http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703859204575526953379583836.html

From 3M

"The St. Paul, Minn., manufacturing conglomerate notified employees on Friday that it would change retiree benefits both for those who are too young to qualify for Medicare and for those who qualify for the Medicare program. Both groups will get an unspecified health reimbursement instead of having access to a company-sponsored health plan."

Consequences of Obamacare are just beginning...a lot of info from the business community is out there as to how employer insurance will change...it's in the pipeline and you are going to pay more
unless Obamacare is repealed. The real purpose of Obamacare is to be the vehicle that eliminates employer based coverage.

That's what I am afraid of. No more 500 a month insurance plans for only 60 dollars a month. T_T

"McDonald's Corp. has warned federal regulators that it could drop its health insurance plan for nearly 30,000 hourly restaurant workers unless regulators waive a new requirement of the U.S. health overhaul."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703431604575522413101063070.html

and more consequences...

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/07/opinion/07brooks.html

"Employee dumping. This is the most serious threat. Companies and unions across America are running the numbers and discovering they would be better off if, after 2014, they induced poorer and sicker employees to move to public insurance exchanges, where subsidies are much higher."

now what was that about if u like your current health insurance u can keep it...

Why wont you post the whole article crickster?

3M Co. confirmed it would eventually stop offering its health-insurance plan to retirees, citing the federal health overhaul as a factor.

The changes won't start to phase in until 2013. But they show how companies are beginning to respond to the new law, which should make it easier for people in their 50s and early-60s to find affordable policies on their own. While thousands of employers are tapping new funds from the law to keep retiree plans, 3M illustrates that others may not opt to retain such plans over the next few years

The St. Paul, Minn., manufacturing conglomerate notified employees on Friday that it would change retiree benefits both for those who are too young to qualify for Medicare and for those who qualify for the Medicare program. Both groups will get an unspecified health reimbursement instead of having access to a company-sponsored health plan.

The maker of Post-it notes and Scotch tape said it made the announcement now to give retirees a chance to explore different options during this year's benefit-enrollment period, according to a 3M memo reviewed by The Wall Street Journal. A 3M spokeswoman, Jacqueline Berry, confirmed the contents of the memo.

"As you know, the recently enacted health care reform law has fundamentally changed the health care insurance market," the memo said. "Health care options in the marketplace have improved, and readily available individual insurance plans in the Medicare marketplace provide benefits more tailored to retirees' personal needs often at lower costs than what they pay for retiree medical coverage through 3M.

"In addition, health care reform has made it more difficult for employers like 3M to provide a plan that will remain competitive," the memo said. The White House says retiree-only plans are largely exempt from new health insurance regulations under the law.

The company didn't specify how many workers would be impacted. It currently has 23,000 U.S. retirees.

Americans become eligible for the Medicare insurance program at age 65. Starting in 2015, 3M retirees too young to qualify for Medicare will receive financial support through what the company called a "health reimbursement arrangement" and won't be able to enroll in the company's group insurance plan. The company described that as an account retirees can use to purchase individual insurance through exchanges that the health law will create in 2014. 3M didn't provide details on the financial contributions.

Currently, these workers get credits they can use to buy the company's health plan offering medical, dental and prescription drug coverage, or they can elect to enroll in a health savings account. Such accounts typically provide employees with a contribution to help cover their health costs, and incentivize them to keep medical expenses low.

For those old enough to qualify for Medicare, 3M in 2013 will replace its current retiree medical program with a health reimbursement account, funded partly by the sponsor, that can be used to buy an individual Medicare plan. The federal government provides Medicare but enrollees pay a premium and can opt for privately run plans. Currently, these workers have had access to a reimbursement account that could be used to buy into the company's group health plan.

Democrats that crafted the legislation say they tried to incentivize companies to keep their retiree coverage intact, especially until 2014. The law creates a $5 billion fund for employers and unions to offset the cost of retiree health benefits. More than 2,000 entities, including many large public companies, have already been approved to submit claims for such reimbursement. 3M did not apply.

"We would certainly welcome their application," said Reid Cherlin, a spokesman for the White House. Ms. Berry, the 3M spokeswoman, said the company was monitoring the program and its requirements.

Sen. Charles Grassley, an Iowa Republican, said that "for all the employees who were promised they'd be able to keep their current benefits after the health-care law passed, I'm worried that the recent changes we've heard about...are just the beginning."

