Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

HRA Survivor Decison

Expand Messages
  • d_arey35
    Received the letter in the mail regarding making the decision to elect NO IBM survivor coverage or elect IBM survivor coverage. In my case it will cost me
    Message 1 of 19 , Oct 22, 2013

      Received the letter in the mail regarding making the decision to elect NO IBM survivor coverage or elect IBM survivor coverage.

      In my case it will cost me $626.00 a year to take the survivor coverage.

      Would appreciage a sanity check on my decison.

      I would not take the survivor coverage.

      Wife is 15 months younger than I.

      I have a $112K life Ins. policy.

      She is not going to be hurting when I die.

      Might just as well use the $626.00 while still living.

      Am i not taking somethig into consideration?

      Thoughts?

      Dave BTV '92

    • ileftibm
      Some are arguing that the 3000/3500 could disappear in a few years anyway. Speculation, of course, but based on the history of other benefits eroding. ...
      Message 2 of 19 , Oct 22, 2013

        Some are arguing that the 3000/3500 could disappear in a few years anyway. Speculation, of course, but based on the history of other benefits eroding. 



        ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <K1OXD@...> wrote:

        Received the letter in the mail regarding making the decision to elect NO IBM survivor coverage or elect IBM survivor coverage.

        In my case it will cost me $626.00 a year to take the survivor coverage.

        Would appreciage a sanity check on my decison.

        I would not take the survivor coverage.

        Wife is 15 months younger than I.

        I have a $112K life Ins. policy.

        She is not going to be hurting when I die.

        Might just as well use the $626.00 while still living.

        Am i not taking somethig into consideration?

        Thoughts?

        Dave BTV '92

      • Wayne E Frye
        I believe in a short span of time that the allotted HRA/HSA that IBM now provides will go away in addition to overall health care premiums continued
        Message 3 of 19 , Oct 22, 2013
          I believe in a short span of time that the allotted HRA/HSA that IBM now
          provides will go away in addition to overall health care premiums
          continued escalation, so not sure that taking the survivor option will do
          the spouse much good down the road a bit.

          Wayne
          Upstate NY

          On 22 Oct 2013 13:27:11 -0700 bmcfarlin <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
          writes:

          Dave, I think everyone has to analyze their own situation. In your
          choice just make sure you spend that $626 as part of the $3000. BTW,
          that's per month, not per year as your note refers to. In my case, I'm
          comfortable choosing the survivor choice as I believe as time goes on,
          health insurance premiums will continue rise and the $1187 available to
          my spouse will ease that cost somewhat.



          ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com> wrote:


          Received the letter in the mail regarding making the decision to elect NO
          IBM survivor coverage or elect IBM survivor coverage.
          In my case it will cost me $626.00 a year to take the survivor coverage.
          Would appreciage a sanity check on my decison.
          I would not take the survivor coverage.
          Wife is 15 months younger than I.
          I have a $112K life Ins. policy.
          She is not going to be hurting when I die.
          Might just as well use the $626.00 while still living.
          Am i not taking somethig into consideration?
          Thoughts?
          Dave BTV '92

          ____________________________________________________________
          Do THIS before eating carbs (every time)
          1 EASY tip to increase fat-burning, lower blood sugar & decrease fat storage
          http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/5266e24e3750d624e14c3st02vuc

          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • ibmshaftee
          I felt the same way, then came 2012-13. Oct, stomach problems, April was told I had 3 to 6 months, Kidney Cancer. Still fighting it and now the prognosis is
          Message 4 of 19 , Oct 22, 2013

            I felt the same way, then came 2012-13.  Oct, stomach problems, April was told I had 3 to 6 months, Kidney Cancer.  Still fighting it and now the prognosis is 1 to 2 years.  You can bet I will keep the survivor coverage.



            ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

            Some are arguing that the 3000/3500 could disappear in a few years anyway. Speculation, of course, but based on the history of other benefits eroding. 



            ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <K1OXD@...> wrote:

            Received the letter in the mail regarding making the decision to elect NO IBM survivor coverage or elect IBM survivor coverage.

            In my case it will cost me $626.00 a year to take the survivor coverage.

            Would appreciage a sanity check on my decison.

            I would not take the survivor coverage.

            Wife is 15 months younger than I.

            I have a $112K life Ins. policy.

            She is not going to be hurting when I die.

            Might just as well use the $626.00 while still living.

            Am i not taking somethig into consideration?

            Thoughts?

            Dave BTV '92

          • Ralph H Ross
            I’m lucky in that both spouse and I both are retirees. One of us is 66 and the other 62. I will see next month the differences between the coverage and costs
            Message 5 of 19 , Oct 22, 2013
              I’m lucky in that both spouse and I both are retirees. One of us is 66 and the other 62. I will see next month the differences between the coverage and costs and will update the group. Of course I already see that Dental is pretty much been eliminated.  I do hope the HRA continues but my gut tells me that next year we will both be in the Extended Health loop even though one of us will not be Medicare yet. So all retirees and I think eventually even active employees will soon not be covered by a work policy – maybe just the Sr executives will get company benefits. I don’t like it but the writing is on the wall. More later...
            • older_bassman
              Sorry to hear about your situation. My father passed in 2006 from Renal Cancer. I recall at the time that there were some promising treatments being tested.
              Message 6 of 19 , Oct 22, 2013

                Sorry to hear about your situation. My father passed in 2006 from Renal Cancer.  I recall at the time that there were some promising treatments being tested. While he was not part of the formal tests he participated in one and his insurance agreed to cover part of the cost with the drug company covering the rest. While he saw some improvement he was too far along to get the most benefit.  Not sure if this would be of any of this would be possible for you. While not fully successful the experimental drugs did allow for extra time to plan for my mother after Dad passed.



                ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                I felt the same way, then came 2012-13.  Oct, stomach problems, April was told I had 3 to 6 months, Kidney Cancer.  Still fighting it and now the prognosis is 1 to 2 years.  You can bet I will keep the survivor coverage.



                ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                Some are arguing that the 3000/3500 could disappear in a few years anyway. Speculation, of course, but based on the history of other benefits eroding. 



                ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <K1OXD@...> wrote:

                Received the letter in the mail regarding making the decision to elect NO IBM survivor coverage or elect IBM survivor coverage.

                In my case it will cost me $626.00 a year to take the survivor coverage.

                Would appreciage a sanity check on my decison.

                I would not take the survivor coverage.

                Wife is 15 months younger than I.

                I have a $112K life Ins. policy.

                She is not going to be hurting when I die.

                Might just as well use the $626.00 while still living.

                Am i not taking somethig into consideration?

                Thoughts?

                Dave BTV '92

              • EG Fine
                Per month? That would sure be nice – but most of us will get $3,000 per YEAR, which is $250/month. And the reduction is indeed about $626 per YEAR. Ernie
                Message 7 of 19 , Oct 22, 2013

                  Per month? That would sure be nice – but most of us will get $3,000 per YEAR, which is $250/month. And the reduction is indeed about $626 per YEAR.

                   

                     Ernie

                   

                  From: ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of bmcfarlin
                  Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 4:27 PM
                  To: ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: [IBM Retiree] RE: HRA Survivor Decison

                   

                   

                  Dave, I think everyone has to analyze their own situation.  In your choice just make sure you spend that $626 as part of the $3000. BTW, that's per month, not per year as your note refers to.   In my case, I'm comfortable choosing the survivor choice as I believe as time goes on, health insurance premiums will continue rise and the $1187 available to my spouse will ease that cost somewhat.



                  ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                  Received the letter in the mail regarding making the decision to elect NO IBM survivor coverage or elect IBM survivor coverage.

