On Monday, November 16, 2020, several unions protested the change (without their input) in their retirement healthcare plans from traditional Medicare to Medicare “Advantage.” They are correct in their resistance. As Bonnie Peters, president of the CivilService Employees AssociationLocal 807, said: “We don’t unilaterally change terms and conditions of what we agreed to after the fact. What the mayor is doing to us is morally and ethically bankrupt.”

Beyond that, however, is the fact that the choice between traditional Medicare and the so-called Medicare Advantage is no advantage at all.

Perhaps you think that the cost of the Medicare advantage is lower upfront and gives you “extra” benefits. But with everything that seems a bargain, it is buyers beware! If you’re healthy and never “plan” to get sick, maybe it’s a bargain, but if, as many elderly, you need extra care at a nursing facility, you’ll find your out of pocket costs skyrocketing.

Mary Ashkor, senior attorney at the Center for Medicare Advocacy states, “The best candidate for Medicare Advantage is someone who’s healthy. We see trouble when someone gets sick.”

Federal government audit reviews show that these plans often do not meet the needs of people with costly conditions, and some of these plans can lead to deadly outcomes. After studying the mortality rates in hundreds of Medicare Advantage plans with 15,000,000 enrollees, Yale University professor of economics Jason Abaluck and colleagues at Brown University, University of Chicago and Northwest University found that making the wrong choice of a Medicare Advantage plan resulted in a significantly higher mortality rate than with traditional Medicare.

Medicare Advantage plans, since they are private for-profit plans, have very little reason to put keeping people healthy above their bottom line. Their first priority is to their shareholders and to maximize profits. Therefore, they restrict choice, limiting the doctors and hospitals that can be used as well as delaying and denying medically necessary care and shifting costs to people that need the most care.

Moreover, these plans do not disclose what they charge people out of pocket when they need costly care and which doctors and hospitals they will be able to use. The plans cover only certain doctors and often drop providers without cause,leaving the patient without continuity of care. Certain high cost prescriptions may also be rationed, putting the burden on the patient. Emergency care may be rationed as well, making it more difficult to get urgent care.

MA plans are also inconsistent in that they constantly change the products and services they offer.

Many of these private plans have failed to disclose complete and accurate data regarding the health care services their members received, though required by law for effective oversight.

In short, though the city is financially strapped, it seems ill advised to save money on the backs of retirees, and the unions are correct in resisting this change.

Renate Bob is a Jamestown resident.