And why does this article come out now of all times?




Democrats that crafted the legislation say they tried to incentivize companies to keep their retiree coverage intact, especially until 2014. The law creates a $5 billion fund for employers and unions to offset the cost of retiree health benefits. More than 2,000 entities, including many large public companies, have already been approved to submit claims for such reimbursement. 3M did not apply.

Too bad the party of no destroyed the public option!

First the company says this,

3M Co. confirmed it would eventually stop offering its health-insurance plan to retirees, citing the federal health overhaul as a factor.

Then they say,


"We would certainly welcome their application," said Reid Cherlin, a spokesman for the White House. Ms. Berry, the 3M spokeswoman, said the company was monitoring the program and its requirements.

Which is it Ms Berry?

I guess this wishy washy news release is to to help the Republican and insurance companies fear, misinformation, and lie campaign.

Any company that does this will lose many young qualified and talented people from their work force.
It's just a politically motivated threat.
They will end up, after the Republicans fail, opting to use the 5 billion dollar incentive.

The company will not incur any further costs from the HC bill.

That actually happened in the lame duck session and before the members took their seat in office........and you cannot blame the Repubs completely as the President approved.......and no I don't approve of it myself.....

In 2014 the HC bill provision kicks in that won't allow companies to dump anyone because of pre-existing illness, and will prevent insurance companies from raising rates for undue reasons.

You really should study up on this stuff.

Either way its costs to pick up the health insurance for those people and obvioulsy the 5 billion dollars isn't enough money for the companies to pay for their healthcare.....it obviously costs more to keep them so if it costs those companies that look at the bottom line and cost effectiveness more than 5 billion to keep these people on the healthcare plan.......what will it cost the taxpayers to cover them and how is this going to get paid for if everyone is dropping their private insurance or "luxury insurance" if there is no "luxury insurance benefits" to tax?? Exactly where is the money coming from or will be dumped into national debt once again??

It would be cheaper paying for a public option from all tax-payers taxes than paying premiums to an insurance company.

There is a benefit to a larger pool.

The newest poll says only 18% of the American public support repeal.
62% want to keep and strengthen the existing bill.

Who do you think the Republican Party represents in this matter?
The People or the Insurance companies?

Besides,

The tax-payer is picking up a larger bill by treating the uninsured for curative care.

Who do you think pays for the uninsured's ER visits and hospital bills when they can't?

Number one polls are polls and unreliable......I would never put my faith in a poll sampling the can be slanted either.....I never do either way.......its the population that pays the premiums not the tax payers its an option......and if the governemnt is going to be the insurance company then people need to pay preiums as they would in the private sector and not count on "luxury insurance taxes" there will not be any luxury healthcare or private healthcare as people will dump their healthcare premiums for the government healthcare causing deficits to rise through the roof......this healthcare plan is not well thought out and needs repealing and reconstruction..............the costs is going to be through the roof and so will the deficit over it...........

What 'new' poll(s)?

I checked several. Lowest for Repeal - 41%: Higest for repeal 66% again based upon who took the poll.

Not one of the polls I checked showed the percentages fanta cites...

course I did only check mostly 'reliable' polls...

there could be some superslant poll out their showing his numbers.

Or he could have possibly just polled himself.

approved does not mean that they have decided to take the funds....

u really need comprhension 101

u can ramble on and nickpick the articles but the proof will be what companies actually do...3m has acted.

I smile also... Someone should focus off the actual bill and onto the things that are 'smoking' up arround it.

by 2014 the only corporations that get to the 'won't allow' catagory are the ones that don't have union or left wing backing. Those companies with union and left wing backing (i.e. provides funds to left political causes) will all have waivers...

Many of them allready have applied for said waivers.

You really out to read the bill.

As far as the article posted within this thread... You are all missing one of the fuzzy math things.

5 million.

How many corporations...

How much will this bill really cost?

I will leave you to do the math.

As I said you really must READ the bill. It has much eye candy. It has a much more sour flavor once you begin to tie all the strings together.

Do you really, seriously...think that anything is going to change? Democrat or Republican are virtually the same exact thing, different colors...same black heart.

A lot of large companies have warned the same thing. This will also put a few out of business.