[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference 7.286::digital

Title:	The Digital way of working

Moderator:	QUARK::LIONELON

Created:	Fri Feb 14 1986
Last Modified:	Fri Jun 06 1997
Last Successful Update:	Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:	5321
Total number of notes:	139771

260.0. "Unfair Policy " by RUBY::KELLY () Sun Feb 01 1987 22:04

    Three years ago, when our son was born, my husband(also a Digital
    employee) picked up family coverage(we have MULTIGROUP). Multigroup
    then without any notice cancelled my individual coverage and added
    me to my husband's policy. When I discussed this with my PSA, she 
    told me that this was against policy and I could not be covered
    under another Digital employee's coverage. So, now I pay $2.00 a
    week for individual coverage and my husband pays $15.00 a week for
    family coverage. I was recently told that this policy is under 
    review but it is unclear if any change will be made in the near
    future.
    Has anyone else run into this problem? The policy works against
    Digital's married employees and should be revised.

T.R	Title	User	Personal Name	Date	Lines
260.1	Avoiding the problem	ULTRA::HERBISON	B.J. [Digital Internal Use Only]	`Tue Feb 03 1987 13:39`	6
	Could you avoid this problem by signing yourself up for John Hancock coverage (at no charge), but just using your husband's MultiGroup family coverage? This may save you the charges until Digital fixes the policy. B.J.
260.2	Yes, and it is Unfair!	USWAV3::GOLDBERG	Len Goldberg	`Tue Feb 03 1987 14:43`	45
	I have run into this exact problem when our twins were born 18 mo. ago. As a result I carry HCHP coverage for me and the kids, and Linda has to carry her own individual membership. I called the HMO, and they had no problem with us all under one family membership, but personnel told us that the policy is that a DEC employee can not be a dependent of another DEC employee as far as insurance goes. I ran this up the organization as far as the Group Compensation and Benefits Manager, and got the same answer. I said I thought is was unfair, since if my wife worked for a different company rather than Digital, there would be no problem. I pointed out that not only was my family paying extra money every week, but the company was also paying twice for the same coverage. He said it was some kind of law about providing benefits for all employees, and my wife had the choice of JH or an HMO on her own, but in any case couldn't be covered as my dependent. He also said the policy would be reviewed next time they review policies, but in the mean time, sorry, that's the way it goes. In changing nodes since then I have deleted the exact text of the reply, but you get the idea. Obviously from your note this policy has not changed yet. The following is from the "HMO Management Guide", page VI.1, 1/85: QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS Enrollment 1. IF MY SPOUSE AND I ARE BOTH EMPLOYEES OF DIGITAL, CAN ONE OF US ENROLL IN THE HMO AND THE OTHER IN THE JOHN HANCOCK MEDICAL PLAY? WHAT ABOUT OUR DEPENDENT COVERAGE? Yes. Each employee has a choice between the John Hancock Medical Plan and an HMO. Dependent children can also be covered under either teh HMO or the John Hancock Medical Plan, but not both. ------> You should also note that as an employee of Digital, you ------> may not be covered as a dependent under any company-sponsored ------> plan.
260.3	DEC's correct	BISTRO::PATTERSON	life in the Fast AC's!	`Thu Feb 05 1987 09:36`	11
	Digital is quite correct. I think it buys insurance on average number of employees, insurance scales, and time. If employees are married to one another should make no difference. Also, salaries, I think, are set up assuming a person will need at least basic coverage. If salaries were set up my married, single, divorced, or "unknown"...we'd really have a mess, wouldnt we? Keith