Swampscott officials frustrated over lack of response to GIC proposal

SWAMPSCOTT – Town officials and town employees appear to have reached an impasse when it comes to the most recent Group Insurance Commission (GIC) proposal put forth by the town.Board of Selectmen Chairman Anthony Scibelli said adopting the GIC last fall at the current 60/40 split would have benefited everyone.”For the second year in a row, we have reached an impasse with the town’s unions comprising the Public Employee Committee (PEC),” Scibelli said. “Much of the town’s savings would have been used to pay salaries and save jobs. In the end, the question begs to be answered: why wasn’t saving the town $800,000, and saving themselves over $300,000 good enough?”The PEC is comprised of 10 people – one representative from each of the unions in town and one representative for the retirees. Swampscott Education Association President Paul Maguire said the GIC could save some employees money on premiums, but he said it could cost town employees more in deductibles, co-pays and for prescriptions.”If they stay healthy they may save some money,” he said. “But higher co-pays and deductibles are a problem. It could cost town employees more. There is also concern about the product itself. Many town employees and retirees are happy with Blue Cross/Blue Shield and the GIC does not offer it.”According William Wollerscheid, who represents approximately 400 retired teachers and town employees, the GIC would cost retirees much more than the current plan.”It’s all on the back of the retirees and the town could care less,” he said. “Retirees are on fixed incomes. The co-pays (with the GIC) would be astronomical for anyone with health problems or taking several prescription medications.”Town employees and retirees currently pay 40 percent of their own insurance premiums and the town picks up the remaining 60 percent. According to Scibelli, the offer from the town would have reduced the percentage of the premium paid by employees from 40 percent to 30 percent by the year 2014. The town can only adopt the GIC for three or six years at a time so the proposal floated by the town has an escape clause for 2015.Maguire said the PEC sent in a counter offer where the town would pick up 65 percent of the premium in the first year and 70 percent in subsequent years, which Scibelli said is unacceptable.”Under that scenario, the Town would lose about $300,000 in savings in those two years, and would be burdened with a 70 percent premium share thereafter,” Scibelli said. “Again, the question must be answered: why is the PEC insisting on a tactic that undermines the town’s savings when its own members will save hundreds of dollars in premium costs, and any savings by the town will be used to pay union salaries?”In order for the town to sign onto the GIC for the next fiscal year, it must have a signed Public Employee agreement in place by Oct. 1. Town Administrator Andrew Maylor explained the state requires a 70 percent vote in favor for the town to adopt the GIC. The state gives retirees a 10 percent weighted vote and the other unions get a percentage of the vote based on membership. With the exception of the teachers union and retirees, each of the unions have less than 10 percent of the weighted voted. Maylor said it is impossible for the GIC to pass without the support of the teachers union, which said carries approximately 58 weighted percent of the vote.Scibelli said the PEC owes it to the town and to union members to put the issue to a vote.”The PEC owes the town, and its own members, that much at least,” he said.Maguire said the PEC already rejected the town’s proposal but would be willing to put its proposal – a 65/35 split next year and 70/30 split in subsequent years – to the town to a vote.