Why shouldn't they pay at least a little?
The following letter was presented for consideration by the Gilford Municipal Budget Committee. After it was read and discussed, the School Board Chairman, sitting in the audience, declared that they would NOT make any changes in response to the request as in the letter. Remember, the letter was ONLY A DRAFT PROPOSAL. NO ACTION WAS TAKEN.
To the School Board,.The Gilford Municipal Budget Committee wishes to inform the Board of its appreciation for its smaller budget increase in this year’s proposed spending plan when compared to the past several cycles. We want everybody up front to know that no matter what budgetary matters get discussed by the budget committee, we value each and every employee..As you are aware from the review of the Town’s budget, this budget committee has ongoing concerns about the ever-escalating so-called “non-discretionary” costs which drive nearly all of the increases we see year after year. Many taxpayers have expressed concerns to members of this committee and a desire to at the very least stabilize their property tax bills if at all possible..When studying the health insurance benefit, for which the taxpayers pay 100%, we became concerned with the cost, and the fact that almost everybody that has health insurance these days fully expects to shoulder a portion of the burden. We believe that it would be reasonable, given the excellent plans being offered to employees and their families, that they should start paying a small amount for that benefit..Given that the district pays 100% of both a single and family plan, we believe that the School Board should adjust their budget proposal to reflect the cost savings in this fashion: A “single person” employee would pay $15.00 per week towards the insurance. A “family” employee would pay $30.00 per week..While we believe that further efforts to look at alternatives to the current benefit plans needs to happen in subsequent budgets, this proposal is one that could be implemented this year, and is not so drastic as to cause great upheaval in the larger picture..Respectfully Submitted,
After it was read, it was agreed to further discuss it at next week's meeting.
.
What do you think the budget committee should do? Post your suggestions in the "comment" section below...
Comments
The last 3 year contract that featured 8% annual wage increases was justified at the time (I thought) on the fact that teachers would be assuming a larger portion of the healthcare insurance premiums. How have we gotten back to no copay?
Posted by: Harry Blinn | December 18, 2006 10:44 PM
Yesterday's (12/18/06) USA Today says it all. States medical liabilities exceed 1 Trillion dollars. "The numbers make your jaw drop," says North Carolina state Rep.
Bottom line is that all levels of government are experiencing the same problems with health insurance provided to its workers. On top of the current tax burden, we tax payers will soon be strapped with shouldering the burden for the State workers increasing benefits and the law that is changing to force these cost to be funded!
It is time reign this in! I'm sure that this will get the masses begging for national health care. What do you suppose the likelyhood of the entitled people having the same health care system as the rest of us? Oh but Terry, you're just too cynical!
Posted by: Terry Stewart | December 19, 2006 10:06 AM
I think the proposal (requiring public employees to contribute financially for their health benefits) is reasonable.
Posted by: William Amann | December 23, 2006 12:38 PM
It's more than reasonable.
Posted by: doug | December 23, 2006 02:20 PM