The Wrong Kind of Hike

Byuclafaculty

CalPERS enrollees receive notice of long-term care rate hikes

2/20/13, Sacramento Bee, Jon Ortiz [excerpt]

With an 85 percent premium hike looming, government workers and retirees covered by CalPERS’ costliest long-term care insurance policies face a crucial decision: Swallow the increase or get out of a program they have been paying into for years. The reality of the increase literally came home this week as letters from CalPERS hit the mailboxes of 148,000 policyholders. The fund’s board last year voted to raise premiums for the 90 percent of insured members who bought the top-tier plan – lifetime coverage and inflation protection for things like nursing home and assisted-living care. Half of those policyholders are in the very highest tier and also face two small increases over the next two years before the 85 percent jump kicks in. In all, rates for them will roughly double. CalPERS says it is hiking rates to keep the insurance fund solvent long-term. Losses from higher-than-expected claims, lower-than-expected investment returns and loose underwriting standards early on forced the decision…


Does this matter for UC employees?  UC is not part of CalPERS.  But as state employees, UC employees at one time were offered the “opportunity” to subscribe to CalPERS’ long-term care plan.  There is a larger lesson from this episode.  Long-term care policies are essentially a promise to provide resources for what could be an expensive future event.  But the premiums you will pay for such policies/promises are not fixed.  Moreover, you are depending on some insurance company – which between now and then may be merged, acquired, or who knows what? – to honor the policy when you may not be in a good position to appeal denials of claims.  

Long-term care insurance is truly faith-based insurance.  But if you believe…
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWewQIrLUvM?feature=player_detailpage]

Similar Posts

|

CalPERS Long-Term Care: What Happens Tomorrow?

Byuclafaculty

Although CalPERS doesn’t run the UC retirement plan, at one point CalPERS offered long-term care insurance to UC employees.  It seemed to some folks to be a good idea at the time and they took out policies.  Long-term care policies can be bought from commercial carriers.  The problem is that you have to trust that these carriers will do right by you many years in the future when you may not be in the best condition to assert your rights.  It appeared, however, that having CalPERS – a public entity – providing the policies might be a solution.  Sadly, there…

| | | |

The Rewards of Good Behavior (and the penalties for the reverse)

Byuclafaculty

With a possible pension initiative coming to the ballot, it would be nice if public pension plans stayed on Good Behavior.  Alas: Federal investigators are looking into allegations that CalPERS violated insider trading laws this year when it purchased $26.6 million in restricted stock and then decided it didn’t need to reverse the trades when they were discovered. Two sources with knowledge of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s inquiry say on condition of anonymity that it involves stock purchases that the nation’s largest public pension fund made in March, including nearly $24 million in global financial firm JPMorgan Chase & Co….

|

Core Competencies for Regents?

Byuclafaculty

Yours truly noted with interest this item from the State Worker blog of the Sacramento Bee: CalPERS’ governing board aims to up its collective understanding of everything from financial statements to financial markets with a new set of “core competencies” that will help shape education and training. The policy, which the board is imposing on itself, also requires board members to have familiarity with topics ranging from health care and pension plans to board governance and communication…  Full story at http://www.sacbee.com/2013/12/05/5974549/calpers-sets-knowledge-standards.html Now if the Regents were to adopt such a policy, what would their core competencies be?  Pension funding?  Capital…

| | | |

Let’s Start With This Idea on the Pension Initiative: One Size Doesn’t Fit All

Byuclafaculty

Don’t buy it. Editorial: The pension (and retiree health) initiative on which we have been reporting on this blog sweeps in UC for no particular reason.  Yet all the propaganda concerning it so far deals with mayors and cities.  UC has no mayor and isn’t a city. Were the Regents consulted by initiative proponents?  Was anyone at UCOP consulted?  Anyone at UC at all?  Yours truly sincerely doubts it.  Did anyone in the group pushing the initiative look at such issues as faculty recruitment, compensation, or any other UC issue?  Did they look at the issue of the constitutional autonomy…

|

The CalPERS Long-Term Care Affair

Byuclafaculty

We have noted in earlier posts that although UC employees are not covered by CalPERS, at one point in the past, they were offered the “opportunity” to buy long-term care insurance through CalPERS.  But then CalPERS began jacking up the cost and, for those who protested, offering inferior alternative policies. CalPERS position is that it didn’t deliberately lowball the initial premiums but instead just underestimated what the costs would be.  But some subscribers disagree and now there is a lawsuit. From the Sacramento Bee: CalPERS was sued Tuesday over the big rate hikes it imposed on its long-term care insurance…

| | | | |

Does everything have to be seen?

Byuclafaculty

From time to time on this blog, we have pointed to the issue of privacy and potential ID theft posed by the practice of certain newspapers posting public employee and pensions by name.  While courts have seemed to see the handing over of raw payroll data as a required public disclosure, we have noted that whatever purposes such posting has – ostensibly “good government” – could be accomplished using job titles without names, statistical distributions, etc. It may seem at this point that nothing more could be said or done about the impact on UC.  Note that private universities face…