TelCo
Retirees Association, Inc.
August 15, 2005
Dear Member:
The TelCo
Retirees Association has received a Notice of Prehearing Conference
by the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California. “Notice
is hereby given that the Public Utilities Commission has set a prehearing
conference in the above-entitled matter before Administrative Law
Judge Victor D. Ryerson, for September 2, 2005, at 10:00 A.M. in
the Commission Court Room, State Office Building, 505 Van Ness Avenue,
San Francisco, California.” A prehearing conference is called
to determine the parties, positions of the parties, issues, and
other procedural matters.
Our Association’s
response to the attorney for SBC (Mr. Wong) was priority mailed,
confirmation on Wednesday, August 10, 2005. (See enclosure)
Based upon
the evidence submitted, your Association remains confident we will
prevail in this formal Commission complaint to restore the telephone
concession service you were promised at the time of your retirement.
(Please keep in mind this complaint only involves retirees living
within the state of California.) Assuming a favorable decision by
the California Commission, we shall request that SBC provide similar
treatment for all of you living outside of California.
You will
be pleased to learn the Officers and Directors of our Association
were invited to a Health Benefit conference in San Ramon, California
on Thursday, August 4th by Ms. Karen Jennings, Sr. Exec., V.P. (HR/Communications).
Attending for SBC were Mr. Chuck Smith (President/CEO, SBC West),
Mr. Jim Beck (V.P./;HR, SBC West), Ms. Sue Colburn (V.P./Benefits),
Ms. Debbie Trammell (Exec. Dir./Health Ops), Mr. Marty Webb (Assist.
V.P./Benefit Ops), Ms. Kristie Sadlon (Assoc. Dir./Benefit Design),
Ms. Karen Heinkel (Assoc. Dir./Health Ops) and Ms. Norma Gonzales
(Exec. Dir./HR).
The primary
purpose of this conference was to review the new Management Health
Benefit Plan which is to become effective January 1, 2006. (See
enclosed copy of our agenda) The conclusions of this conference
were that approximately 90% of active and retired managers will
realize a reduction in their total health benefit expenses. Those
retirees living “outside” of a designated “Network”
should consider to “Opt-In” in order to receive the same
cost benefits to those “inside” a designated “Network.”
(If you refer to your company provided material, you will recognize
the significant cost reductions available to you through the “Opt-In”
privilege.)
For those
of you currently involved in an HMO, (especially those being served
by Health Net, Kaiser and Pacific Care) SBC representatives stated,
these HMO’s are providing retirees with superior health services
and are well managed. SBC must await Medicare’s annual negotiations
with all Health Management Organizations (HMO’s) before new
contracts can be negotiated.
Ms. Norma
Gonzales (Exec. Dir./HR) distributed an SBC announcement highlighting
a “new telephone concession service reimbursement plan for
retirees living outside of an SBC service area.” (600 minutes
of long distance service for $25.00 monthly, and no more Acordia!)
We responded by announcing some Association members were already
encountering difficulties with this “new plan” since “serving
companies” were not amenable to this arrangement. (Ms. Gonzales
acknowledged the complaint and indicated SBC was working to resolve
the issue.)
Your President
announced during the conference the TelCo Retirees Association had
received formal notification from the California Public Utilities
Commission that a prehearing conference has been set for September
2, 2005 for a review of our formal complaint on retirees’ telephone
concession service based upon retiree documents and System Instruction
25, dated July 1, 1985, which states, “Employees whose telephone
service is provided by another company are to receive a fixed monthly
payment based on the Class of concession the employee is entitled
to receive.” Employees who retired before or after 1-1-84 are
entitled to a fixed payment of $35.00 monthly. (Those who retired
before 1-1-84 are exempt from federal taxes for their concession
service.) They are also entitled to a monthly payment of $13.50
for a second residence.
Pacific
Bell retirement documents state, “Retirees are entitled to
100% of exchange service, $13.50 for a second residence and $20.00
toll allowance!” The SBC representatives at the conference
reflected a total surprise at the above announcement!)
In closing,
our TelCo Retirees Association, Inc. now exceeds 2000 members in
40 states but we need your individual help in “recruiting”
fellow retirees to our cause. With over 19,000 Pacific Bell/Nevada
Bell retirees receiving benefits, they need to become part of our
Association’s efforts to “protect, enhance and assure
the continuation of retirees’ pensions and other benefits promised
by the company at the time of their retirement.” (Mr. Jack
Land, Vice President and Membership Chairman, will welcome all suggestions
and recommendations.)