                  In my case it will cost me $626.00 a year to take the survivor coverage.

                  Would appreciage a sanity check on my decison.

                  I would not take the survivor coverage.

                  Wife is 15 months younger than I.

                  I have a $112K life Ins. policy.

                  She is not going to be hurting when I die.

                  Might just as well use the $626.00 while still living.

                  Am i not taking somethig into consideration?

                  Thoughts?

                  Dave BTV '92

                • gfretwell2000
                  The open question is whether IBM will decide to stop funding the HRA in a few years. It is not like they actually follow through on unwritten promises. n a
                  Message 8 of 19 , Oct 22, 2013
                    The open question is whether IBM will decide to stop funding the HRA in a few years.
                    It is not like they actually follow through on unwritten promises.

                    n a message dated 10/22/2013 4:27:13 PM Eastern Daylight Time, no_reply@yahoogroups.com writes:


                    In my case, I'm comfortable choosing the survivor choice as I believe as time goes on, health insurance premiums will continue rise and the $1187 available to my spouse will ease that cost somewhat.


                  • ileftibm
                    Another view on the subsidy decision: I think it is $1187 that the surviving spouse would get per year. How does this compare the reduction in cost to the
                    Message 9 of 19 , Oct 23, 2013

                      Another view on the subsidy decision: 

                      I think it is $1187 that the surviving spouse would get per year.


                      How does this compare the reduction in cost to the widow (widower) who no longer has to share expenses with a living husband (wife)? I think when food, clothing, copays, second car, etc are considered, there will be a reduction in costs greater than $1187 per year. 


                      There are other numbers to crunch in this reckoning, but $1187 is not among the big ones.



                      ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <gfretwell@...> wrote:

                      The open question is whether IBM will decide to stop funding the HRA in a few years.
                      It is not like they actually follow through on unwritten promises.

                      n a message dated 10/22/2013 4:27:13 PM Eastern Daylight Time, no_reply@yahoogroups.com writes:


                      In my case, I'm comfortable choosing the survivor choice as I believe as time goes on, health insurance premiums will continue rise and the $1187 available to my spouse will ease that cost somewhat.


                    • fneal63
                      You are very lucky indeed. The one who is 66 whould be able to buy a medigap PLand F and a part D with the 3k subsidy and have money left over for drug copays
                      Message 10 of 19 , Oct 23, 2013
                        You are very lucky indeed. The one who is 66 whould be able to buy a medigap PLand F and a part D with the 3k subsidy and have money left over for drug copays
                        .

                         



                        ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                        I’m lucky in that both spouse and I both are retirees. One of us is 66 and the other 62. I will see next month the differences between the coverage and costs and will update the group. Of course I already see that Dental is pretty much been eliminated.  I do hope the HRA continues but my gut tells me that next year we will both be in the Extended Health loop even though one of us will not be Medicare yet. So all retirees and I think eventually even active employees will soon not be covered by a work policy – maybe just the Sr executives will get company benefits. I don’t like it but the writing is on the wall. More later...
                      • fneal63
                        Its 3k per year not per month and is over a 600 dollalr per year for your wife ... Per month? That would sure be nice – but most of us will get $3,000 per
                        Message 11 of 19 , Oct 23, 2013
                          Its 3k per year not per month and is over a 600 dollalr per year for your wife

                           



                          ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                          Per month? That would sure be nice – but most of us will get $3,000 per YEAR, which is $250/month. And the reduction is indeed about $626 per YEAR.

                           

                             Ernie

                           

                          From: ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of bmcfarlin
                          Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 4:27 PM
                          To: ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com
                          Subject: [IBM Retiree] RE: HRA Survivor Decison

                           

                           

                          Dave, I think everyone has to analyze their own situation.  In your choice just make sure you spend that $626 as part of the $3000. BTW, that's per month, not per year as your note refers to.   In my case, I'm comfortable choosing the survivor choice as I believe as time goes on, health insurance premiums will continue rise and the $1187 available to my spouse will ease that cost somewhat.



