MEMBERS' CALLS AND LETTERS....
Bill Kadereit's Letter To The Editor Responds To A New York Times Editorial Supporting The EEOC's Rule.
To The Editor:
Times’ editorials have often
rightly spoken out against acts of discrimination. So I was disappointed to read
your support for the rule by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that
allows employers to reduce or eliminate health care benefits for retirees when
they turn age 65 and become eligible for Medicare. This is blatant age
discrimination!
How dare you to refer to these
older Americans as “a relative privileged
minority of retirees.” The author has not performed the diligence needed to
publish an informed opinion. The notion that “coordination” of benefits with
Medicare at age 65 creates comfort is wrong. Employer plans usually pay 90% or
100% of a claim filed by the retiree. When dumped on Medicare they suffer losses
in coverage to 80%; most plans are not supplemental to Medicare. This take-back
to a lower common denominator is discriminatory toward those over 65.
Taking back benefits earned is
unethical and immoral.
Bill Kadereit
Heath, TX
President, National Retiree
Legislative Network
BellTel Retirees Vice President Responds
To New York Times Article 2/9/06
Times’ editorials have often rightly spoken out against acts of discrimination. So I was disappointed to read your support for the rule by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that allows employers to reduce or eliminate health care benefits for retirees when they turn age 65 and become eligible for Medicare. This is blatant age discrimination!
How dare you to refer to these older Americans as “a relative privileged minority of retirees.” The author has not performed the diligence needed to publish an informed opinion. The notion that “coordination” of benefits with Medicare at age 65 creates comfort is wrong. Employer plans usually pay 90% or 100% of a claim filed by the retiree. When dumped on Medicare they suffer losses in coverage to 80%; most plans are not supplemental to Medicare. This take-back to a lower common denominator is discriminatory toward those over 65.
Taking back benefits earned is unethical and immoral.
Bill Kadereit
Heath, TX
President, National Retiree Legislative Network