Sure, they’re jettisoning the group health plans only to create a demand for wage increases. The idea that corporations find it a burden to insure through a third party or via self-funded insurance is absurd. The cost to the employees would be much greater outside the group plan and would in turn force salaries upwards, create ill-will, and an attraction to competing organizations that offer such benefits. The managed benefits of corporations providing health insurance (and savings plans) to their employees is win for both the employee and employer. The costs get covered one way or another.
This is exactly why "big business" is in favor of a government-run health care system. The purpose of a government run health care system is not to provide coverage to everyone who doesn't have insurance . . . it's to reduce the cost (by reducing the quality) of insurance for those who are already covered in a manner that gives them: 1) no incentive to shop around for a different job that offers a better insurance plan; and 2) no mechanism to complain about it (since it will be run by a massive, anonymous bureaucracy).
Why does that have to be the case? If a company with 10,000 workers stopped covering their workers, and their workers all went to sign up directly with the insurance company, why would the economics of the deal change for either of them?
Walmart seems to offer low prices on goods, even though it's customers haven't joined together in a large purchasing block and negotiated low prices.
My car insurance seems to be reasonable even though my employer didn't get us all together and negotiate for a company-wide car insurance plan.
What makes health insurance the ONE thing that we think is better purchased by a 3rd party who limits our choice in exchange for delivering a large group of captive purchasers?
Our neighborhood HOA explored saving money for the members, and cutting down on trucks, by getting a single trash collector for the entire neighborhood.
In the end they found out that NO trash collecter was going to be cheaper for the entire neighborhood than what they could already get individually. And we found that neighborhoods who had done this in the past were now, often without knowing it, paying more per person from the company than the CHEAPEST rate that company offered in other neighborhoods where they had to compete for the business.
If 200 million people suddenly had to all make their OWN decisions on which health insurance to buy, my assertion is that there would be a HUNDRED new plans to choose from, offering a WIDE RANGE of different options for different consumers, and that those plans would be competing by slashing prices.
You don't see it much now because the few major companies have their captive audience to use as economic leverage to drive out competition. That, and they have stupid state legislatures who dictate minimum coverage requirements that limit competition.
The managed benefits of corporations providing health insurance (and savings plans) to their employees is win for both the employee and employer.True. For those that work for large corporations. It doesn't work that way for the self employed or small businesses.
The idea is to grow the size of the insurance groups to spread the risk further. Spreading the risk is the principal behind insurance in the first place.