Hacker News Reader

Comment by tyingq | Hacker News Reader

Also notable that buying health insurance on your own, versus through your employer is typically 2 to 4x the cost.

You can purchase your old benefit through FMLA for up to 36 months in an involuntary departure, but you pay 104% of the cost that previously was split between you and the employer.

What if your employer went bankrupt?

What does the cause matter? Company's dead, the employee "involuntarily departed."

The cause matters because the right to individually buy into the existing employer-sponsored group health plan.

So, if the employer no longer exists, and the employer-sponsored health plan no longer exists, the right to buy in is meaningless.

If your company is buying from an insurance company, that insurance company is required to offer the same plan to the former employee.

It matters if it was a self-insured plan i.e. the company itself paid insurance claims.

In my case, my company "self-insures" but they hire processors (Bluecross, CIGNA, etc) to handle the claims. I doubt that any employer is processing all claims themselves directly. I would have to do the research, but it seems sensible to me that the processor would require some amount of money in escrow (or some other insurance policy) to cover such an event.

Most companies do and thus, most people believe they have a policy from the processor, not their company. Also many companies hire processors for payroll too (ADP and the likes). Does it seem sensible to you that in this case the payroll processor would require some amount of money in escrow to cover severance, PTO, California's WARN etc in case of bankruptcy?

Similar to people thinking they have a policy from the processor rather than their employer, health providers are completely unaware that my employer pays the bills. If the providers don't get paid according to the contract, they'll go after the processor. The processor wants a buffer, insists on escrow or something.

As employees, people are seldom under the delusion that they work for, e.g., ADP. My last company paid me through a processor. My direct deposits showed as coming from the processor. To any bank, it looked as if I was employed by the processor, but the employees knew who the employer was. Should the employer suddenly cease to exist and owe employees anything, employees will go after the employer, not ADP.

> If the providers don't get paid according to the contract, they'll go after the processor.

No, not really. Do a search of "insurance claim denied" and see who is on the hook. Even in the case when the processor simply decides not to pay.

“...according to the contract” is the operative phrase there.

I am not sure what you mean here. There is no contract, which turns an insurance administrator to an insurance under-signer.

" the cost that previously was split between you and the employer"

Employers usually pay at least half, so this doesn't change my 2x-4x range.

I would assume that an actuary might put the cost of an unemployed person twice that than an employed person. Because technically people with chronic health problems would tend to be unemployed.

Companies also get good rates because they can negotiate based on volume.

my company is big enough they self insure. aetna, etc exists to administrate the program

I would also suspect a significant part of the difference is that the company is likely subsidizing the premium cost.

"Hello, cobra? I'd like to pay $1,300 for a month of health insurance"

Reply on news.ycombinator.com