5 ms·

Yes, people do lose their insurance constantly when they switch jobs...and then immediately sign onto their new plan. Is the argument that switching insurance p

Yes, people do lose their insurance constantly when they switch jobs...and then immediately sign onto their new plan. Is the argument that switching insurance plans is stressful? What's stressful is remaining uncovered. Switching plans is hardly comparable to the transition to a Medicare-for-all program.

pnutjam 8y ago
With the current love for High deductible plans, it can get much riskier. I just walked away from a plan where I had paid the full Out of pocket max for the year (around $7k), in January. That hurt, but the other offer was good enough. None of that money translates to the new plan, I'm back to paying deductibles for everything.
zrail 8y ago
> Switching plans is hardly comparable to the transition to a Medicare-for-all program The big stressor is having to pay two deductibles in one year. That said, from an individual perspective I don't see what would be different. Before you had an (Aetna|Cigna|BCBS|UHC) card, now you have a M4A card.
crooked-v 8y ago
> Is the argument that switching insurance plans is stressful? It absolutely is stressful, because every single time you have to carefuly inspect the documentation to figure out what conditions and care (if any) you're "allowed" to have without going bankrupt.
- identity-haver 8y ago
  For non-Americans and confused Americans reading this, this isn't precisely true. Any employer with over 50 employees has to cover all pre-existing conditions from your previous employer. But there is no guarantee that your old providers will be in your new network, so you may have to switch providers, with all the bureaucratic headache that entails. Also, if you are getting care for that condition that isn't 100% standard and established you may not get it, or have to spend a bunch of extra money while it gets re-approved. Also, your deductible will reset, so if you switch jobs in the middle of the year you could potentially be paying thousands more out of pocket.
gorbachev 8y ago
If you switch to another insurance provider, you might have to change doctors, pharmacies and other service providers, because your previous service provider is no longer in-network or too costly. Also your coverage may completely change for better or worse. The worst case scenario is just as disastrous as losing insurance entirely. This is particularly bad for people with chronic/ongoing medical needs.
midnightmonster 8y ago
They lose their insurance for other reasons, too. Their employer changes plans; they get dropped from full time to part time; they lose their job and don't immediately get another. And switching insurance plans at almost any time can be very costly, even if you go straight to a new one, as all your deductibles and out-of-pocket limits get reset. And then you have to hit them again when the plan year starts again, almost certainly sooner than a year later.
- fwip 8y ago
  My employer switched health insurers 3 years in a row. First because we became a new company (understandable), second because they thought they could get a better deal at another place (okay...), and thirdly reverting the 2nd change except some of the numbers and coverage is different now. I really am considering leaving if they switch a 4th time.
naravara 8y ago
>Yes, people do lose their insurance constantly when they switch jobs...and then immediately sign onto their new plan. Unless they lose their jobs. Or change to a job that doesn't offer coverage/start a new business. Or have their hours cut to be <40 hrs/wk and are no longer eligible. . . >Switching plans is hardly comparable to the transition to a Medicare-for-all program. Why? It would be a one-time switch. Switching costs would be exactly the same as the switching costs you pay every time you change jobs, except you only pay it one time in your life and you don't have to shop around in some silly healthcare exchange or open enrollment process where you get to weigh which absurdly high premium you want to pay despite deductibles being so high that barely any of your routine health costs will be compensated. And then there is the joy of making sure all your care providers are covered by your new plan. AND hoping your providers don't drop your plan because of insurance company negotiations.
- dd36 8y ago
  It’s not just when you change jobs. My wife handles large employer groups and the insurance companies ask for a 15% rate increase every year so the employers have to threaten to switch every year to negotiate down then actually switch every other year. It’s a wasteful, useless game. Even if you stay at same employer, your insurer and networks will regularly change.
benatkin 8y ago
How about having to switch doctors, or having to go a couple weeks without an insurance card, but hey, you still have insurance and you can pay up front and get reimbursed later? Big fucking deal, right?
dragontamer 8y ago
> Yes, people do lose their insurance constantly when they switch jobs...and then immediately sign onto their new plan. Lets say you payed for insurance, but were healthy for the 90s. So ~10-years of paying insurance. Around 2005, you are diagnosed with Diabetes, so your insurance pays for your care. Around 2007, the recession happens and you lose your job. You immediately find a new job, but you need to get new insurance. Diabetes is now a "pre-existing condition", so your insurance no longer covers your condition. Its important to recognize that changing health-plans is a regular event, that shouldn't punish people with chronic conditions. Diabetes is lifelong, once you get it, you live with it for the rest of your life. Insurance companies don't want to pay for that kind of issue. With all talk about "Repeal and Replace", its important to recognize the tradeoff. As long as "pre-existing conditions" are banned in the USA, I don't think its a big deal to lose employer sponsored health care (at least, compared to pre-Obamacare). We should build a world where it is easy to lose (and regain) health coverage... compared to the pre-Obamacare world where it was a big risk to lose coverage. Hopefully laws of the future make it easier to switch health care plans without problems.
- conanbatt 8y ago
