Dan McGuire says in part, regarding the transit strike and the health/retirement benefits currently provided to Metro Transit employees:
>...We will all lose, and especially Minneapolitans, if he does get > away with forcing the workers to shoulder the cost increases. I fail to follow this logic. Let's talk of fairness and parity for the majority of workers and taxpayers, rather than just the minority of transit workers currently out on strike. I currently have significant deductibles associated with my family health/dental insurance, and co-pays accompany everything from prescription drugs to virtually all outpatient services, emergency visits, etc. Most workers are in the same boat. I have no employer paid pension plan, and no retirement health care plan. Many thousands of metro-area workers have even more restrictive health insurance coverage and no pension plan; and thousands have NO health coverage or pension plan, but are working taxpayers nonetheless. Why should these taxpayers be asked to shoulder the cost of better insurance/benefit plans for transit workers than they themselves enjoy? The transit employees will soon be notified that their healthcare coverage will cease and they will be offered the opportunity to pick up their coverage under COBRA laws, at the current group rate. Most will be unable to afford to maintain that coverage, and will begin to shop around for alternate, more affordable coverage. They are in for sticker shock when they find what types of family coverage are available for $400-$500 per month; what deductible and co-pays are required, etc. Most families struggle month-to-month making ends meet with rent/mortgage payments, utilities, car loans, various insurance payments, day care, kids education bills, and the like. They also try and save a bit for a rainy day and retirement. Why should the majority of taxpayers be asked to subsidize the relatively extravagant health and benefit programs of the minor population of transit workers? Where is the fairness and parity? The outrageous cost of healthcare is an issue that transcends individual employment contracts, and it should be addressed at the appropriate state/federal level if fairness and parity are to be achieved. Michael Hohmann Linden Hills > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Behalf Of Dan McGuire > Sent: Friday, March 12, 2004 8:31 PM > To: Mpls Forum > Subject: [Mpls] Peter Bell on Almanac > > > Peter Bell's haughty, take it or leave attitude on Almanac was hard > to watch. He clearly gave the impression that he was not interested in > negotiating and that he thought that negotiations were not necessary. > He already had it figured out and the bus drivers simply needed to > accept what he decided. It appears that he thinks he can get away with > it politically. > We will all lose, and especially Minneapolitans, if he does get > away with forcing the workers to shoulder the cost increases. It was > clear that he wasn't worried about his copays or prescriptions. > Everyone who is part of a group health plan should be concerned if Bell > and Pawlenty win this one. I don't doubt that they will be rewarded so > that their copays really won't be an issue for them. > Their bread and crumbs for the masses is insulting. > Dan McGuire > Ericsson > snip REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
