Comments on: Pierce County employees may have to pay for health insurance next year

By: klthompson

klthompson — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 19:28:55 +0000

This is one playing field that has never been level. Health insurance should never have been allowed as a tax free fringe benefit. I had to pay for my insurance with after tax income for years. Government and private sector employees should have to do the same.

By: Exidor

Exidor — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 03:46:59 +0000

I was also not aware that PC did not pay for healthcare. I have no problem with employees paying a reasonable amount, but you need to consider the balance between private pay scale and public pay scale. In most cases you work for lower salary to receive better beni’s and stability. Not always the case though.

By: shandalynn

shandalynn — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 15:36:54 +0000

I work in Grays Harbor County… we have had to pay for dependent coverage for years. The county pays for the cost of the employee only. I was shocked when I saw the Medical rates, and that Pierce county is paying a composite rate and not tiered. I know it’s not always easy to get everyone on board with a plan, but tiered rates make sense. And maybe the county should just pay a fixed amount only and let the employees pick up the balance… I don’t know of anyone else that pays for full benefits for their employees… those days are long gone!

By: Cloyd

Cloyd — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 23:27:43 +0000

Almost everyone agrees that healthcare insurance costs have skyrockected.

Well, so have automobile and home insurance costs. And they are parallel worlds: behemoth corporations that are largely indifferent to the average consumer, no real market competition, ever-rising costs. Let’s also start a national dialogue about automobile and home insurance costs.

By: davidwickert

davidwickert — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 15:39:21 +0000

sw4n6xprt, the county is thinking about addressing the issue of spouses and insurance. Phelps told me there are 65 couples in which both spouses work for Pierce County. He suggested eliminating one of the from the program would save a lot, though I don’t have details. I was hesitant to mention that in the post because I don’t have enough information. Presumably the “de-enrolled” spouse would still be covered by the county’s program, but as a spouse, not as an employee. I don’t know the details of how it would work, but it’s one of the issues they were going to raise with the union officials yesterday.

By: smartypants

smartypants — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 15:37:47 +0000

Now hold on, IKNOW….you say you pay their salary for doing a lackluster job – you ever thought that most of them live with in the county so they pay just as much of their salary as YOU do? You ever thought that all of them don’t do a lackluster job but rather the few ruin it for the good workers? How annoying it must be to get the pinch from the higher ups and have your budget cut and then have other fellow tax payers put it in their face that they aren’t doing their job when they aren’t given the resources to do so!

By: sw4n6xprt

sw4n6xprt — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 15:33:46 +0000

One of the areas that the County can cut on medical premiums is the area where they have husbands and wifes working for the county. They can let one of them opt out of the system, because they are already covered by one of the spouses. I know of many husband/wife county employees. This would cut on costs. The other area is pay for what you have. Instead of this one large premium for every employee, pay for the coverage needed. Like a single person’s medical costs are going to be less than a family, and a couple that does not have any children would not have to pay a full premium either. Just some common sense issues.

By: Daisydog

Daisydog — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 14:37:51 +0000

You must read this this while thinking about “Triumph the insult comic dog”"– pretend what you are reading is coming from Triumphs mouth……….

“OOOOOHHHHHH NOOOOO! They have to start paying for their own insurance! The world is coming to an end! Woe is me! What will they ever do now that they will have to pay for insurance?????? All I know is I need some to p**p on and I found it!

By: imaginetr

imaginetr — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 13:06:27 +0000

Well, any step backwards for a worker is unfortunate. Is it necessary, perhaps. Could an employee share the burden with an employer, sure, but what’s fair and comfortable? What I never seem to see are articles or reports about insurance companies trimming their fat, cutting their costs in order to keep premiums stable or increases at a minimum? If they do anything it’s to reduce their cost to increase their profit. Instead of getting angry at the workers or management for trying to balance their budget, we should all be applying pressure on the insurance companies and our own states Insurance Commission. Insurance is a necessary EVIL. We go through life paying and avoiding using it and when we do those companies try their best to avoid covering us. check this out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jng4TnKqy6A

By: obamanothanks

obamanothanks — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 06:09:03 +0000

Boo! Hoo! Cry me a river. Welcome to the real world government workers!

Fatuous, Everything Alaska, Toocan hit the nails right on the heads !!! You can’t and shouldn’t help those who won’t help themselves – I ‘m the first to give someone the shirt off my back if they need it while trying to better themselves, but giving help to those who sit around waiting for the Mailman to show up with their welfare check / my tax dollars is absurd. Why work when others will work for you?