To OP, I received my first contact from Cigna last week and received a package of info yesterday to complete that included a lengthy questionnaire. I called my attorney and mailed the paperwork to his office. He ticked that they even contacted me and not him directly.
Long Term Disablity change to Cigna, need help
- Thread starter Anonymous
- Start date
-
- Tags
- None
Anyone know the Senators working on LTD? Id like to write them a letter.
I have been on disability now for 20 years through a combination of Cigna paying 60 percent and Social Security paying 40. Every six months I receive a claims review form from Cigna to fill out. For the longest period of time CIGNA would call me to offer getting me back to work, which I flatly denied. I believe that since my long term disability has always been tied to social security, Cigna hasn't taken harder methods to eliminate payments. They would have to take on the government in a torn dispute. I still don't trust them, they are a for profit insurance company. My monthly payout with Cigna has the feeling of playing the lottery.
I have the same feeling despite the supposed fiduciary requirements of the plan.
In Jan when I received the Cigna info I was considered light duty and doctor was ready to release after being on LTD for 1.5. Doc released in late Jan to no job at Merck ava in my geography. Once this happened Merck acted like oh well and offered no severance package. However, after consulting with an attorney Merck must offer a package if no position is ava within a 45 mile geo and this is where it's get's funny. Attorney that I paid on an hourly sends off a demand letter for the severance + his fee's to Merck corp office and within 48 hours his office gets a fax that arrangements are being made to complete a package. Two months later I am setting on a awesome severance package that includes 1 year of subidized ins. I provided this story to inform all of you of this. Merck will never play fair and if you push with legal means, this is probably the only way to get anything done.
That doesn't say much or do much to improve merck's trust and value scores. lol
For those who have a legitimate need for this benefit, you shouldn't have to resort to legal means to get it.
You are a morn and have no idea what a benefit is. The benefit of a severance package was due to the employee, but Merck would not pay. What would you do? Attorney's are a means to get what should have been yours in the first place. No one can reply to this post that they would ignore a large severance package that they had coming to them just because the company says NO! If the beneift is not due the attorney would get shut down too. Believe me, MOTHA does not pay anything it does not have to.
Yeah, I probably am a "morn" but reading your post leaves me questioning your mental capacity, too. LTD has nothing to do with severance. Severance is a different matter entirely. I firmly stand by what I said about employees with documented disabling conditions having to resort to legal means in order to obtain LONG TERM DISABILITY BENEFITS (NOT SEVERANCE). I know it happens but it doesn't make it right and there should be harsh penalties to discourage and minimize the practice of employers/insurers denying legitimate LTD claims. Currently, there are no punitive awards allowed under ERISA law. If employees were allowed punitive damages whenever they have been forced to seek and get awarded LTD benefits from their employer through the courts, it would likely incent employers/insurers to take their employees' LTD claims much more seriously.
Not to mention help reduce the case load of already overburdened federal courts.
I don't have anything in this, but I am reading what the post is that stirred all this up. It appears the employee said they were released to work, meaning no more LTD. That means he/her was still an employee of Merck. What happens when Merck has no positions to offer??? I guess in this situation it does mean a severance package and it makes sense. There is no reason for Merck to offer an employee a job back that they might end up having another injury and again paying out LTD benefits. Does anyone get this besides me.
If its so bad then why isn't the media attention creating internal changes to change image and quality?
There appears to have been confusion about suing for LTD benefits and suing for severance benefits. Either way, it's a shame an employee has to resort to litigation and speaks poorly of the employer but that seems to be the way of the world in which we now live. One is still an employee while on LTD with a status of inactive. Once an employee becomes no longer eligible to receive LTD benefits, your employer may help you find a position so that you remain employed, or if it is determined that no suitable jobs are available, you may be terminated. A severance package may or may not be offered. Given this possibility, an employee should always seek counsel to be sure their company treats them fairly. The poster was very accurate about MOTHA not wanting to pay anything unless it has to. Thus, one better have a damn good lawyer to help encourage MOTHA to do the right thing.
We're in a pretty sad state if it has come down to relying on media to effect needed change. It's only so bad when it happens to you.
Yes, you are a moron and have no clue. This is me being as nice as I can. Next time take a second to understand what is written in the post before firing off your idiotic reply.
Appreciate the affirmation and effort to be as nice as you can. Without a doubt, you make the world a better place for all of us on this special day.
Our benefits are great, until you have to use them. We want to believe the best and we ASSUME our out-of-pocket and premiums are reasonable, then reality hits. Everyone's financial plan should include an additional $50,000 to bridge health care expenses. There is a definite cash flow gap.