Harvard’s retired teachers will have to pay a larger percentage of their health care premiums beginning next June, but the increase will be spread over three years, rather than taking full effect in 2018. The selectmen unanimously approved the gradual transition Tuesday in what they described as an effort to mitigate the hardship to retirees living on fixed incomes. But, to judge by the reactions of some teachers at the meeting and afterward, the solution did little to allay their concerns.
The selectmen’s Sept. 5 vote to withdraw from the state-run group insurance program for retired teachers and instead join the Minuteman Nashoba Health Group means that retirees’ share of premiums will rise from the 10 or 15 percent they pay now (depending on their date of retirement) to 25 percent. That is the same share paid by other retired town employees. Many current and former teachers have asked the board either to reconsider that vote or to find a way to “grandfather” those who are already retired at their existing premium share. Tuesday’s vote put an end to hopes for either of those options.
About 25 teachers and spouses attended the meeting. During the public comment period, Diane Temple, Kathleen Doherty, and Julia Chadwick spoke on behalf of the retired teachers.
No possibility of grandfathering
Town Administrator Tim Bragan and Assistant Town Administrator Marie Sobalvarro had been tasked by the selectmen with finding a way to lessen the impact of the increase. At this week’s meeting, Bragan said the law on insurance offerings by municipalities differs from the law on state offerings. While the state insurance program could grandfather rates based on date of retirement, a town could not charge different rates for the same coverage plan. So, with advice from town counsel, they concluded the grandfathering option was impossible.
Bragan said he and Sobalvarro had also looked into giving cash payments to retirees to counterbalance some of the increased costs. But that idea failed because of a court ruling that such payments violated the legal concept of equal treatment. The best remaining option, Bragan said, was a transition plan that would spread the increases over two or three years.
When Chairwoman Lucy Wallace asked for a sense of the board, the selectmen quickly agreed on the three-year transition. Selectman Stu Sklar suggested that the increase be lower in the first year of the transition, to lessen the initial cost to retirees and give them time to look into some of the less expensive plans the Minuteman Nashoba Health Group offers.
At two points in the meeting, the civility that had prevailed on both sides of the health insurance debate broke down briefly. Dr. Philip Temple, the husband of a retired teacher, attempted to speak in response to the transition proposal. Wallace told him the public comment period (during which three teachers had earlier spoken) was over, and she repeatedly tried to silence him.
Temple, who identified himself as a former member of the School Committee and the Finance Committee, continued to speak. “This is pretty poor treatment!” he asserted at one point.
“You are out of order, sir,” Wallace responded, bringing down her gavel when he spoke out a second time later in the meeting.
A bewildering range of cost changes
When the selectmen resumed their deliberations, they agreed on a 3 percent share increase in 2018 for retirees who now pay 10 percent of their premium, with increases of 6 percent in the two following years to bring their share up to the full 25 percent that was the original goal of the provider change. According to figures compiled by Selectwoman Alice von Loesecke based on 2017 premium rates, those retirees would pay $36 to $57 a month more at the end of the transition period—without taking into account any increases in the premiums over the three years.
More recent retirees who pay 15 percent of their premiums and are covered by Medicare are the largest group affected by the change. Their share will increase by 3 percent in both 2018 and 2019, and by 4 percent in 2020, again bringing them up to 25 percent altogether. At the end of the transition, they could expect to pay anywhere from $17 to $36 more a month, again based on 2017 rates.
Those facing the greatest uncertainty are the 24 retirees who are not eligible for Medicare, especially those who live outside Massachusetts. Some have been covered within the state’s group program by a so-called indemnity plan that Massachusetts has subsidized by $180 million, according to Bragan. For a comparable plan they would have to pay 50 percent of the premiums, with a 10 percent increase next year, 15 percent in 2019, and another 10 percent in 2020. At the end, their costs could increase as much as $848 a month for individual coverage or $2,531 a month for family coverage, based on von Loesecke’s 2017 figures.
For less costly HMO plans, von Loesecke’s research shows that those non-Medicare retirees might see their premiums change anywhere from an $87 decrease to a $308 increase per month.
Several selectmen expressed the hope that those who faced the largest increases would use the intervening months to look into less expensive options. Wallace also urged retirees to take advantage of the SHINE program, which provides free health insurance counseling to all Massachusetts residents who are eligible for Medicare. SHINE can be contacted through the Council on Aging.
