Merck Retirees will have to go to a private exchange for medical and pharmacy coverage

[anonymous]

In an effort to save money for big executive bonuses; Merck & Co. just announced that when you are retired and 65 years of age you will have to buy your coverage through a private Medicare exchange and also get your pharmacy coverage through the private Medicare exchange. Merck & Co. throwing all retirees to the dogs. Be well! Um this is not a B.S. story.

 

[anonymous]

In an effort to save money for big executive bonuses; Merck & Co. just announced that when you are retired and 65 years of age you will have to buy your coverage through a private Medicare exchange and also get your pharmacy coverage through the private Medicare exchange. Merck & Co. throwing all retirees to the dogs. Be well! Um this is not a B.S. story.

I just heard this as well except that we do get to keep the pharmacy benefits for Medicare part D.

 

[anonymous]

In an effort to save money for big executive bonuses; Merck & Co. just announced that when you are retired and 65 years of age you will have to buy your coverage through a private Medicare exchange and also get your pharmacy coverage through the private Medicare exchange. Merck & Co. throwing all retirees to the dogs. Be well! Um this is not a B.S. story.

Isn't what MRK offers as a supplement to Medicare pretty much window-dressing, anyway? It's only 80/20 coverage. That's what Medicare is---80/20. Annual out-of-pocket is $2500, so unless someone is very sick, the only real benefit is the Part D/Rx component---for about $90/month.

 

[anonymous]

Isn't what MRK offers as a supplement to Medicare pretty much window-dressing, anyway? It's only 80/20 coverage. That's what Medicare is---80/20. Annual out-of-pocket is $2500, so unless someone is very sick, the only real benefit is the Part D/Rx component---for about $90/month.

Nailed it.

 

[anonymous]

So happens if the Merck Medicare retiree has a spouse who is not yet 65? Can the spouse still get primary medical coverage at the retiree subsidized rates (as it exists today)?

 

[anonymous]

Isn't what MRK offers as a supplement to Medicare pretty much window-dressing, anyway? It's only 80/20 coverage. That's what Medicare is---80/20. Annual out-of-pocket is $2500, so unless someone is very sick, the only real benefit is the Part D/Rx component---for about $90/month.

No. Currently at 65 you have 80/20 coverage from Merck (i.e., Aetna or BCBS) in addition to being able to have standard Medicare coverage 80/20. So now you end up with just Medicare coverage through the private exchange. The letter says it saves the Company money and gives seniors multiple options. Does not say it saved the participants money.

 

[anonymous]

No. Currently at 65 you have 80/20 coverage from Merck (i.e., Aetna or BCBS) in addition to being able to have standard Medicare coverage 80/20. So now you end up with just Medicare coverage through the private exchange. The letter says it saves the Company money and gives seniors multiple options. Does not say it saved the participants money.

Also if you are 65 and have kids under 26, they are not covered under the new plan.

 

[anonymous]

Many large companies take the 65 year old out of Aetna once he/she on Medicare and puts them into United. Save them $ and not as good.

 

[anonymous]

Many large companies take the 65 year old out of Aetna once he/she on Medicare and puts them into United. Save them $ and not as good.

OP here That is exactly right. They mention that in the write-up. They list two reasons. It will save the Company money and "everyone else is doing it so we should too". If you are an employee thinking you are going to get great coverage when you retire, you are mistaken.
The bond that the Company touted when I signed on with the company no longer exists. That is the point of my post. Wonder what the bonus will be for the head of HR and the CEO next year?

 

[anonymous]

what if you are 60 and retired?... Can you still get the Merck retiree insurance till 65 if you qualify?

 

[anonymous]

what if you are 60 and retired?... Can you still get the Merck retiree insurance till 65 if you qualify?

Yes

 

[anonymous]

Also if you are 65 and have kids under 26, they are not covered under the new plan.

No, they are covered under current plan.

 

[anonymous]

Many large companies take the 65 year old out of Aetna once he/she on Medicare and puts them into United. Save them $ and not as good.

Don't worry about that. This is for the best. It will liberate you and give more options. It's a win-win for everyone. The exchange is great. Don't worry about the minor details.

Be well.

 

[anonymous]

what if you are 60 and retired?... Can you still get the Merck retiree insurance till 65 if you qualify?

If you are 60 and retired you should look in your mail box for the letter. As you know, pre-65 retirement medical coverage from Merck has gone through the roof since Obamacare mandates which make coverage unaffordable for large companies to subsidize; that if why Merck is throwing us under the bus. Pre-65 copay is very high. The good part was once you hit 65 in the past it went down because Medicare would kick in; but that is not true going forward. To all those who voted for Obama, thanks for nothing.

 

[anonymous]

Don't worry about that. This is for the best. It will liberate you and give more options. It's a win-win for everyone. The exchange is great. Don't worry about the minor details.

Be well.

Don't worry walk in lock step and spout the party line. There is solyent green to eat and keep your belly full.

 

[anonymous]

No. Currently at 65 you have 80/20 coverage from Merck (i.e., Aetna or BCBS) in addition to being able to have standard Medicare coverage 80/20. So now you end up with just Medicare coverage through the private exchange. The letter says it saves the Company money and gives seniors multiple options. Does not say it saved the participants money.

What the heck are you talking about? The 80/20 BSBC/Aetna coverage from MRK overlaps the 80/20 Medicare coverage. There is no additional benefit by having the MRK coverage. The only practical thing it does is provide access to Rx coverage for about $85/month. 80/20 is 80/20 any way you count it.

 

[anonymous]

What the heck are you talking about? The 80/20 BSBC/Aetna coverage from MRK overlaps the 80/20 Medicare coverage. There is no additional benefit by having the MRK coverage. The only practical thing it does is provide access to Rx coverage for about $85/month. 80/20 is 80/20 any way you count it.

If you think the plans are equivalent with the same access to doctors and the same coverage you are mistaken. GE did this and retirees are suing their company

 

[anonymous]

Yep got the letter in the mail today.

So glad that I am now working for a european company and the benefits follow their country's HQ requirements.

Now I got to find out when I can get my lump sum pension from this suckage of a company!

this company once cared for its employees, now it only sees them as a "cost center"

 

[anonymous]

Yep got the letter in the mail today.

So glad that I am now working for a european company and the benefits follow their country's HQ requirements.

Now I got to find out when I can get my lump sum pension from this suckage of a company!

this company once cared for its employees, now it only sees them as a "cost center"

How easy it is to get the trash out to the curb!

 

[anonymous]

how much is the annual company contribution to a healthcare account that all of you are leaving out of the conversation and how does it work?