  The problem with covering pre-existing conditions at all times is that you need to make insurance mandatory, due to the adver selection problem. If insurance is optional, then only people that know they are sick or will get sick will dominate the insurance, making it more expensive, and pushing the healthy-low risk out. Its a well known economics problem that has no silver bullet. What is crazy to me is that insurance is involved in paying primary care doctors. That is a terrible application of health insurance, and have full faith on high deductible plans bringing sanity back into this.
- scarface74 8y ago
  If you find a new job and you’re eligible under group insurance, the insurance company can’t deny a claim under pre-existing conditions. This was true before the ACA. What the ACA changed was that insurance companies couldn’t exclude treatment based on preexisting conditions if you go on the open market.
will_brown 8y ago
>Is the argument that switching insurance plans is stressful? I think it’s clear the article is promoting universal coverage, and simply highlight how ridiculous it is that healthcare is a benefit of employment by highlighting nearly 1/3 of employment based plans are discontinued within 12 months. I’m not sure how you can conclude switching private insurance plans is hardly comparable to a transition to Medicare-for-all, when millions of people make the jump from private insurance to Medicare every year and you don’t hear much complaining from that group. Not to mention a 1 time transition compared to nearly 33% of the workforce going through this annually.
maxsilver 8y ago
> and then immediately sign onto their new plan Nope. Employer-provided insurance plans often have blackout dates. If you quit your job on June 2, and start your new job on June 3, your new job's health insurance might not actually take effect for up to 30, 60, or even 90 days after your start date. To cover that gap period, you either have to switch to a new plan with your old employer (commonly called COBRA) at ridiculous high rates nobody can afford, or you have to get temporary blackout insurance coverage (which cover nothing at all, and are almost identical to having no insurance). This need is so common, that most insurance companies have special advertising just for it (like https://www.priorityhealth.com/individual-family-health-insurance/short-term-plans https://www.priorityhealth.com/individual-family-health-insu... for example). In America, to switch jobs once, requires three concurrent interactions with three different health insurance plans, simultaneously. (Your old employer plan, your intermediate temporary plan/COBRA, and your new employer's plan). For obvious reasons, this is incredibly error prone, risky, and fraught with stress. > Is the argument that switching insurance plans is stressful? Yes! Literally every single interaction with every single health insurance provider is painful and stressful and complicated and intentionally obfuscated, for absolutely no valid reason whatsoever.
- intopieces 8y ago
  >This need is so common, that most insurance companies have special advertising just for it (like https://www.priorityhealth.com/individual-family-health-insu.. https://www.priorityhealth.com/individual-family-health-insu.... for example). This doesn’t even cover pre-existing conditions. So, if you are on medication for high blood pressure, or have diabetes, or are just one of the 55 percent of Americans who take prescription drugs... you are out of luck. That these plans are even legal is a monumental failure of the American system.
- nogridbag 8y ago
  As I painfully found out, transitioning between jobs also requires competent HR people on both ends. Our insurance was accidentally terminated a week early so our claim was denied and we got a massive bill. Not only do you have to then deal with the insurance company but you have to deal with your previous employer to fix the situation.
a3n 8y ago
When I started my current job I wasn't eligible for benefits for 90 days. This is not uncommon.
- Glyptodon 8y ago
  One time I switched jobs the company I left was so small (I think ~ 15 to 18 people) it turned out that COBRA wasn't available and new job benefits didn't kick in for 90 days. This was between when the ACA was passed and took effect so getting private insurance for the gap was scary. (Going without coverage was not an option, I have serious medical history.)
- nogridbag 8y ago
  My wife recently worked for a startup and had them change the company policy to start benefits on day 1 simply by asking. No one really knew why the benefits started after N days and no one cared enough to change it previously.
gwbas1c 8y ago
I don't understand why you're downvoted. It's an important observation. In my case, my employer was bought and sold 3 times. All three cases involved a sudden and abrupt termination of my insurance. It was "okay" when I was single, but once I carried my wife, and then my entire family, it became a huge problem. Throughout my tenure at my job, I had major surgery and two children. Sudden insurance changes immediately before or during any of those events would be a huge problem. (Fortunately, the timing worked out.)
- tialaramex 8y ago
  Europe also has a broader fix for this, called Transfer of Undertakings rules, the UK version is "TUPE" the "Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations". The broad overview of TUPE is that employees whose actual job doesn't change shouldn't have to put up with any negative consequences at all for the fact that at some higher level their employer changed. e.g. the office building switches from Ace Cleaning Corp. to Best Cleaning Limited, but it's still Jenny and Achmed actually doing the cleaning, just in blue overalls instead of yellow now. It makes no sense to be allowed to tell Jenny now she's only getting minimum wage because Best Cleaning Limited doesn't pay as much as Ace Cleaning Corp, she's doing the same job so she should continue to get the same pay. But I don't mean just obvious stuff like they can't cut your pay, it's everything - your seniority is preserved, shift priorities, rules for how much paid leave you get, or how pensions are paid - if it was part of the job, then it moves with the job. If employment-based health insurance was a big thing here, that would undoubtedly be covered.

