Its a contract violation. The company can not do a run around and excluide the union. CWA is the sole bargaining unit. It was a strategic move by the company to try and undermine the union. Asking the members to call their hall and ask to vote on something that was not bargained for or passed across the bargaining table… BAD move on the company part…

How can you claim poor and on the verge of asking for a bail-out, while you have 14 billion dollars in the bank. THe employee’s helped them make that money and need to be compensated justly. Why are the top executives healthcare free for life (including whiticare and his whole family)for them and their whole family, but asking us to come out of pocket up to 6,000 per family..

If you are so poor that you do not have money for healthcare, where did you get the money for investments…

AS far as why you arent treated fairly.. i have no idea.. if you work in a union shop then you will get whatever the union bargains….

What difference does the Verizon deal make? If Verizon had to unload some assets, I’m guessing they were a pretty good deal. Someone always says, “Look how much they spent” whenever the company spends anything or “If they can afford to do THAT” like it shouldn’t spend any money at all. The Verizon deal isn’t making benefits more expensive, and I don’t expect the company to stop doing business until it can pay for every increase in the cost of health care first.

The company is in a no-win situation. How does investing in assets justify keeping CWA benefit costs where they are but everyone else needing to pay more for their benefits doesn’t matter? If they try to keep costs down for current members, people make an issue about what future employees would get when it’s what the rest of the company already has. It’s like pick a mix, just not with candy.

None of this has anything to do with this being a fair offer and it doesn’t explain why the union should pay less for coverage than everyone else. This offer looks better than what the rest of the company gets, so why does the CWA deserve more for less other than what it’s used to paying? Everyone else was used to paying less too. Where was the CWA while everyone else was being treated this unfairly?

That’s the real question, not when or where or how the company made a press release or pointing to any time the company has spent money like it should mean the company must be able to spend more. Any offer that costs the CWA less than everyone else more than fair. If it wasn’t, all the discussion would be about everyone else being treated better than the CWA instead of every other reason under the sun that has nothing to do health care being more expensive and why it shouldn’t affect the union like everyone else.

The Company’s proposed rates for current employees range from $5.00 to $45.00 per month, and up to 15% of the FULL PREMIUMS for New Hires. The Company’s projection for 2010 is that New Hires will pay up to $321.00 per month.

MONTHLY CONTRIBUTIONS FOR FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES
Coverage Tier 2010 2011 2012
Individuals $5 $10 $15
Individual +1 $10 $20 $30
Family $15 $30 $45

NETWORK DEDUCTIBLES
Coverage Tier % of Annual Rate of Pay Maximum Amount
Individuals 1% $500
Individual +1 2% $1,000
Family 3% $1,500

COINSURANCE
Network Type Employee Portion
Network 10%
Non-Network 40%

DRUG COPAYS
Drug Type Retail (up to a 30-ay supply)
Mail Order (up to a 90-day supply)
Generic $10 $20
Formulary $35 $70
Non-Formulary $60 $120

NETWORK OUT-OF-POCKET MAXIMUMS
Coverage Tier % of Annual Rate of Pay Maximum Amount
Individual 4% $2,500
Individual +1 6% $4,000
Family 8% $5,300

Mr. Stankey called these “modest” amounts. I guess when you have free healthcare,…. this would seem modest too..
This is horrible, from a company that has 16 billion in the bank, and can afford to buy 2.5 billion worth of Verizon assets.