Please
send this material to your friends and former company associates.
You may also wish to tell those with email to visit our Website
(www.telcoretirees.org). A membership application may be downloaded
from our Website.
Sumner
K. Emery, President
P.S.
A reminder…General Membership Meeting, Elks Lodge, 5631 Cypress
Avenue, Carmichael, CA, Wednesday, September 28th , 9:00 A.M./12:30
P.M. (Please let us know of your attendance plans, including guests.)
SBC/TelCo
Retirees Association Meeting
Health
Benefit Program Changes-January 1, 2006
San Ramon, CA
August 4, 2005
The Officers
and Directors of the TelCo Retirees Association, Inc. have diligently
perused the SBC Benefits Update describing the SBC Medical Plan
that replaces CustomCare and ConsumerWise in 2006. The proposal
advances the philosophy of “distributing costs to all participants
based on their individual use of health care services.” While
this concept would seem to merit the general support of retired
and active SBC managers, it contains a machiavellian element that,
left unchanged, will be devastating to the vast majority of retired
managers.
Areas of
vital concern to retired managers impacted by the new health benefit
plan include Annual Deductibles For Medical Services, Out-Of-Pocket
Maximums and the 40% co-insurance for Non-Network Services covered
by the plan.
Requiring
an SBC management retiree (with spouse) to meet a “monthly
contribution” of $179.00 ($2,148.00 annually) and a “monthly
deductible” of $478.00 ($5,738.00 annually) plus a 40% co-insurance
payment for any Non-Network Service covered by the plan is a radical
departure from all previous Pacific Bell/SBC Health Benefit Plans.
Here, for
discussion in today’s conference, are proposed SBC health benefit
issues the TelCo Retirees Association feels are inchoate and require
resolution.
A. Management
retirees who retired from Pacific Telesis after 1-2-91 (and who
pay a “contribution” ) are to be impacted by this new
health benefit program.
(The Association
finds SBC’s planned implementation date of 1-2-91 compelling
since it coincided with the U.S. West, Inc. Employees’ Benefit
Committee decisions of January 8, 1996.
During
that meeting, the U.S. West Employees’ Benefit Committee passed
the following resolutions.
“For
all pre-1991 retirees:
…Medical
and dental coverage for life
…Same
overall percentage of annual out-of-pocket costs (deductibles,co-payments,
etc.) as under the 1990 plans to be paid by retirees:
…No
premiums and continued payment of Medicare Part B premiums by the
company.
…The
company will never require pre-1991 retirees to use a limited network
of healthcare providers (i.e., they will not be forced to use HMO’s)
unless that is the only way health care is available (due to health-care
market or legislative changes.)
Resolved:
That in accordance with the appeals submitted by (Curtis Kennedy,
Attorney) the Employees’ Benefit Committee agrees to an amendment
specifying that U.S. West will continue to meet its previously announced
commitment to provide healthcare coverage for those retired pre-1991
and those retired in accordance with the 1992 enhanced retirement
offer (ERO).”
(Does the
action undertaken by the U.S. West Employees’ Benefit Committee,
in recognizing pre-1991 retirees health benefit plans, have a bearing
upon the same date chosen by the SBC Corporation for the introduction
of the proposed 2006 management health plan?)
B. 33,000
SBC management retirees impacted.
(How many
Pac Bell retirees will be impacted by the introduction of the SBC
Health Benefit Plan?)
C. Philosophy
- “Distribute cost to participants based on their individual
use of health care services,”
(Won’t
this decision cause “illness prone” retirees, through
no fault of their own, to incur astronomical health care expenses?)
D. Deductibles
“2005 annual deductibles for the SBC Medical Plan may be adjusted
in 2006*
(How does
government indexing impact deductibles?)
E. Network-Outside
Network Areas
(Per Ms.
Trammell: “Yearly we assess what zips fall into the service
areas for the Network service area across every state for every
zip code. The criteria requires you have: 2 PCPs, 2 OB/GYNs and
2 Pediatric PCPs within 5 miles and 1 network hospital within 15
miles then you are in the Network service area. If not, you are
considered Outside Network Area (ONA) and you may choose to opt
into the Network and then all claims are paid at the Network level
if you use a Network provider or facility. If you opt in and do
not use a Network provider, then all claims are paid at the Non-Network
level. Annually the ONA person can decide to move back to ONA during
Annual Enrollment. Otherwise, they stay opted into the Network until
the person changes that during Annual Enrollment.)
