high quality health plans for New Jersey residents, and their families, who work for the common good.”

****