Question about employer requiring participation in insurance plan

[wormy78]

What is the name of your state? Alabama

I work for an organization that refers to themselves as being Quasi-state. Up until about 8 months ago, I received health insurance at no cost to me. They now require me to pay approximately $23 per month for this coverage because of an increase in thier rates. Human resources says I am required to pay this because the state requires that I have state insurance. I do not need it because I am covered by my wife's insurance. Is this legal?

 

[cbg]

If it is true that the state requires you to have state insurance, then yes, they can require it. It is also possible that their contract calls for 100% participation.

Have you asked them whether proof of other insurance will be sufficient? In the private sector it generally would be, but the public sector often has different rules.

 

[wormy78]

I will check that out. Both are through Blue Cross Blue Shield. I doubt they will help me out regarding this as they receive two premiums for one person. Since I rarely need it, I am almost pure profit to them. Thanks.

 

[Beth3]

But what you don't know is whether you will get hit by a car tomorrow or be diagnosed with a serious illness. I assure you, you are not "pure profit" for the insurance carrier. Do you object to paying your car insurrance because you were fortunate enough not to be in an accident this year?

By the way, $23.00 is a VERY modest contribution for you to make. Employees in the private sector typically pay considerably more and it's only going to increase with the massive premium increases the insurance industry is renewing group health contracts at.