Pennsylvania Employment Lawyer & Attorney : Russell Krafft & Gruber Law Firm : Lancaster, York, Harrisburg

Harley Davidson workers have approved a new contract, ending the three week strike that included disputes over wages and healthcare premiums. According to WHTM, ABC News of Harrisburg, the new contract provides that "Workers will not pay health insurance premiums, but deductibles and co-pays will increase." This resolution stops short of the trend toward consumer driven healthcare plans. However, increasing out of pocket healthcare expenses for consumers is a step towards making them more aware of the increased cost of healthcare. Insurance analysts hope this will result in consumers taking a more vested interest in their healthcare costs.

Is this an effective approach or will it result in consumers foregoing needed healthcare? There is a fairly comprehensive analysis of consumer driven healthcare at ConsumerDrivenHealthCare.us: Guide to Options in Consumer Driven Health Care. In the coming years, employers will be faced with many difficult decisions as they attempt to slow the rapidly rising cost of healthcare coverage for employees.  A recent report by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services predicts that health care is expected to account for $1 of every $5 spent in the United States in another decade.  Decision makers will need to become educated on the options available and the consequences of the plans they choose.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Last week we discussed some of the new issues that arise regarding electronic records. I summarized the results of a pre-federal rule amendment case, Zubalake v. UBS Warburg. 

If you've decided to do your best to protect yourself from similar circumstances, consider developing and implementing a written record retention policy. Following are some things to keep in mind:

• Identify the types and sources of both electronic and hard copy documents;
• Evaluate the business need for the various types of electronic records and documents. Keep in mind that some records have mandatory retention periods.
• Determine the retention or destruction period for classes of records.
• Anticipate the arguments that may be made and inferences that could be drawn from the destruction of certain documents and weigh it against the expense of retaining and producing the documents.
• Establish a storage and retrieval system for retained records evaluating its cost and efficiency.
• Develop, communicate, and enforce a policy on record retention.
• Establish a system for placing a "litigation hold" on records when a claim is threatened, administrative claim commenced, or a law suit filed. This will protect your company against sanctions for destroyed documents.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Most Human Resource professionals tend to be pack rats. When documentation is typically hard to come by, no one in his or her right mind would put it in the shredder. In fact, the inclination might be to keep it forever. Recent changes in court procedures may require re-evaluation of company record retention practices, particularly when it comes to "electronically stored information". It's time for all employers to get a handle on the sources of electronic information and develop a record retention policy for its preservation, production and destruction.

On December 1, 2006, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure were amended to address court procedures for disclosing electronic information during the discovery phase of litigation. The new court rules begin to apply to a company when litigation is "reasonably anticipated". At that point, a company must put a "litigation hold" on its electronic and other records that may be discoverable in litigation. Companies that take this step will be protected against court sanctions, so long as they take reasonable steps to protect and preserve information.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

 HSAs have been touted as the latest and greatest vehicle for consumer directed health care savings, but upon closer examination, HSAs may not live up to their billing because people are laboring under false assumptions. First, health coverage with HSAs isn't necessarily "cheaper". Cost savings may be achieved through the use of a high deductible health plan but the savings are not always used to fund HSA contributions. Second, HSAs are not retirement savings devises. It is difficult to for most employees to accumulate money in an HSA because the account is depleted annually to cover current health care expenses. Third, HSAs are not designed to be medical cost containment mechanisms; although, they can result in postponing or foregoing medical treatment when they are marketed as retirement savings vehicles rather than tax advantaged medical expense payment mechanisms.

The U.S. Treasury Department's publication on HSAs contains a laundry list of advantages including affordability, savings, portability and "triple tax savings." While all are true in theory, some are difficult to obtain in reality. HSAs can be more affordable because the high deductible health plan to which it is attached has a lower premium. HSAs create a portable account in which an employee can save money and accumulate earnings in a tax advantaged manner. However, an employee's ability to achieve any savings in an HSA depends upon how much of the medical expenses are covered by the plan versus paid out of pocket by the employee.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks