quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

It is my understanding that all employees have a choice. Either the company employees are healthy enough and make up a large enough group to make your premiums low enough to beat what the exchanges offer or you then go to the exchanges to buy it on your own without joining the group at work.

Yes, there is an introduction here of a bit of price competition but trust me kinkroids...it won't be much. This also can just as easily result in employers no longer offering insurance but I am not so sure how much flexibility they have on that count. I think if there are 50 or more employees, your employer then has a large enough group that by law, will be required to offer a group plan.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
It is my understanding that all employees have a choice. Either the company employees are healthy enough and make up a large enough group to make your premiums low enough to beat what the exchanges offer or you then go to the exchanges to buy it on your own without joining the group at work.
Yes, there is an introduction here of a bit of price competition but trust me kinkroids...it won't be much. This also can just as easily result in employers no longer offering insurance but I am not so sure how much flexibility they have on that count. I think if there are 50 or more employees, your employer then has a large enough group that by law, will be required to offer a group plan.

There are certain conditions that need to be met to use the exchange over the employer, and not many will qualify. But the article wasn't about that anyway.
There are certain policies that were "grandfathered" making them exempt from the new health care laws (except for a couple of things like insuring children on parents' medical until 26). They won't have to remove lifetime caps, etc.
Nothing really of value concerning whether or not the employee could choose NOT to accept the employer's plan.
If you think about it, that would be getting the employers completely off the hook for providing insurance. Just like there were some morons who subtly told employees that if they voted for Obama, they would be fired, likewise employers would search out and find the lousiest medical package they could (and in fact insurers are marketing this), so that employees would go to the exchanges. Then when it came time to fine the employer, they would shrug their shoulders, say they offered it, but no one would take it.
So no, you won't have a choice between your employer and the exchange.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri


According to my ex (an HR Mgr.), employer plans don't have to change to meet standards (if they don't already) until they are renegotiated, at which point, the plans had to include the entirety of the changes. Now, this was also 2011 that I asked her about it, so things could certainly have changed since then. Since we got divorced in May 2012 and her employer didn't re-sign insurance papers until end of September, I have not talked to her about it since '11.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
According to my ex (an HR Mgr.), employer plans don't have to change to meet standards (if they don't already) until they are renegotiated, at which point, the plans had to include the entirety of the changes. Now, this was also 2011 that I asked her about it, so things could certainly have changed since then. Since we got divorced in May 2012 and her employer didn't re-sign insurance papers until end of September, I have not talked to her about it since '11.

Plans that were in place in 2010 when the bill was signed are grandfathered, so I am guessing your ex's plan no longer is.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
According to my ex (an HR Mgr.), employer plans don't have to change to meet standards (if they don't already) until they are renegotiated, at which point, the plans had to include the entirety of the changes. Now, this was also 2011 that I asked her about it, so things could certainly have changed since then. Since we got divorced in May 2012 and her employer didn't re-sign insurance papers until end of September, I have not talked to her about it since '11.

Plans that were in place in 2010 when the bill was signed are grandfathered, so I am guessing your ex's plan no longer is.

Is it true (I'm fairly certain this is what she had said) that if nothing changes - at all - then the plans stay grandfathered? And, that an increase in premiums is an example of a change that would end the grandfather status?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

Is it true (I'm fairly certain this is what she had said) that if nothing changes - at all - then the plans stay grandfathered? And, that an increase in premiums is an example of a change that would end the grandfather status?

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

It is my understanding that all employees have a choice. Either the company employees are healthy enough and make up a large enough group to make your premiums low enough to beat what the exchanges offer or you then go to the exchanges to buy it on your own without joining the group at work.

Yes, there is an introduction here of a bit of price competition but trust me kinkroids...it won't be much. This also can just as easily result in employers no longer offering insurance but I am not so sure how much flexibility they have on that count. I think if there are 50 or more employees, your employer then has a large enough group that by law, will be required to offer a group plan.

There are certain conditions that need to be met to use the exchange over the employer, and not many will qualify. But the article wasn't about that anyway.

There are certain policies that were "grandfathered" making them exempt from the new health care laws (except for a couple of things like insuring children on parents' medical until 26). They won't have to remove lifetime caps, etc.

Nothing really of value concerning whether or not the employee could choose NOT to accept the employer's plan.

If you think about it, that would be getting the employers completely off the hook for providing insurance. Just like there were some morons who subtly told employees that if they voted for Obama, they would be fired, likewise employers would search out and find the lousiest medical package they could (and in fact insurers are marketing this), so that employees would go to the exchanges. Then when it came time to fine the employer, they would shrug their shoulders, say they offered it, but no one would take it.

So no, you won't have a choice between your employer and the exchange.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

It is my understanding that all employees have a choice. Either the company employees are healthy enough and make up a large enough group to make your premiums low enough to beat what the exchanges offer or you then go to the exchanges to buy it on your own without joining the group at work.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

It is my understanding that all employees have a choice. Either the company employees are healthy enough and make up a large enough group to make your premiums low enough to beat what the exchanges offer or you then go to the exchanges to buy it on your own without joining the group at work.

