Part C &D Levelized Commissions?

[Frank Stastny]

I agree with that, but, they should handle those agents. Not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

I know many, many agents that are diligently doing their job. They are explaining options and doing what's best for the clients. There is nothing wrong with them being compensated for their work.

The MA program has been a godsend for millions of seniors. It's saved them thousands of dollars individually, but, more importantly, it's gotten needed care to many that could not get care before because they couldn't pay the 20%.

This battle is just taking shape. The seniors don't even know that the benefits they have are being taken from them. There will be a huge backlash once they realize what's happened.

There should be more oversight, there should be a standardization of the plans, there should be a weeding out of the bad agents.

You have totally missed the point of this thread.

It isn't about the MA plans, it is about the the huge, unrealistic commissions that are being paid. We are not talking about benefits, this thread addresses commissions.

Do you honestly believe that an agent "earns" up to $600 for placing someone in an HMO, PPO, or PFFS plan? I sincerely hope not. If you really do believe that then that tells me where your priorities are.

I would guess that those huge commissions are a contributing factor in why MA plans are costing the govt around 12% more than traditional Medicare.

Put MA plans at the same level of commission as Med Supps and let's just see how many of the "I'm just concerned about the seniors" agents decide to stick around.

Hopefully this will put senior health insurance back in the hands of the professional, honest, career agents and get rid of the "fast buck" rip off artists.

 

[midwestbroker]

Yes, for a lot of agents there was the I can make how much money "giving away insurance?"

I think the lock in is good for this that is starves out the money hungry. Most have moved on to other things to fill in the long lock in.

Level MA commissions would not be a bad thing. It would eliminate the agent pushing one product over another, however I am not really for any more government regulation over this. Before you know it, you will have to tape all your appointments and mail them to CMS for approval.

 

[jdeasy]

You have totally missed the point of this thread.

It isn't about the MA plans, it is about the the huge, unrealistic commissions that are being paid. We are not talking about benefits, this thread addresses commissions.

Do you honestly believe that an agent "earns" up to $600 for placing someone in an HMO, PPO, or PFFS plan? I sincerely hope not. If you really do believe that then that tells me where your priorities are.

I would guess that those huge commissions are a contributing factor in why MA plans are costing the govt around 12% more than traditional Medicare.

Put MA plans at the same level of commission as Med Supps and let's just see how many of the "I'm just concerned about the seniors" agents decide to stick around.

Hopefully this will put senior health insurance back in the hands of the professional, honest, career agents and get rid of the "fast buck" rip off artists.

I haven't missed anything. You are missing my point solely because you agree with the end results of this legislation. You are willing to to throw out the whole MA structure because of a few rogues.

As as the $600 commission, I don't know of anyone that gets that. My largest contract is $420. The second largest is $270 then $225. I've done far more of the $27o and $225 than I have the $420.

I don't have a problem with the leveling of commissions. I'm sure there are many agents that would place the business with the $420 instead of the $225 without taking into consideration the suitablity for the client. To pay it as earned, I do not agree with. Unless they allow the members a continuous OEP. If you pay the agents as earned, but, still lock the member into the plan, that's nothing but a punishment to the agent. That would drive the good agents away from the MA business and all you would have left are the ones that caused the problems.

That would be a death knell for the MA program. Of course, it's that the end one seeks, it would be a good thing in their mind.

 

[Frank Stastny]

I haven't missed anything. You are missing my point solely because you agree with the end results of this legislation. You are willing to to throw out the whole MA structure because of a few rogues.

As as the $600 commission, I don't know of anyone that gets that. My largest contract is $420. The second largest is $270 then $225. I've done far more of the $27o and $225 than I have the $420.

I don't have a problem with the leveling of commissions. I'm sure there are many agents that would place the business with the $420 instead of the $225 without taking into consideration the suitablity for the client. To pay it as earned, I do not agree with. Unless they allow the members a continuous OEP. If you pay the agents as earned, but, still lock the member into the plan, that's nothing but a punishment to the agent. That would drive the good agents away from the MA business and all you would have left are the ones that caused the problems.