pnutjam 8y ago

With the current love for High deductible plans, it can get much riskier. I just walked away from a plan where I had paid the full Out of pocket max for the year (around $7k), in January. That hurt, but the other offer was good enough. None of that money translates to the new plan, I'm back to paying deductibles for everything.

zrail 8y ago

> Switching plans is hardly comparable to the transition to a Medicare-for-all program The big stressor is having to pay two deductibles in one year. That said, from an individual perspective I don't see what would be different. Before you had an (Aetna|Cigna|BCBS|UHC) card, now you have a M4A card.

crooked-v 8y ago

> Is the argument that switching insurance plans is stressful? It absolutely is stressful, because every single time you have to carefuly inspect the documentation to figure out what conditions and care (if any) you're "allowed" to have without going bankrupt.

identity-haver 8y ago
For non-Americans and confused Americans reading this, this isn't precisely true. Any employer with over 50 employees has to cover all pre-existing conditions from your previous employer. But there is no guarantee that your old providers will be in your new network, so you may have to switch providers, with all the bureaucratic headache that entails. Also, if you are getting care for that condition that isn't 100% standard and established you may not get it, or have to spend a bunch of extra money while it gets re-approved. Also, your deductible will reset, so if you switch jobs in the middle of the year you could potentially be paying thousands more out of pocket.

gorbachev 8y ago

If you switch to another insurance provider, you might have to change doctors, pharmacies and other service providers, because your previous service provider is no longer in-network or too costly. Also your coverage may completely change for better or worse. The worst case scenario is just as disastrous as losing insurance entirely. This is particularly bad for people with chronic/ongoing medical needs.