Yes, there is an introduction here of a bit of price competition but trust me kinkroids...it won't be much. This also can just as easily result in employers no longer offering insurance but I am not so sure how much flexibility they have on that count. I think if there are 50 or more employees, your employer then has a large enough group that by law, will be required to offer a group plan.

There are certain conditions that need to be met to use the exchange over the employer, and not many will qualify. But the article wasn't about that anyway.

There are certain policies that were "grandfathered" making them exempt from the new health care laws (except for a couple of things like insuring children on parents' medical until 26). They won't have to remove lifetime caps, etc.

Nothing really of value concerning whether or not the employee could choose NOT to accept the employer's plan.

If you think about it, that would be getting the employers completely off the hook for providing insurance. Just like there were some morons who subtly told employees that if they voted for Obama, they would be fired, likewise employers would search out and find the lousiest medical package they could (and in fact insurers are marketing this), so that employees would go to the exchanges. Then when it came time to fine the employer, they would shrug their shoulders, say they offered it, but no one would take it.

So no, you won't have a choice between your employer and the exchange.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
According to my ex (an HR Mgr.), employer plans don't have to change to meet standards (if they don't already) until they are renegotiated, at which point, the plans had to include the entirety of the changes. Now, this was also 2011 that I asked her about it, so things could certainly have changed since then. Since we got divorced in May 2012 and her employer didn't re-sign insurance papers until end of September, I have not talked to her about it since '11.

Plans that were in place in 2010 when the bill was signed are grandfathered, so I am guessing your ex's plan no longer is.

Is it true (I'm fairly certain this is what she had said) that if nothing changes - at all - then the plans stay grandfathered? And, that an increase in premiums is an example of a change that would end the grandfather status?

quote:

ORIGINAL: defiantbadgirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

It is my understanding that all employees have a choice. Either the company employees are healthy enough and make up a large enough group to make your premiums low enough to beat what the exchanges offer or you then go to the exchanges to buy it on your own without joining the group at work.

Yes, there is an introduction here of a bit of price competition but trust me kinkroids...it won't be much. This also can just as easily result in employers no longer offering insurance but I am not so sure how much flexibility they have on that count. I think if there are 50 or more employees, your employer then has a large enough group that by law, will be required to offer a group plan.

There are certain conditions that need to be met to use the exchange over the employer, and not many will qualify. But the article wasn't about that anyway.

There are certain policies that were "grandfathered" making them exempt from the new health care laws (except for a couple of things like insuring children on parents' medical until 26). They won't have to remove lifetime caps, etc.

Nothing really of value concerning whether or not the employee could choose NOT to accept the employer's plan.

If you think about it, that would be getting the employers completely off the hook for providing insurance. Just like there were some morons who subtly told employees that if they voted for Obama, they would be fired, likewise employers would search out and find the lousiest medical package they could (and in fact insurers are marketing this), so that employees would go to the exchanges. Then when it came time to fine the employer, they would shrug their shoulders, say they offered it, but no one would take it.

So no, you won't have a choice between your employer and the exchange.

Can an employee's housewife choose between being covered on her husband's high deductible policy or signing up for a lower deductible on the exchanges?

quote:


If you think about it, that would be getting the employers completely off the hook for providing insurance. Just like there were some morons who subtly told employees that if they voted for Obama, they would be fired, likewise employers would search out and find the lousiest medical package they could (and in fact insurers are marketing this), so that employees would go to the exchanges. Then when it came time to fine the employer, they would shrug their shoulders, say they offered it, but no one would take it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

First, I'm reading articles the same as you, apparently my comprehension is just better.

The exchanges are for those who aren't offered other policies is my understanding, not something you can choose simply because you don't like the one your (or your spouse's) employer offers. I will repeat what I said earlier that apparently wasn't read.

quote:


If you think about it, that would be getting the employers completely off the hook for providing insurance. Just like there were some morons who subtly told employees that if they voted for Obama, they would be fired, likewise employers would search out and find the lousiest medical package they could (and in fact insurers are marketing this), so that employees would go to the exchanges. Then when it came time to fine the employer, they would shrug their shoulders, say they offered it, but no one would take it.

If you can think logically for a moment, if people were able to do what you want, then everyone would choose the exchanges unless their employers offered great coverage. The employers would be off the hook, and that isn't going to happen.


If you really want answers to all this, then you need to speak to someone who handles these things. The employer's HR department, possibly the local social security or social services offices. Perhaps an insurance agent who sells health care policies.

Look, I get it, you have chronic health issues and are wondering how all of this will impact you. It's understandable. But this is NOT the place to get solid answers. We are all reading the same articles, and as far as I know, no one here is an insurance agent in the US who might actually know for sure.

In other words, we are offering our opinions based on our understanding of the article. While that may help you because we understand the articles better, it is still only our opinion and not a sure thing that you could "quote" to anyone else when trying to do what you want to do.

GO to the sources who can give you definitive answers.