That would be a death knell for the MA program. Of course, it's that the end one seeks, it would be a good thing in their mind.

Ask agents in California how much they get for writing an MA plan. It's a whole lot more with some companies than $420. If Rick is around I'm sure he will jump in, or not.

Apparently I missed it, please show me where it says that they are talking about getting rid of all MA plans. Are you equating level and as earned commissions with the demise of all MA plans? You can't be serious.

It's not the fact that we have MA plans that is causing the problem, it is the PFFS plans. They were crap when they first came out and they still are.

The "slime bag" agents who are causing the problems really didn't enter the scene until the announcement of the PFFS plans. That's when it all began. There is no way to get rid of them except to take away the reason they started doing it in the first place.

HMO's and PPO's have been around for a long time and are not going anywhere. They are also not causing the problems. Hopefully this will spell the demise of the PFFS plans as we know them and the rip off agents who got into the senior market to make a fast buck placing them.

Regarding commission advances, why should a company pay you before they get paid regardless of the length of the "contract"? You only "earn" an 12 month commission if you collect an annual payment. The company is letting you use their money before you actually earn it, it doesn't become "yours" until the client makes a premium payment. It is about the only "nice thing" companies do for agents.

There are a lot of agents out there who take all their commissions as earned and I haven't seen any policies eliminated because of it. I've been getting commissions as earned since I went independent 1999.

 

[GreenSky]

Ask agents in California how much they get for writing an MA plan. It's a whole lot more with some companies than $420. If Rick is around I'm sure he will jump in, or not.

Even though I hate to get into any argument with anyone, I'll make just one exception!

Street commissions in California:
Pyramid $330 (PFFS)
Health Net 500 (HMO, PFFS)
Secure Horizons 545 (HMO, PFFS)
Aetna 625 (HMO, PFFS)
Blue Shield 625 (HMO - this is for a referral to carrier)

The issue about screwing seniors for a big commission is CAUSED by lock-in. An agent can slam a senior into plan, collect the $625 and know this is fully earned after 90 days. Pay it monthly and get rid of lock-in. This limits the chance of anyone being held hostage by a plan because an agent said "sign here so you can keep your benefits."

Changing the commissions to as earned with renewals at the same level will tend to help professional agents and get rid of the ambulance chasers. I would LOVE to get a decent renewal for all my hard word. You don't see the same problem with Med Supps. There aren't a million guys running around enrolling seniors in a "better" plan.

That being said, the more rules CMS imposes the worst it is in general. If insurance carriers would police their salespeople we wouldn't have even more government control. CMS caused this problem and instead of finding a way to either make PFFS work or give some sort of incentives for docs to join PPO networks in rural areas, they have chosen to restrict our ability to help people. Typical socialist bullshit!

By the way, it's not just independent agents who are deceptive. I had two clients called by their former carrier and asked "Did you really want to cancel your insurance?" They got scared and said no. The carrier then took an application on the phone and moved them both into their worst plan. This used up their OEP choice and they were stuck for the rest of 2009. (Yes, I did resubmit with a letter from each client stating they were deceived - CMS agreed and granted an SEP).

Rick

 

[HoosierDaddy]

Just to mix it up a little, but I can't belive that the Government and CMS is getting a free pass with the problems with PFFS plans, and the problems they have caused seniors and headaches for agents.

Initially this PFFFS was supposed to save the Government tons of money all while providing more benefits then Medicare. They were wrong!

The independent agent carries a big load if expected to jump through all of the hoops of contracting and certify with all of the PFFS companies available in counties he works. In an attempt provide the best offer to seniors. It is hard to obtain what info on what companies will be where and what benefits they are going to provide for that year.

FMO's and the Companies themselves really are never sure of any answer they give you to any question.

As far has helping seniors choose the best plan in their county? Are you serious? There is always going to be a company that has at least one better "benefit" then the other one you recommended.

The term "benefit" is such a big and broad term. Much more than how much your co-pay is when you see your doctor.