midnightmonster 8y ago

They lose their insurance for other reasons, too. Their employer changes plans; they get dropped from full time to part time; they lose their job and don't immediately get another. And switching insurance plans at almost any time can be very costly, even if you go straight to a new one, as all your deductibles and out-of-pocket limits get reset. And then you have to hit them again when the plan year starts again, almost certainly sooner than a year later.

fwip 8y ago
My employer switched health insurers 3 years in a row. First because we became a new company (understandable), second because they thought they could get a better deal at another place (okay...), and thirdly reverting the 2nd change except some of the numbers and coverage is different now. I really am considering leaving if they switch a 4th time.

naravara 8y ago

>Yes, people do lose their insurance constantly when they switch jobs...and then immediately sign onto their new plan. Unless they lose their jobs. Or change to a job that doesn't offer coverage/start a new business. Or have their hours cut to be <40 hrs/wk and are no longer eligible. . . >Switching plans is hardly comparable to the transition to a Medicare-for-all program. Why? It would be a one-time switch. Switching costs would be exactly the same as the switching costs you pay every time you change jobs, except you only pay it one time in your life and you don't have to shop around in some silly healthcare exchange or open enrollment process where you get to weigh which absurdly high premium you want to pay despite deductibles being so high that barely any of your routine health costs will be compensated. And then there is the joy of making sure all your care providers are covered by your new plan. AND hoping your providers don't drop your plan because of insurance company negotiations.

dd36 8y ago
It’s not just when you change jobs. My wife handles large employer groups and the insurance companies ask for a 15% rate increase every year so the employers have to threaten to switch every year to negotiate down then actually switch every other year. It’s a wasteful, useless game. Even if you stay at same employer, your insurer and networks will regularly change.

benatkin 8y ago

How about having to switch doctors, or having to go a couple weeks without an insurance card, but hey, you still have insurance and you can pay up front and get reimbursed later? Big fucking deal, right?

dragontamer 8y ago

> Yes, people do lose their insurance constantly when they switch jobs...and then immediately sign onto their new plan. Lets say you payed for insurance, but were healthy for the 90s. So ~10-years of paying insurance. Around 2005, you are diagnosed with Diabetes, so your insurance pays for your care. Around 2007, the recession happens and you lose your job. You immediately find a new job, but you need to get new insurance. Diabetes is now a "pre-existing condition", so your insurance no longer covers your condition. Its important to recognize that changing health-plans is a regular event, that shouldn't punish people with chronic conditions. Diabetes is lifelong, once you get it, you live with it for the rest of your life. Insurance companies don't want to pay for that kind of issue. With all talk about "Repeal and Replace", its important to recognize the tradeoff. As long as "pre-existing conditions" are banned in the USA, I don't think its a big deal to lose employer sponsored health care (at least, compared to pre-Obamacare). We should build a world where it is easy to lose (and regain) health coverage... compared to the pre-Obamacare world where it was a big risk to lose coverage. Hopefully laws of the future make it easier to switch health care plans without problems.

conanbatt 8y ago
The problem with covering pre-existing conditions at all times is that you need to make insurance mandatory, due to the adver selection problem. If insurance is optional, then only people that know they are sick or will get sick will dominate the insurance, making it more expensive, and pushing the healthy-low risk out. Its a well known economics problem that has no silver bullet. What is crazy to me is that insurance is involved in paying primary care doctors. That is a terrible application of health insurance, and have full faith on high deductible plans bringing sanity back into this.
scarface74 8y ago
If you find a new job and you’re eligible under group insurance, the insurance company can’t deny a claim under pre-existing conditions. This was true before the ACA. What the ACA changed was that insurance companies couldn’t exclude treatment based on preexisting conditions if you go on the open market.

will_brown 8y ago

>Is the argument that switching insurance plans is stressful? I think it’s clear the article is promoting universal coverage, and simply highlight how ridiculous it is that healthcare is a benefit of employment by highlighting nearly 1/3 of employment based plans are discontinued within 12 months. I’m not sure how you can conclude switching private insurance plans is hardly comparable to a transition to Medicare-for-all, when millions of people make the jump from private insurance to Medicare every year and you don’t hear much complaining from that group. Not to mention a 1 time transition compared to nearly 33% of the workforce going through this annually.