Many TelCo
Retirees Association members live “outside the definition”
of “network service area” and do not have access to a
hospital “within 15 miles” or a physician “within
5 miles.” If they choose to “opt in,” how can they
avoid the expense of using Non-Network Providers?
(Here is
a partial listing of TelCo Retirees Association members whose residence
may be “outside” of a “Defined Network Area“)
1401 Harvard
Dr., DeRidder, LA 70634
General Delivery, Lake City, TN 37769
1523 Glencoe Rd., Fairhope, PA 15538
51 Lana St., Pala, HI 96779
22943 Lawlis Rd., Siloam Springs, AR 92761
P.O. Box 749, Port Hadlock, WA 98339
812 Chadbourne Ave., Concord, NC 28027
P.O. Box 59, Fayetteville, WV 25840
1030 S. Lincoln St., Casper, WY 82601
P.O. Box 536, Union, WA 98592
46 Eagle Crest Dr., #400, Lake Oswego, OR 97035
752 E. Wagonmaster Rd., Washington, UT 84780
P.O. Box 194, Thomaston, ME 04861
15 Sunset Lane, Anaconda, MT 59711
233 Northwoods Dr., Merlin, OR 97532
646 Crest Lane, Sedro Woolly, WA 98284
1015 N. Sugar Maple Trl., Postfalls, ID 83854
P.O. Box 563 , Hatch, UT 84735
194 Buffalo Street, Jamestown, NY 14701
2112 Rodman Bl., Gllitin, TN 37066
81950 Makahiki Lane, Captain Cook, HI 96704
516 Center St., Winona, MN 55987
1655 “P” Rd., Loma, CO 81524
161 Oakland Ave., Staten Island, NY 10310
948 SE Loren Lane, Toledo, OH 97391
We are
interested in learning if the above retiree addresses fall “inside”
or “outside” of a Network Area.
F. The
Annual Deductibles (Out-of-Pocket Maximums) “Have been established
to limit financial responsibility.”
Retirees
earning more than $50,000.00 a year at retirement
Network
Deductibles (Individual Maximum) $5,100.00.
Network
Deductibles (Two Person Maximum) $7,650.00
Non-Network
Deductibles (Individual Maximum} $15,300.00
Non-Network
Deductibles (Two Person Maximum) $30,600.00
Retirees
earning less than $50,000.00 a year at retirement
Network
Deductibles (Individual Maximum) $3,825.00
Network
Deductibles (Two-person Maximum) $5,738.00
Non-Network
Out-of-Pocket - (Individual) Maximum) $15,300.00
Non-Network
Out-of-Pocket - (Two-person Maximum) $30,600.00
(What formula
was utilized to establish these deductibles?)
HMOs
The SBC
Benefits Update (June 2005) states, “Will HMOs connected with
the SBC Medical Plan be impacted by this new change? There will
be changes to contributions as described above. SBC has informed
the HMOs it has relationships with about the introduction of the
new plan. SBC is implementing a very efficient plan, one that may
be challenging for some HMOs to compete against, but one that we
feel sets the right cost structure for participants and for the
company. SBC has encouraged all of the HMOs to offer comparable
competitive offerings.”
(During
your recent meeting with the Ameritech Retiree Association in Chicago,
a statement was made, “HMO offerings will be presented to all
employees and retirees as usual during the October-November time
frame. The management retirees who will have the new SBC Medical
Plan will be given an enrollment worksheet listing the HMO offerings
available for their home zip code in October. The targeted mail
date will be around October 19. The enrollment period for this group
is from October 27-November 16 at 7:00 P.M. Central Time. As we
get closer to annual enrollment, information will be mailed informing
you and others when your enrollment begins.”)
(Recognizing
the magnitude of negotiations being conducted between SBC Health
Benefits and the various HMOs, as well as the decisions being made
that will impact corporate and retiree contributions, some delay
in announcing new HMO agreements is understandable. Nonetheless,
since a great many of our Pacific Bell retirees now participating
in various HMOs may be forced ,through no fault of their own, to
undertake a drastic change in their benefit plans, an earlier communication
with them would materially alleviate their concerns.)
Respectfully
submitted,
Sumner K. Emery, President
August 17, 2005
Garrett
L. Wong, Sr. Attorney
SBC California
Legal Department 140
New Montgomery Street, R. 1619
San Francisco, CA 94105
Dear Mr.
Wong:
Pursuant
to the request in your communications to me dated July 15, 2005,
I am responding to the SBC California’s First Set of Data Requests.
