We work for a large employer. We expect our union to resist these moves. Not the health corp loving UFT.
A new Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF) analysis
examines the extent to which large employers that offer retiree health
benefits are turning to Medicare Advantage (MA), the reasons why they
are making this shift, and the implications for retirees and federal
spending. This shift has important implications for beneficiaries and the Medicare program. Unlike Original Medicare (OM) enrollees, people with MA are subject to narrow provider networks and utilization management tools that may limit or delay access to Medicare-covered services. Funneling more Medicare-eligible retirees into MA will likely drive up costs, as Medicare pays more for MA enrollees (including in group plans), on average, than for a similar beneficiary in OM. |
Among the key findings:
- Currently, only 13% of large employers (200 or more workers) offer retiree health benefits. In 2022, half (50%) contracted with MA plans to provide that coverage—nearly double the share (26%) who did so in 2017.
- About 44% offered retirees no choice but to receive their health benefits through MA. As a result, those retirees are unable to choose Original Medicare (OM), unless they are willing to give up their retiree health benefits.
- A driving reason employers cited for offering retiree health benefits through MA contracts was to lower their own financial liability. For some, the adoption of MA “appears to be a strategy to maintain benefits for their retirees, without terminating coverage or adopting other changes that more directly shift costs onto retirees.”
This shift has important implications for beneficiaries and the Medicare program. Unlike OM enrollees, people with MA are subject to narrow provider networks and utilization management tools that may limit or delay access to Medicare-covered services. Funneling more Medicare-eligible retirees into MA will likely drive up costs, as Medicare pays more for MA enrollees (including in group plans), on average, than for a similar beneficiary in OM.
No comments:
Post a Comment