non-member fee

[manderson3]

What is the name of your state?What is the name of your state?oklahoma As a public sector employee of a municipal fire dept. I dont have to join or pay dues to the union as a condition of employment. But I still recieve all of the benifits and rights of the contract,as a member of the barganing unit. And even though Okla. is now a right-to-work state the state law would not allow manditory union membership as a condition of employment. The union that represents the f.f. has separated from the cities health and welfare plan by agreement, and now my health insurance is union sponsored.The union offers me the same benifits as it does the dues paying members and I also pay the same rates. But the union is telling me that when I retire I will be allowed to remain on it's plan and maintain all of the benifits but that I will have to pay a different rate. The rate has not been published but I'm sure it will be much, much more. Is this possible? They claim that when I retire I'm no longer in the barganing unit so they can charge me at a higher rate than they do now. I'll be retiring soon and need to find out what my options are

 

[Beth3]

The rate has not been published but I'm sure it will be much, much more. Is this possible? Yes, it's quite possible. I expect the union receives a substantial amount of money from your municipality towards the cost of the group health plan. Thus the price you currently pay towards that benefit is very likely significantly discounted. Since you are not in the bargaining unit and thus likely not included in any continuing contribution towards the premiums after you retire, they can require you to pay up to the actual monthly premium the insurance company charges.

I imagine you should discuss your situation with someone in human resources.

 

[manderson3]

Thanks for your response. Though I will be retired and no longer in the barganing unit, the city will continue to contribute to the Union's insurance trust fund.The amount of city subsity is negotiated annually with the Union, and if I elect to remain in the plan after I retire the city will still pay to the fund that amount on my behalf.But I've been told the current employee portion I'm now paying will increase substanually at retirement based on my non-membership in the local. In your opinion can the Union charge a non-member more based on what I've described? I am at least glad to be able to keep my insurance but should they be allowed to make me pay more for not being a dues paying member?

 

[Beth3]

manderson, at this point you need to ask your questions of your municipality's human resources group or benefits administrator. I obviously know nothing of the CBA in place between the union and the city, nor the "rules" that govern their benefit plans. I do agree that if the municipality continues to make a contribution towards your health benefits after you retire but the union plans on charging you the full premium, something's not right. Whether it's legal or not I can't say but you can anticipate the union will act in their best interests, not yours.

 

[manderson3]

I will go to the cities benifits manager to get their opinion. Thank you for your response I appriciate your thoughts and comments