maxsilver 8y ago

> and then immediately sign onto their new plan Nope. Employer-provided insurance plans often have blackout dates. If you quit your job on June 2, and start your new job on June 3, your new job's health insurance might not actually take effect for up to 30, 60, or even 90 days after your start date. To cover that gap period, you either have to switch to a new plan with your old employer (commonly called COBRA) at ridiculous high rates nobody can afford, or you have to get temporary blackout insurance coverage (which cover nothing at all, and are almost identical to having no insurance). This need is so common, that most insurance companies have special advertising just for it (like https://www.priorityhealth.com/individual-family-health-insurance/short-term-plans https://www.priorityhealth.com/individual-family-health-insu... for example). In America, to switch jobs once, requires three concurrent interactions with three different health insurance plans, simultaneously. (Your old employer plan, your intermediate temporary plan/COBRA, and your new employer's plan). For obvious reasons, this is incredibly error prone, risky, and fraught with stress. > Is the argument that switching insurance plans is stressful? Yes! Literally every single interaction with every single health insurance provider is painful and stressful and complicated and intentionally obfuscated, for absolutely no valid reason whatsoever.

intopieces 8y ago
>This need is so common, that most insurance companies have special advertising just for it (like https://www.priorityhealth.com/individual-family-health-insu.. https://www.priorityhealth.com/individual-family-health-insu.... for example). This doesn’t even cover pre-existing conditions. So, if you are on medication for high blood pressure, or have diabetes, or are just one of the 55 percent of Americans who take prescription drugs... you are out of luck. That these plans are even legal is a monumental failure of the American system.
nogridbag 8y ago
As I painfully found out, transitioning between jobs also requires competent HR people on both ends. Our insurance was accidentally terminated a week early so our claim was denied and we got a massive bill. Not only do you have to then deal with the insurance company but you have to deal with your previous employer to fix the situation.

a3n 8y ago

When I started my current job I wasn't eligible for benefits for 90 days. This is not uncommon.

Glyptodon 8y ago
One time I switched jobs the company I left was so small (I think ~ 15 to 18 people) it turned out that COBRA wasn't available and new job benefits didn't kick in for 90 days. This was between when the ACA was passed and took effect so getting private insurance for the gap was scary. (Going without coverage was not an option, I have serious medical history.)
nogridbag 8y ago
My wife recently worked for a startup and had them change the company policy to start benefits on day 1 simply by asking. No one really knew why the benefits started after N days and no one cared enough to change it previously.

gwbas1c 8y ago

I don't understand why you're downvoted. It's an important observation. In my case, my employer was bought and sold 3 times. All three cases involved a sudden and abrupt termination of my insurance. It was "okay" when I was single, but once I carried my wife, and then my entire family, it became a huge problem. Throughout my tenure at my job, I had major surgery and two children. Sudden insurance changes immediately before or during any of those events would be a huge problem. (Fortunately, the timing worked out.)

tialaramex 8y ago
Europe also has a broader fix for this, called Transfer of Undertakings rules, the UK version is "TUPE" the "Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations". The broad overview of TUPE is that employees whose actual job doesn't change shouldn't have to put up with any negative consequences at all for the fact that at some higher level their employer changed. e.g. the office building switches from Ace Cleaning Corp. to Best Cleaning Limited, but it's still Jenny and Achmed actually doing the cleaning, just in blue overalls instead of yellow now. It makes no sense to be allowed to tell Jenny now she's only getting minimum wage because Best Cleaning Limited doesn't pay as much as Ace Cleaning Corp, she's doing the same job so she should continue to get the same pay. But I don't mean just obvious stuff like they can't cut your pay, it's everything - your seniority is preserved, shift priorities, rules for how much paid leave you get, or how pensions are paid - if it was part of the job, then it moves with the job. If employment-based health insurance was a big thing here, that would undoubtedly be covered.