$130. a year sounds about right. I wouldn’t know for sure; both our Ontario Health Insurance Plan premiums are paid by my wife’s employer as a fringe benefit of employment.
I don’t know who has told you we get less service, but that’s horseshit.
When I’ve worked in H/R (And payroll) this is the way it’s always worked.
The breakdown is like this.
Say you would get a private policy from Blue Cross and it would cost you $500/month.
Because the company buys so many policies Blue Cross gives the company a discount. So in this case it may be the employer pays only $250/month for the same coverage.
Got that, because employers can get a discount, two policies with identical coverage cost different prices.
What the employer does is generally absorb anywhere from 50% to 90% of the actual cost to them. So let’s say in this case your employer absorbs 90%. That means the employer pays $225/month and the employee pays $25/month
Math -> Cost of policy to company $250 X 90% = $225.00
Now the company offers the coverage to spouses. Now for the moment let’s look at this from the company’s perspective.
You, the employee are giving the company your talents and skills. This is why they absorb the cost of the insurance. You’re wife is not giving the company anything. So it makes sense NOT to give her a discount.
So you’re wife pays $250 a month while you pay $25 a month. Which is slight more than 10 times the rate you (the employee) pay.
Now you see your spouse IS getting a discount because to get the same identical coverage from Blue Cross on her own she’d have to pay $500.00 as an individual.
The company in my example is allowing the spouse to particpate in the group plan which is lower rates.
Remember your spouse doesn’t give the company and added benefit because they don’t work for said company.
As another poster said, it also encourages people to get insurance through their own work.
So the spouse gets a discount and it is fair. Why should you get extra benefits single people don’t get.
For instance in my example if the spouse was give the same rate of insurance, it would cost the company $2,700/ a year for the employee and $2,700 for the spouse.
Math -> Policy is $250/month of which the company pays $225/month or $225 X 12 = $2,700
This means Joe Married would be getting a salary of say $50,000 + $5,400 (2 X $2,700) or $55,400
Now Joe Unmarried would be getting $50,000 + $2,700 or $52,700
Now why should two people doing the same job have different salaries (which are just expense to the company).
Just because the cost is hidden doesn’t mean it isn’t real nor that it isn’t fair, nor does it mean your wife isn’t benefiting. In reality with your wife having to pay the full company rate of $250.00. The cost would break down like this
Mr Married gets salary of $50,000 + $2,700
The spouse is getting a policy worth $500/month if he/she didn’t get the group rate, which she pays all of. So she’s getting $6,000/year worth of insurance (12 X $500) for only $3,000 12 X $250)
So if you had to get an individual policy for the spouse
You’re cost would $6,000 and by allowing her to participate in the group plan from the company, even though the spouse pays full cost he/she only pays $3,000. which is still a savings of $3,000 year.
excellent detailed breakdown - thanks for sharing!
It’s not always done that way, though.
I haven’t looked at the spouse/family rates in a while, but a few years back, it went like this where I work (a very large employer)…please remember they post these changes and give you like a week to decide what you’re going to do for the next year. It’s terrific!
Employer paid full amount of employee insurance, valued at $150 / month.
To add a spouse was an extra $600 / month. To add kids was another $300 / month. (Previously, the spousal rate was around the same as the employer rate, and the family rate was about that again.)
So it was more like “you can add your spouse and kids but we’re going to charge you out the wazoo if you do”. I knew people whose entire paychecks were going to pay for insurance.
It really screwed a lot of people, especially those with family who have pre-existing conditions and therefore can’t get insurance anywhere else.
We’ve changed insurance carriers since, and it’s down to a more reasonable rate. However, they’ve also started making employees pay part of the premium.
My employer has also “socialized” their coverage for the last couple of years. People at the bottom of the pay scale don’t pay anything for their insurance. The more money you make, the more you pay. I’m actually paying for other folks’ insurance right now.
And you know what? I’m OK with that. I’d rather my hard-working janitor be able to go to the doctor when he needs to than keep my $50 a month. I’m not that hard up.
If you listen to Fox news you would be very unhappy with the terrible health service you are getting, All my Canadian relatives and friends are just as poorly informed as you. They are pretty happy with their care. They too don’t seem to know any better.
This reminds me of a Canadian friend who needed hernia surgery. An American was aghast that he wound up waiting six months for the surgery. My Canadian friend’s attitude was that it was a minor hernia, he was being medically monitored in case the situation deteriorated, and he got to go to a world-class hernia hospital (Shouldice). He was content to wait his turn in return for having the procedure fully covered by excellent surgeons. He said his roommate at the hospital had had a very serious hernia and had been admitted and operated on the day he was diagnosed, as in thatcase the hernia was a threat to health.
You know, I don’t have a problem with proper triage practices, which is what the above situation is. Those most in need go first. Every one gets seen to, but those with less severe problems wait their turn.
Of course, he’s “supposed to be” unhappy - but he’s not.
That’s why I prefer facts to Fox.
Who would want to pay so much? Freedom-loving Americans, that’s who! We’ll continue to pay out the ass only to have our coverage rescinded only because when we do get coverage, it will be the best goddamn coverage in the entire world! You can take your $10.80 and shove it up your Nazi-Commi-Socialist asshole!
Seriously, no offense intended. I’ve had conversations like this with numerous people in this country. I don’t understand it any more than you do. A lot of it seems to be based on an amorphous fear of both the unknown and of change.
Some other oddities in the system…
At our company, the breakdowns are employee, spouse and children. Doesn’t matter how MANY children; anyone who chooses to cover children pays the same for them. The lady with one healthy child pays the same premium as the guy with 6 sickly ones. That seems weird to me.
And - I choose to be on my partner’s program rather than my company’s, because switching to my company’s program would mean finding another doctor. For the same rates, I’ll stick with what I’ve got. BUT - they tout “health coverage” as the great benefit. I’m not getting it - can’t they find something else to do for me? I cost them less! (Grumble, grumble…)
As a slight hijacky aside - my partner’s program covers domestic partners, which is fantastic, but… she has to pay taxes on my portion of the coverage, and married couples don’t. Another grumble.
I don’t generally look at the family rates, since hubby and I have no plans to have kids, but its actually cheaper to be Employee + Children rather than Employee + Spouse. Its a lot cheaper! The family coverage is pretty pricey. But this new review leads to the next question: why is it cheaper for Employee + Children than Employee + Spouse? I am assuming that its because the thinking goes that adults are more likely to have very expensive issues whereas children are not. but as Fetchund commented: it would be cheaper to have 10 sickly kids under insurance than 1 well spouse.
Maybe I would have been happier not looking and actually thinking about all this stuff. And I am definitely old enough that I should have been paying more attention years ago. But the more I think about it, the more I come closer to supporting the health care reform stuff that I was waffling on before.