- Thread starter
- #11
G
Guest
Guest
Again, carriers want at least the appearance that the employee is not receiving 100% first dollar coverage (which escalates utilization through the roof).
OK, if the carriers want to prevent first-dollar coverage why do they allow the employer to fund all or part of the HSA? Where is the logic here?
There must be a better way for the carriers to prevent first-dollar coverage in HDHPs than to club the agent to death or threaten the client.
And here is something else I don't get. Say the deduct is $5,000. And say I work for XYZ company who will insure it or reinburse me. Why does the carrier care. The money is not coming out of their pocket. Why do they care that the deductible is paid by the client or the boss? Is the argument that employees will run through their deductible "faster" and thus get carrier-paid benefits sooner? I'd like to see an independent study on that because I don't believe anything out of the mouths of any of the carriers on this issue.
I wonder what would happen if some boss decided to fund everyone's deduct by paying 100% on a Colonial or Aflac "medical bridge" plan that paid all of or a large percentage of the deductible. Or maybe the boss might pay for $5,000 accident plan for each employee which just might be the deductible (should there be an accident)?
I wish I practiced law because I see a big juicy law suit against a deep-pocketed carrier if they actually tried to rescind a group plan because of the above.
Life insurance is so much easier and gives you far fewer ulcers... and the carriers never threaten to pull your ticket. They actually like us!! To bad it is so much harder to sell than health.
Al