                          ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                          Received the letter in the mail regarding making the decision to elect NO IBM survivor coverage or elect IBM survivor coverage.

                          In my case it will cost me $626.00 a year to take the survivor coverage.

                          Would appreciage a sanity check on my decison.

                          I would not take the survivor coverage.

                          Wife is 15 months younger than I.

                          I have a $112K life Ins. policy.

                          She is not going to be hurting when I die.

                          Might just as well use the $626.00 while still living.

                          Am i not taking somethig into consideration?

                          Thoughts?

                          Dave BTV '92

                        • EG Fine
                          Paraphrasing what I wrote, or was I not clear? Ernie From: ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of fneal63 Sent: Wednesday,
                          Message 12 of 19 , Oct 24, 2013

                            Paraphrasing what I wrote, or was I not clear?

                             

                                Ernie

                             

                            From: ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of fneal63
                            Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2013 11:57 PM
                            To: ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com
                            Subject: RE: RE: [IBM Retiree] RE: HRA Survivor Decison

                             

                             

                            Its 3k per year not per month and is over a 600 dollalr per year for your wife

                             



                            ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                            Per month? That would sure be nice – but most of us will get $3,000 per YEAR, which is $250/month. And the reduction is indeed about $626 per YEAR.

                             

                               Ernie

                             

                            From: ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of bmcfarlin
                            Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 4:27 PM
                            To: ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com
                            Subject: [IBM Retiree] RE: HRA Survivor Decison

                             

                             

                            Dave, I think everyone has to analyze their own situation.  In your choice just make sure you spend that $626 as part of the $3000. BTW, that's per month, not per year as your note refers to.   In my case, I'm comfortable choosing the survivor choice as I believe as time goes on, health insurance premiums will continue rise and the $1187 available to my spouse will ease that cost somewhat.



                            ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                            Received the letter in the mail regarding making the decision to elect NO IBM survivor coverage or elect IBM survivor coverage.

                            In my case it will cost me $626.00 a year to take the survivor coverage.

                            Would appreciage a sanity check on my decison.

                            I would not take the survivor coverage.

                            Wife is 15 months younger than I.

                            I have a $112K life Ins. policy.

                            She is not going to be hurting when I die.

                            Might just as well use the $626.00 while still living.

                            Am i not taking somethig into consideration?

                            Thoughts?

                            Dave BTV '92

                          • jeyeff31
                            Here is my analysis of the situation (I am in the same boat as you are): You have a choice of either receiving $3,000 per year, or $2,374 with spouse coverage
                            Message 13 of 19 , Oct 24, 2013

                              Here is my analysis of the situation (I am in the same boat as you are):


                              You have a choice of either receiving $3,000 per year, or $2,374 with spouse coverage after your death.


                              A.  If you choose $2,374 each one of you will have $1,187 per year ($98.91 per month). Not much, but it is stable (assuming IBM does not change it).


                              B.  If you choose $3,000 now you each can spend $1,500 per year ($125 per month).  In this case:

                                   B1:  You die first, your spouse gets nothing.

                                   B2:  Your spouse dies first and you will continue with $125 per month ($26.09 more than case A)


                              The difference between A and B is $26.09 each or $52.18 total now and $26.09 if she dies first. 


                              The decision depends on each person's situation.  Is it worth $52.18 per month  to continue with the present insurance, or is it better to use that money to buy life insurance.  It depends on many factors, all very personal.



                              ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                              Per month? That would sure be nice – but most of us will get $3,000 per YEAR, which is $250/month. And the reduction is indeed about $626 per YEAR.

