California Legislature: More Uninsured, Please

Californians struggling to provide for their family's healthcare needs share a common frustration: it's very expensive. Unfortunately, one of the bills making its way through the California legislature will add frustration -- and expense -- to their struggle.

For some, finding health insurance coverage can be as simple as participating in an employer-sponsored plan bought in California's group insurance market. Older Americans receive coverage from Medicare, while those with disabilities and few resources use a state program like Medicaid. But for workers in companies that can't afford to provide coverage, for self-employed and small business owners, for people working part-time or who stay at home to care for children or an ailing parent, health insurance is available through California's individual insurance market.

The individual market allows people to pay monthly premiums, just like employer-sponsored group coverage. The difference is that individual plan premiums are much lower than group plan premiums.

California has imposed so many regulations on the group market that its premiums are often twice as expensive as those of individual plans. For families, group plans now average nearly $12,000 per year, compared with about $3,900 for families buying coverage on the individual market. As much as $2.59 of wages for every hour worked pays for employer-sponsored health plans (2007 California Healthcare Foundation). Higher pay for workers is sacrificed to fund a form of health coverage that is expensive and over-regulated.

In contrast, individual plans in California are far less regulated and-not surprisingly-far more affordable. As of March 2008, individual health plans in California are among the least expensive in the U.S. Health insurance premiums in states that heavily regulate the individual market have predictably skyrocketed-like in Massachusetts, in which much-heralded recent "reforms" contributes to Boston residents paying TRIPLE what San Franciscans do for identical coverage.

That difference in affordability may be disappearing. AB 1962 would impose a mandate for every individual health insurance policy to cover maternity benefits regardless of whether the person needs, wants or can afford this coverage. The bill would force the following Californians to pay for comprehensive pregnancy coverage:

Women who have had a hysterectomy

Men

Post-menopausal women

Couples who can't have children

Men after vasectomy

Women after tubal surgery to prevent pregnancy

If AB 1962 were enacted, it would become illegal in California for an insurer to try to sell an individual health insurance policy without obstetrical coverage. This mandate was examined by the independent California Health Benefits Review Program. Its analysis revealed that forcing these policies to cover pregnancy will add $74.5 million to the premiums paid by those trying to buy individual health insurance.

The net result of making individual health insurance less affordable? 2,300 more Californians will become uninsured when they lose the ability to buy any coverage at all when the only policies sold are priced to include maternity benefits. Increasing the number of uninsured Californians isn't what our state needs. If you oppose making insurance MORE expensive, please ask your state representatives to vote no on AB 1962.

Source





Australia: NSW Ambulance staff dread return of boss

Vicious "Health" bureaucrats at work again. They seem to be as bad in NSW as they are in Qld.

The former boss of an ambulance station in western NSW is being returned there as an officer despite an external investigation largely substantiating more than 50 allegations of bullying and harassment made against him over the past 10 years. Several former officers at Wellington station have either resigned, transferred or gone on stress leave, saying they could no longer work there while Rodney Althofer, 63, was manager. The Herald understands a six-month external investigation by Kamira Stacey Consulting found more than 50 allegations against him were mostly substantiated.

Today marks the final hearing day of a parliamentary inquiry into the NSW Ambulance Service, which has been inundated with submissions on bullying and harassment and complaints about poor handling of grievances. Investigators interviewed about a dozen officers who had worked at Wellington for the report, which was completed midway through last year. However, the service has kept that report secret and did not act on the matter until last week. The chief executive of the service, Greg Rochford, has also refused to release to staff the service's response to the report.

The Herald spoke to seven former and serving Wellington ambulance officers, as well as the partners of two others, all of whom alleged bullying by Mr Althofer. Three alleged that he told them not to bother buying property in the area because he would run them out of town. The officers described Mr Althofer, a warrant officer in the navy for 20 years, as a "military-style", micromanaging authoritarian who screamed at, and publicly humiliated, staff. They are also furious at management for failing to deal with the problem for so long.

They were devastated to learn at a staff meeting on Tuesday that Mr Althofer would be returning within two weeks - although as an ambulance officer and not in his original job as station manager. They were told an external mediator would be available to work through any problems. One ambulance officer immediately went on stress leave upon hearing the news and another is seeking a transfer. There are only six full-time ambulance officers at the station.

An email from a former western division officer, sent to the parliamentary inquiry last month, said it was "one of the most investigated and documented accounts of bullying and harassment that I have seen in my experience". The email, which has been seen by the Herald, said "[The manager] has previously been stood down for harassment of staff over the years and has also been sent to anger management courses, this you will find in the [Kamira] report". The Herald understands the Kamira investigation was prompted after the service received three formal complaints of bullying in one week in late 2006 - two from Wellington officers and one from a doctor at the local hospital.

A former officer, who worked there for 18 months until mid-2000, said he went on workers' compensation due to stress from being bullied by Mr Althofer. The final straw was when Mr Althofer "chased me across the road yelling at me . in the main street of Wellington", he said. "They found that he needed to attend an anger management course and he refused to do it." Another former Wellington officer said Mr Althofer would hide behind trees near the station on his days off and check what time staff turned up for work.

Mr Althofer denies any bullying and harassment of staff. "I've always tried to get ambulance officers to do what they are supposed to do and because of the culture of the ambulance service they simply don't do what they're supposed to do. "They breach the code of conduct on a daily basis and all I ever did was to try and get people to do what they're supposed to do," he told the Herald. He said he offered to return as an ambulance officer, and not the manager, because of "all the stress of trying to manage people who don't want to do their job". "I was bullied and harassed," Mr Althofer said.

The service would not comment except to confirm there had been an investigation at Wellington "involving interpersonal dealings between colleagues".

Source