Request
Number 1: Please provide any and all documents that support the
allegation “official corporate documents provided to retirees
upon their retirements from Pacific Bell (SBC) specifically delineated
their rights to telephone concession services (whether living in
or outside of an SBC service area).”
Enclosed
you will find copies of corporate documents mailed to eleven (11)
Pacific Bell (SBC) retirees attesting to their corporate rights
for telephone concession service.
The eleven
(11) documents described above were provided by the following retirees:
Mr. Robert
P. Colson, 16041 Cumberland Way, Bullard, TX 75757, Mr. Richard
L. Arkin, 11409 Muller Street, Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670, Ms. Barbara
England, P.O. Box 460 Alba, MO 64830, Mr. H. P. Trivitt, 1682 Central
Avenue, Napa, CA 94558, Mr. and Mrs. Dale George, P.O. Box 1330
Georgetown, CA 95634, Ms. Marilyn Swift, 2317 NW Tower Rock Rd.,
Bend OR 97701, Ms. Cleo Davidson, 11315 Rolling Hills Dr., Dublin,
CA 94568, Mrs. Nadine F. Yaple, 25695 Chimney Rock Rd., Valencia,
CA 91355, Mr. Alexander P. Falck, 8883 Callita St., San Gabriel,
CA 91775, Mrs. Frances E. James, Rt. 2, Box 3020, Escondido, CA
92025, Mr. Eugene Moore, 2666 Worden St., San Diego, CA 92110.
Request
Number 2: Please provide any and all documents that support the
allegation “additional documents issued by the SBC Corporation
to these customers over the years referenced qualified retirees’
rights to this telephone concession benefit.”
Enclosed
you will find ten (10) Pacific Telephone/Pacific Bell corporate
documents attesting to retirees’ “rights to this telephone
concession service benefit.”
Request
Number 3: Please provide the letter mailed to retirees by the Assistant
Secretary, General Employees’ Benefit Committee, issued January
1991, that contains the statement, “If you have returned from
Pacific Bell or Nevada Bell and your telephone service is provided
by Pacific Bell or Nevada Bell then your concessionable service
is automatically changed to Class R or D.”
Enclosed,
as requested, is a copy of the document. The page referenced in
your request will be found on Page 52. Your request contained the
statement, “If you have returned from Pacific Bell or Nevada
Bell.” The actual statement in the Assistant Secretary General
Employees’ Benefit Committee statement reads, “If you
have retired from.”
My copy
of this document only contains the pages submitted with this letter.
I will be expecting to receive the complete document with the other
pages.
Request
Number 4: Unless the letter sought in request Number 3 is responsive
to this request, please provide the document that contains the statement,
“If you have retired from Pacific Bell or Nevada Bell and your
service is provided by another company, the Retiree Services Group
Concession Unit will arrange for you to receive taxable fixed monthly
payments.”
My response
to your Request Number 3 answered this request.
Request
Number 5: Please provide any and all documents that support the
allegation, “that SBC made a contractual commitment to retirees
and that commitment is not subject to unilateral revision.”
Enclosed
is a copy of System Instruction 25 (Employee Concession Telephone
Service) dated 7-1-85 . The following sections/paragraphs are germane
to the CPUC complaint (C.05-05). Section I, page 1, page 2, page
5 and page 11. Section II, page 1, page 13 ad page 14. Section III,
page 3, page 4, page 5, page, 6 and page 8. Section IV, page 5 and
page 13.
Telephone
Concession Service as a “contractual issue” was decisive
in the Colvin V Qwest Communications International, Inc. (Class
Action Lawsuit Case # 04-CV-39, Otero County District Court, Colorado)
This Class
Action complaint with a demand for a jury trial stated, “The
telephone concession reimbursement” has been an established
contractual commitment in existence at Qwest and predecessor companies
for more than forty (40) years. The “telephone concession reimbursement”
is not governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of
1974 (ERISA) and is not a welfare benefit plan. The “telephone
concession reimbursement” specifically fits within the exemption
outlined by the Department of Labor’s regulation, 29 C.F.R.2510.3-1
(e), because it is a discount on a commodity of the kind which Qwest
offers for sale in the regular course of business.
The Class
Action lawsuit was adjudicated in the Sixteenth Judicial District
Court, Otero County Courthouse by Judge William Neighbors on September
14, 2004 and resulted in an agreement that benefited over 4,000
Qwest retirees for the loss of their telephone concession service.
Sumner
K. Emery, President
TelCo Retirees Association, Inc.
