NYC Speaker Says Medicare Advantage ‘Moving Forward’ — Retirees Jeer ‘Scare Tactics’ And Press Alternatives

NYC Council Speaker Adrienne Adams and Civil Service & Labor Committee Chair Carmen De La Rosa have released a statement saying changing the NYC Administrative Code will “preserve Retirees’ choice of health insurance.”

By Bob Hennelly 

On the eve of the introduction of controversial legislation to alter the city’s Administrative Code that covers the provision of health insurance for active and retired civil servants, the City Council’s Democratic leadership issued a statement asserting that no matter how they act on the legislation, Mayor Adams and the Municipal Labor Committee will be “moving forward to implement Medicare Advantage.”

In a joint statement, City Council Speaker Adrienne Adams and Council Member Carme De La Rosa, chair of the Civil Service and Labor Committee said that the change in the language being contemplated would actually “preserve retirees’ choice of health insurance rather than have them automatically enrolled in Medicare Advantage as the sole plan on January 29.”

Opponents of the change to the Administrative Code contend that the change in the language would eliminate the protective language they cited in their successful court challenge to the city’s shifting retirees to Medicare Advantage.

The Adams administration and the MLC claims time is of the essence because its Health Stabilization Fund, created in 1984, used to cover healthcare obligations and help defray premium costs, is running out of money, putting at risk the premium free health care that active city employees continue to enjoy.

The ongoing debate is an outgrowth of last year’s blowback from a coalition of municipal retirees against then-Mayor Bill de Blasio and the Municipal Labor Committee’s proposal to shift retirees to a privatized Medicare Advantage program in hopes of realizing a $600 million savings which was supported by Mayor Adams. The NYC Organization of Public Service Retirees countered the move threatened retirees’ continuity of care, would cost more, and would cover less as providers would squeeze more profits out of the conversion.

The New York City Organization of Public Service Retirees successfully challenged the city in court bringing the implementation of its Medicare Advantage plan to a standstill at the start of the Adams’ administration. Tens of thousands of city retirees opted out. One key issue was a requirement that city retirees who opted out of the new offering would have to pay a $191 monthly premium for their old plan. Subsequently, the two health insurance companies fronting the controversial plan withdrew.

That court decision for the retirees was upheld on appeal.

The MLC’s proposal for Medicare Advantage is the outgrowth of deals it cut with the de Blasio administration to find billions of dollars in healthcare costs savings as unions settled contracts that Mayor Bloomberg had left unsettled for years. The collaboration between management and the MLC included the creation of a Tripartite Health Insurance Committee chaired by Martin Scheinman, who would act as the arbitrator over any disputes that arose out of implementation of the Committee’s initiatives.

In an October 28 letter Office of Labor Relations Commissioner Renee Campion warned that unless the Council passed the change to Administrative Code 12-126 by Nov. 4, the Adams administration “would seek relief” from mediator Scheinman, to order a change that would also comply with a standing order from the state judge that the city continue to provide retirees a single health insurance plan without a premium option.

“The City continues to lose $50 million a month for every month this plan is delayed, putting our shared goals in significant jeopardy,” Campion wrote.

On Dec. 15, in what Scheinman captioned an “award” and “decision”, the arbitrator said the city had to follow through with a Medicare Advantage provider by Jan. 9, 2023, with a plan to take effect July 1, 2023. 

Marianne Pizzitola, head of the NYC Organization of Public Service Retirees & FDNY EMS Retirees, says that Scheinman does not have the power to unilaterally impose Medicare Advantage on retirees.

“He has absolutely no jurisdiction over this, although everyone believes because of some media errors as well as the MLC, DC37, UFT, putting this out as this is a decision by the arbitrator,” Pizzitola said on WBAI Jan. 2. “If you go back to the originating document, he only has certain jurisdiction — this is not one. This is strictly his opinion, and the city doesn’t have to agree with it. It surely is not binding. It is not binding on the City Council, and it sure as heck, isn’t binding on the retirees.”

In their joint statement, Adams and De La Rosa assert they are concerned about the potential fallout for both active and retired city workers.  

“We are deeply concerned with the challenges in our health care program for municipal retirees and employees,” Adams and De La Rosa wrote. “While many of the underlying problems that created this situation require comprehensive solutions from all levels of government, the City must confront this dilemma to the maximum extent possible within its own authority.”

The joint statement continued. “This must include support for low-income retirees to truly access choice in their healthcare coverage, reigning in the runaway costs of care that created this crisis, and guaranteeing an insurance program that benefits all of our dedicated public servants.”

The Council leader committed to hearings next week that would be “open to the public and all stakeholders” to “examine the major outstanding questions, the details of the Medicare Advantage plan that is moving forward regardless of any potential Council action, and how the City fulfills its health care commitments to all employees and retirees.”

Pizzitola said that the joint statement continued to treat the arbitrator’s “opinion as a binding legal decision” that was being  “used as a scare tactic.” 

“The New York City Organization of Public Service Retirees has identified more than $300 million in potential healthcare savings as an alternative to this ill-advised plan,” Pizzitola wrote. “Mayor Adams and his administration has repeatedly canceled scheduled meetings with us and made it clear they do not value our input.”

Pizzitola continued. “Here’s the truth: If this progresses and our plans are privatized, we will lose control over our own healthcare. Over 250k men and women, all of whom served the public for decades, will face skyrocketing costs just to receive treatments. Many of us, including a number of 9/11 first responders, will be forced to leave specialists and our long-term providers to use doctors who take this privatized plan, losing our continuity of care. Retirees can not afford the Mayor’s gambit- financially and physically.”