• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Company switching benefits - no more STD - I'm pregnant

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.



What is the name of your state?What is the name of your state? Maryland

My company was bought by another company earlier this year. We currently have STD at 66% that kicks in after 1 week of unpaid leave/vacation. That is what I used last time when I was on maternity leave.

We are going under the new benefits as of Jan 2005, although nobody can tell us what the benefits are exactly ("we think it will be Aetna", etc). We do know that there will be no more STD offered. We will only have LTD at 60% that kicks in after 4 weeks (!!) of unpaid leave/vacation. that is the only maternity leave option available under hte new plan.

I knew about the switch when I got pregnant, but I did not have any more information that I do now. No package has been given out with the new benefits yet, we have not even received anything in writing. It's all verbal with the Sr. Mgmt. The open enrollment hasn't started yet and nobody really knows when it will start (probably not until late Nov).

Am I still entitled to the STD under my old plan, as I have a pre-existing condition right now? The company will make exceptions to people that are borderline (due in Jan 2005), but I'm not due until April 2005. I would guess that if the roles were reversed, if my company did not currently offer STD but the new benefits did include it, and I had a pre-existing condition (pregnancy), I would NOT be entitled to STD.

Any thoughts?


I'm a Northern Girl
Pre-existing conditions tend to be EXcluded from coverage when benefits switch, not INcluded.

The answer will depend upon the wording of the old policy but it is HIGHLY unlikely that you will be covered under a policy that will have been cancelled for several months at the time you take your leave. I don't mean to be offensive, but I'm talking about unlikely to the point of absurdity.

Check your policy, but definitely do not hold your breath on this one. I've been working with employer sponsored benefits my entire working life (25 years now) and I have NEVER seen a plan written in such a way as to make you eligible for benefits under the circumstances you describe. I can't say it's impossible (this is a contractual question, not a legal one) but there is literally next to no chance that this will be the case.

Oh, and by the way, if the circumstances were reversed, it is entirely likely that you WOULD be covered under the new plan.


Yes, that does make sense. I was just throwing the questions out there to see what the responses were, as there are really no clear ones from our HR department (nobody knows anything).

Thank you.


Latest info.

We currently have STD for 6 months, therefore, I do not have LTD selected under my current plan. I waived it and so did a co-worker of mine who is due in January.

With mapping over to the new benefits, we have been informed that if you do not currently have LTD selected (about 50/50 of our employees), then you CANNOT get LTD if you have a pre-existing conditions (including pregnancy).

This means I will have NO COVERAGE AT ALL for maternity leave.

This makes no sense to me.

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential