| T.R | Title | User | Personal Name
 | Date | Lines | 
|---|
| 1410.1 | 11,250 | SCAACT::AINSLEY | Less than 150 kts. is TOO slow | Mon Mar 25 1991 13:53 | 9 | 
|  | re: .0
Well, given how often I have to re-submit claims because of J.H. screwups, I'm
glad I'm not paying the postage.
It might be an interesting exercise to multiply that $45K by .25 and see if it
even comes close to the number of claims that were filed last year.
Bob
 | 
| 1410.2 | 180,000 | NOVA::MOY | Michael G. Moy, CSSE Database Systems | Mon Mar 25 1991 14:52 | 3 | 
|  |     re: .1
    
    It should be $45K DIVIDED by .25 = 180,000
 | 
| 1410.3 | some more data to muddle | SELECT::BOGATY | Dan. | Mon Mar 25 1991 15:20 | 14 | 
|  |     Interestingly, benefits responded that it was 136,000 pieces
    of mail which yielded the $45K figure.
    
     But, 136,000 x .25 = $34K (although, if envelopes had
    many forms in each, they could go over 1 oz, & be > std rate...
    It would be ironic if it was the "High Quality" (therefore "heavy"?)
    paper which brought envelope weight to over an ounce!
    
    The apparent discrepancy isn't my point (although maybe it
    should be someone's!!)
    
    
    
    	D.
 | 
| 1410.4 | re: .2 ...You are right...It's a Monday morning... | SCAACT::AINSLEY | Less than 150 kts. is TOO slow | Mon Mar 25 1991 15:27 | 0 | 
| 1410.5 |  | SUPER::HENDRICKS | The only way out is through | Mon Mar 25 1991 20:30 | 11 | 
|  |     I'd be highly motivated if I thought paying my own postage would lower
    my out of pocket deductible which climbs higher every year.  ;-)
    
    I often have the providers submit them for me, saving both me and DEC
    the postage.  Some are able to, some aren't.  But providers mailing in
    on their own postage would skew the figures being discussed above.
    
    If I had to pay my own, I probably wouldn't notice.  If I submit 15 per
    year, that's 15 x .29 or $4.35.  One lunch...
    
    Holly
 | 
| 1410.6 | Free Postage!?!?!?!? | FASDER::AHERB |  | Tue Mar 26 1991 06:36 | 3 | 
|  |     WHERE do I get postage paid envelopes? All I've seen for years is the
    form that you fold over with the block to put your OWN postage stamp.
    Am I missing something out here in the field?
 | 
| 1410.7 | In this field office in Dallas... | SCAACT::AINSLEY | Less than 150 kts. is TOO slow | Tue Mar 26 1991 08:26 | 5 | 
|  | re: .6
the forms and the envelopes are right next to each other.
Bob
 | 
| 1410.8 |  | NOTIME::SACKS | Gerald Sacks ZKO2-3/N30 DTN:381-2085 | Tue Mar 26 1991 09:15 | 17 | 
|  | >    Benefits believes that the postage-paid envelopes are an
>    important part of the "outstanding delivery of medical benefits
>    to employees" and has chosen NOT to eliminate the benefit.
Outstanding delivery?  How about "outstanding bills?"  They sure take
their time paying us (and our providers).
The postage paid envelopes are for "follow-up claims on the same illness or
injury or for other related bills."  The form is shorter (e.g. you only have
to list your address once).
There's a hefty premium for business reply mail, which explains the
discrepancy mentioned in earlier replies.
BTW, if you feel strongly about this issue, you can always stick a stamp
on business reply mail.  I'm always getting business reply envelopes
from non-profits that say "your stamp saves us money."
 | 
| 1410.9 | Personally, I'd prefer $30K worth of Post-Its | SELECT::BOGATY | Dan. | Wed Mar 27 1991 08:05 | 15 | 
|  |       Well, no one seems terribly worked up about this,
    which isn't surprising... since we're not talking megabucks.
    
      In fact, that's the point. *IF* I can extrapolate from the
    underwhelming response to this note, to the assumption that
    no one would would get REALLY bent out of shape if this benefit
    went away, then why shouldn't it?
    
      Personally, I'd rather have Post-Its (and other such "frivolous"
    office supplies) than Postage-Paid envelopes.
    
      Why is the left hand withholding while the right hand is
    giving away freebies??
    
    
 | 
| 1410.10 |  | TOMK::KRUPINSKI | C, where it started | Wed Mar 27 1991 10:48 | 10 | 
|  | 	Is the $45K figure postage alone, or does it include the
	cost of purchasing, printing, and distributing the envelopes?
	Also, we should consider that having these preprinted envelopes
	reduces the chances that a claim will be misaddressed. The cost
	of handling misdirected claims, and straightening out the associated
	hassles ought to be considered.
					Tom_K
 | 
| 1410.11 | Just a thought.... | BOOVX1::MANDILE |  | Wed Mar 27 1991 11:02 | 4 | 
|  |     Maybe J.H. pays for part of this stuff?
    
