Bridgeless Oldies...

Schering Legacy used to get bridging. Not sure about recent layoffs. The bridging health care wasn't worth anything unless you were medicare age. The cost of the insurance was ridiculous. No better than Cobra cost. You could buy insurance on the open market for much less than what they offered as a "benefit." Such a joke.

 

I am amazed at the view of bridging as an earned benefit. "they can never earn it anywhere else". Bridging is not an entitled benefit. If a company offers it, it is because they choose to under their defined separation benefits. If you meet the criteria you are eligible (not entitled) to bridging.

 

You forget that these folks are the entitlement generation / kens and barbies

 

Hey clueless. You are not even eligible unless you had been with the company ten years or more and 50+ for bridging. So I guess you are not "entitled" but it sure would be nice to think that long time employees are worth something to Merck. It is true that it is a benefit and not an entitlement, but who cares if it does not mean anything. I love how Merck says they have such great benefits but they do not really mean anything for those that need them if they are prohibitively expensive.

 

Spoken from someone sitting on a well padded and lavishly funded tuffet I'm sure. Also someone incredibly callous.

Honestly, don't you think that for older workers (who stuck in there for all those years) having
this happen is pretty horrible. It is synonymous to having the rug ripped from under them at their final stretch. In very simple terms, it's lousy. A real slap in the face. For most in this catagory it's a major loss....and very undeserved. It has nothing to do with entitlement, everything to do with treating employees with dignity and appreciation for their service.

 

Older workers, who have 10 years of service and meet the age requirements are bridge eligible. No one is ripping anything from someone or slapping them in the face. If those are the eligibility requirements how is it a loss? They were not eligible. If they have less than 10 years, I would not call that "sticking in there for all those years." Give me an example of the age and years of service of someone who has the rug ripped out from under them.

 

How about the fact that you are excited about being bridged only to find out that these benefits are no better than if you buy cobra insurance because they are sooooo expensive. How about also the folks that worked for just shy of ten years and then they get laid off and so they cannot be bridged even if they are age eligible and only have a short time until medicare kicks in. Real class act company......

 

Well if they are just short of 10 years then give it to them? What is just short? 1 month, 2 months, 6 months? Why not just make it 9 years? But then, what if I am 7 years 10 months? Just short. Should I be bridged then? What is just short? 1 month, 2 months, 6 months? Why not just bridge anyone who is laid off? Have no criteria at all. That is how utterly asinine your argument is. A bridge is not an entitlement and is offered based on pre-defined criteria in the separation plan. Your employer chooses to offer it based on defined criteria.

As far as health insurance, your beloved president has taken care of that through ACA. Go buy it on the exchange. Do you really expect an employer to pay your health insurance until you are Medicare eligible even though you no longer are employed?

 

Yes, I do expect my pharmaceutical employer to pay the majority of my health insurance if I retire at age 62 (or am forced out!) because I have three years until medicare and that was the original promise. Try getting almost any job at age 62 and see how you fare.

 

You were promised? You have got to be kidding me. Merck has not promised to pay health insurance for early retirees for years. Where have you been? Your premium till Medicare is based on a grid. When did you have an original promise? Back in 1985? Benefits have changed through the years. Just like the change to the rule of 85 and changes to cost sharing of health insurance, and changes to prescription plans, and changes to floating holidays, and whatever change comes in the future.

Just let your buddy president take care of you through ACA. That's what you likely voted for.

 

Grid? Can you share more about this?

 

All this smells like a law suit. Age is a major topic for litigation discussion these days. It might be possible. At the least some news articles to show the world

 

The problem with Merck's HR is that they actually target people based on their years of service, age, pension etc. They know that older employees cost them more so they get rid of these employees. They cannot let people get to 20 years with their pension because that will cost them substantially more. Just look at the breakdown they send employees after they are fired. They always sprinkle in a few young and middle aged and the majority fits into the older employees with higher salaries and closer to 20 years with their pension.

 

I think those who were not given the basic eligibility level of 10 years is where the real problem is. Once you hit 10 everything is available to you. It's just a matter of size of the package and cost of the reduced healthcare.

For an older employee to miss the minimum is sad. Actually its despicable for any manager to push out someone who is older and so close to securing at least this small and modest benefit for their future. Its very surprising this was even permitted to occur. Situation like these should have been picked up and questioned by senior management and HR before this was permitted to occur.

Keep in mind without the bridge any money you have in your pension is not accessible to you. You must wait until you hit the 65/66 mark. You may need the money, but its locked away.

The problem with medical is you really must have the retirement subsidy to purchase it at an affordable rate. Without the bridging retirement subsidy it is higher in cost than cobra plans. The monthly rate for one person is 1200 non subsidy, Cobra is 750 and basic subsidy rate is about 350 monthly (and progressively less with each year over 10 years service). You can see why this is so important and why anyone who is in this situation has every right to feel very slighted and offended.

 

You are missing the point. These are older people. They do not have another 10 years to secure these benefits. Loss of the job with 8 or 9 years service at age 60 or more will mean this was their retirement benefit package. They are beyond an age when, in all probability, these benefits will ever again be obtainable for them again.

 

Yes a pharmaceutical employer as in health, medical and that sincere Be Well image. Too bad it's only for some! Brother can you spare a dime to bridge these people? A little chump change from your massive cash reserve?

 

Really? Why is it that certain people are offered packages outside the typical guidelines? Why is it that new deals are now being drummed up? If these people were cut six months later they would be suddenly have been eligible. In some cases people lost their retirement bridge by weeks or a few short months! If someone is older, they should be bridged with lesser service (e.g. if 60 need 5 or 8 years). If not, let them work to fulfill the small requirement.

If these were people were unscrupulously forced out by anyone it needs to be investigated. Corruption should have no place here.