Frank, I bet if you took every Med Sup you have ever wrote there was another company that offered at least one better benefit than the one you wrote. Even with standardized benefits!! Benefits would included (Company Rating, ease of issue, health questions asked on app, premium ect.)

You can do this with any insurance product or any company. (Especially FE) Why does'nt CMS come out and give their indorsement for the best benefit PFFS plan for each county? They keep the agent on the hook, and hold his feet to the fire of explaining this complicated fiasco to people who eat "cat food"

 

[GreenSky]

Initially this PFFFS was supposed to save the Government tons of money all while providing more benefits then Medicare.

The above statement is not correct. PFFS was not designed to initially save money but to provide better benefits to seniors in rural areas. The idea was to get docs used to deeming and then stabilize rates.

The concept was good (cost aside) because it would equalize access to benefits for those in areas without networks. This is why it is being changed so that PFFS will not be available as 2010 in areas with 2 or more networks.

Rick

 

[midwestbroker]

When looking at MA plans in some counties, there could be a huge difference in benefits and overall costs to the senior. And they change every year.

Sure, there maybe some cases where a co-pay here and there might be cheaper, but you have to look at the overall picture.

Plan A has a hospital Co-pay of $220 per day and $5 PCP
Plan B has a hospital Co-pay of $165 per day and $15 PCP

Sure, you save with plan A when you see the PCP, but one night in the hospital can wipe out all your savings and then some.

Most seniors want to know if their Dr takes it, and how much it costs.

 

[jdeasy]

Ask agents in California how much they get for writing an MA plan. It's a whole lot more with some companies than $420. If Rick is around I'm sure he will jump in, or not.

Apparently I missed it, please show me where it says that they are talking about getting rid of all MA plans. Are you equating level and as earned commissions with the demise of all MA plans? You can't be serious.

It's not the fact that we have MA plans that is causing the problem, it is the PFFS plans. They were crap when they first came out and they still are.

The "slime bag" agents who are causing the problems really didn't enter the scene until the announcement of the PFFS plans. That's when it all began. There is no way to get rid of them except to take away the reason they started doing it in the first place.

HMO's and PPO's have been around for a long time and are not going anywhere. They are also not causing the problems. Hopefully this will spell the demise of the PFFS plans as we know them and the rip off agents who got into the senior market to make a fast buck placing them.

Regarding commission advances, why should a company pay you before they get paid regardless of the length of the "contract"? You only "earn" an 12 month commission if you collect an annual payment. The company is letting you use their money before you actually earn it, it doesn't become "yours" until the client makes a premium payment. It is about the only "nice thing" companies do for agents.

There are a lot of agents out there who take all their commissions as earned and I haven't seen any policies eliminated because of it. I've been getting commissions as earned since I went independent 1999.

I couldn't disagree with you more about the PFFS. The PFFS is the backbone ofthe MA program. In western Ky and southern IN, we have no problem whatsoever with acceptance by doctors and hospitals for he PFFS plan with any company. We do not have an HMO available and the only MA PPO we have is the Anthem for $24/mo that is complete garbage.

I try to sell some med sups in this area and I have the lowest cost med sup in the State of Ky. I can't sell it because of the availability of the PFFS and the excellent value they provide. I understand that it's a different story in your area. I would not be so presumtous to even try and tell you what's best for your area.

As far as the paid as earned, if the person is going to be locked into the plan for one year, the company is going to get their money and the agent should be paid. If they want to make it a level playing field and the person is not locked in, it would be only fair to pay as earned.

As far as what I said about the death knell for the MA program, again, the PFFS is the backbone of the MA program. You are correct that these new regulations are aimed at the PFFS, but, once you take out the backbone, the plan cannot stand.

 

[theinuranceguy]

PFFS the backbone of the MA program? Medicare HMO was around years before PFFS was even thought of...

THe majority of the country is having problems with the PFFS plans.... I tried the dual eligable WellCare PFFS thing and it blew up in my face... people that were used to paying nothing anywhere were getting hit with bills so big they thought I was a fraud...

I cant imagine ever selling a PFFS plan ever again.