University Times

Faculty Assembly wants a role in setting the payment structure for the University's new health care package, which was announced Feb. 22. (For details, see page 7.) A three-year contract, with UPMC Health System as the sole health care insurance provider, is scheduled to go into effect July 1.

At its Feb. 29 meeting, Faculty Assembly passed a resolution urging the administration to allow input in setting the rates employees will be asked to pay under the new agreement.

Despite the resolution, James Holland and Herbert Chesler, co-chairs of the Senate benefits and welfare committee, had high praise for the new deal Pitt struck with UPMC, especially in contrast to the Highmark proposal.

While Highmark was proposing a 15-20 percent increase in rates, Holland said, "UPMC proposed three health care plan options and a decrease of costs in the first year. Faculty members, including me, have a long history of opposing a single-provider benefits arrangement, but between our two options, one was inadequate and the other quite good."

Chesler said the medical advisory committee, which helped hammer out the UPMC agreement, considered more than costs. "UPMC offered us a grievance process, a better pharmacy plan and a comprehensive plan option, which is a product they don't have right now," among other attractive points. "Also, although it's multi-year, we can walk away from the plan any time we choose as a mechanism or lever if we find we're not getting proper service; they can't."

But the issue of the rate structure is still unresolved, Chesler said. "The UPMC rates already have been set. What we don't know yet," Chesler said, "is the rate of the premium to be paid by the University and the rate paid by the subscriber. The medical advisory committee made it very clear that we would hope the University will not reduce its share of the premium."

Holland and Chesler serve on the advisory committee, which includes representatives of the University Senate, Human Resources and Staff Association Council.

Despite the fact that the University's overall payment will be as much as $500,000 less in the first year, Chesler said, "there is the potential for premium increase on the subscribers' side."

The University annually sets a "core" payment, which is the amount it will pay across its health plan options, Chesler said. There is a core rate for individuals, one for employee/child, one for employee/spouse and one for families, regardless of the employee's choice of plans. According to Chesler, in the past the University has set this amount unilaterally.

In calling for Faculty Assembly action, Chesler said, "Nothing should happen without our first being informed. And when I say 'our' I mean the medical advisory committee, appropriate University Senate committees and staff committees, so we can have a voice. We don't want the core shoved down our throats the way the core was shoved down our throats the last time."

The benefits and welfare committee is withholding its final approval of the plan, pending receipt of premium rate information, Chesler said.

Senate President Nathan Hershey asked Chesler to present a resolution in writing that Faculty Assembly could vote on. The assembly then adopted the following resolution: "Faculty Assembly urges the administration to engage in discussion with the appropriate University Senate committees and the medical advisory committee regarding premium-sharing costs and/or the core rate, and not unilaterally determine them."

–Peter Hart