    
    Lynne
 | 
| 1410.12 |  | NOTIME::SACKS | Gerald Sacks ZKO2-3/N30 DTN:381-2085 | Wed Mar 27 1991 11:09 | 10 | 
|  | I imagine they'd want to provide forms or envelopes for additional medical
expenses anyway.  They're probably cheaper to process than the regular
medical expense forms.  I don't think the base noter is complaining about
the existence of the envelopes, just the fact that they're postage-paid.
I'd be happier with the system if the regular forms had a self-envelope
like the additional-expense ones.  How are you supposed to enclose
receipts and preserve privacy in the regular forms?  Scotch tape doesn't
hack it.  I either use my own envelope or (gasp!) stick in one of the
postage-paid ones.
 | 
| 1410.13 | JH just administers (for a price) | SELECT::BOGATY | Dan. | Wed Mar 27 1991 13:28 | 17 | 
|  |     re: .10 -  just postage
    
    re: .11 -  but it's US who pays JH to administer "the plans"
               so the bill comes right back to us.
    
    re: .12 -  I have 3 issues:
    
    		1) the postage itself
    		2) the envelopes themselves (got no feedback on their cost)
    		    (although it's a GOOD point about
                     avoiding address problems...
    		     By	the way, I'm told they HAVE re-designed
    		     the claim forms to include envelopes...
    			(how much do THEY cost?)
    
    		3) the apparent inconsistency between penny pinching in
    		   one area and non-negligible give-aways in another.
 | 
| 1410.14 | Is "regular form" still relevant? | SICML::LEVIN | My kind of town, Chicago is | Wed Mar 27 1991 16:04 | 15 | 
|  | re: .12
  <<	 I either use my own envelope or (gasp!) stick in one of the
  <<	postage-paid ones.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I always (gasp! gasp!) use the 
postage-paid envelope, but the main reason is that none of my medical suppliers
(doctors, dentists, labs, etc) want the "regular" form to fill out.  Everybody
generates a multicopy standard form which is marked as satisfying some sort of 
medical/insurance industry standards, and I get the yellow (or is it pink?) copy
to send to JH.
So I always need to enclose papers in an envelope, and the only preaddressed
envelope around is the prepaid one.
	/M
 | 
| 1410.15 | Does this avoid recursion? | ATPS::BLOTCKY |  | Wed Mar 27 1991 18:17 | 6 | 
|  |     I don't know about the Hancock Insurance plan, but I think that as far
    as Health Care Reimbursement Accounts are concerned, postage paid to
    mail in the claims would be a qualified medical expense, so I could ask
    for the .29 reimbursement if I paid the postage myself.
    
    Steve
 | 
| 1410.16 | How can I get PP Envelopes? | FASDER::AHERB |  | Thu Mar 28 1991 06:51 | 10 | 
|  |     Could someone tell me where *I* can order the postage paid envelopes
    from? In 5 years, I never even knew they existed. In fact, when JH
    sends me a request for additional data, they include an envelope that
    is not postage paid.
    
    I {_don't even use the standard form as I've created a clone of it on
    my MAC with the appropriate (repetitive) data already filled in. An
    earlier reply was correct in that I've never had a physician use JH's
    form (I get yellow and pink also) and they'd rather I send the claim to
    JH (and pay the postage).~{
 | 
| 1410.17 | TRUST THE "BENEFITS" ORGANIZATION | STEREO::DENELL | Elinda Denell - 264-4396 | Thu Mar 28 1991 15:27 | 2 | 
|  |     I concur with Benefits, keep the postage paid envelopes as part of the
    benefits package.
 | 
| 1410.18 |  | WHOS01::BOWERS | Dave Bowers @WHO | Thu Mar 28 1991 16:21 | 5 | 
|  |     I wouldn't care if they weren't postage paid, so long as they were
    available.  For some reason, the blasted things are scarcer then hen's
    teeth here in the N.Y. City area.
    
    -dave
 | 
| 1410.19 | No Flames please, just joking | COOKIE::INDERMUEHLE | Stonehenge Alignment Service | Fri Mar 29 1991 09:43 | 6 | 
|  | It's all those gun and knife wounds  ;^)
cheers,
John I.
 | 
| 1410.20 | Has anybody considered: | CSC32::J_OPPELT | Just do it? But I just DID it! | Fri Mar 29 1991 12:35 | 12 | 
|  |     	MOST (I'm sure not all) of the people sending in claims to
    	John Hancock are current employees.  Why not have a mail stop
    	near the-JH-office-receiving-these-claims collect submitted
    	claims and bulk-deliver them once per week?  Use internal
    	mail and avoid the postage altogether.
    
    	Sure, it might delay claim processing, but JH is so slow already
    	that an extra week won't make much difference.
    
    	Just an idea.
    
    	Joe Oppelt
 | 
| 1410.21 | Thanks to my secretary... | FASDER::AHERB |  | Fri Mar 29 1991 23:11 | 6 | 
|  |     I found that simply calling the 800 number listed on the claim form and
    asking about postage paid envelopes will forward your call to the mail
    room where they ask you how many envelopes (in packages of 100) you
    would like mailed.
    
    
 |