                               

                                 Ernie

                               

                              From: ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of bmcfarlin
                              Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 4:27 PM
                              To: ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com
                              Subject: [IBM Retiree] RE: HRA Survivor Decison

                               

                               

                              Dave, I think everyone has to analyze their own situation.  In your choice just make sure you spend that $626 as part of the $3000. BTW, that's per month, not per year as your note refers to.   In my case, I'm comfortable choosing the survivor choice as I believe as time goes on, health insurance premiums will continue rise and the $1187 available to my spouse will ease that cost somewhat.



                              ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                              Received the letter in the mail regarding making the decision to elect NO IBM survivor coverage or elect IBM survivor coverage.

                              In my case it will cost me $626.00 a year to take the survivor coverage.

                              Would appreciage a sanity check on my decison.

                              I would not take the survivor coverage.

                              Wife is 15 months younger than I.

                              I have a $112K life Ins. policy.

                              She is not going to be hurting when I die.

                              Might just as well use the $626.00 while still living.

                              Am i not taking somethig into consideration?

                              Thoughts?

                              Dave BTV '92

                            • lastdino1
                              We looked at it as using the $250 a month to pay for our health insurance and if I die first she will use our retirement/401K funds to cover her HC. I do not
                              Message 14 of 19 , Oct 24, 2013

                                We looked at it as using the $250 a month to pay for our health insurance and if I die first she will use our retirement/401K funds to cover her HC. I do not want to give IBM $700 a year for maybe the next 10-20 years and then have them give my bride $1100 for 3-5 years after I go. The plan is IBM gets nothing .        Life is Great 



                                ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                                Here is my analysis of the situation (I am in the same boat as you are):


                                You have a choice of either receiving $3,000 per year, or $2,374 with spouse coverage after your death.


                                A.  If you choose $2,374 each one of you will have $1,187 per year ($98.91 per month). Not much, but it is stable (assuming IBM does not change it).


                                B.  If you choose $3,000 now you each can spend $1,500 per year ($125 per month).  In this case:

                                     B1:  You die first, your spouse gets nothing.

                                     B2:  Your spouse dies first and you will continue with $125 per month ($26.09 more than case A)


                                The difference between A and B is $26.09 each or $52.18 total now and $26.09 if she dies first. 


                                The decision depends on each person's situation.  Is it worth $52.18 per month  to continue with the present insurance, or is it better to use that money to buy life insurance.  It depends on many factors, all very personal.



                                ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                                Per month? That would sure be nice – but most of us will get $3,000 per YEAR, which is $250/month. And the reduction is indeed about $626 per YEAR.

                                 

                                   Ernie

                                 

                                From: ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of bmcfarlin
                                Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 4:27 PM
                                To: ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com
                                Subject: [IBM Retiree] RE: HRA Survivor Decison

                                 

                                 

                                Dave, I think everyone has to analyze their own situation.  In your choice just make sure you spend that $626 as part of the $3000. BTW, that's per month, not per year as your note refers to.   In my case, I'm comfortable choosing the survivor choice as I believe as time goes on, health insurance premiums will continue rise and the $1187 available to my spouse will ease that cost somewhat.



                                ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                                Received the letter in the mail regarding making the decision to elect NO IBM survivor coverage or elect IBM survivor coverage.

                                In my case it will cost me $626.00 a year to take the survivor coverage.

                                Would appreciage a sanity check on my decison.

                                I would not take the survivor coverage.

                                Wife is 15 months younger than I.

                                I have a $112K life Ins. policy.

                                She is not going to be hurting when I die.

                                Might just as well use the $626.00 while still living.

                                Am i not taking somethig into consideration?

                                Thoughts?

                                Dave BTV '92

                              • ileftibm
                                I have an IRA instead of a pension. (My choice.) If my remaining life is short the IRA she gets is bigger. If my remaining life is long, we both get to share
                                Message 15 of 19 , Oct 24, 2013

                                  I have an IRA instead of a pension. (My choice.)


                                  If my remaining life is short the IRA she gets is bigger.

                                  If my remaining life is long, we both get to share the $3,000 every year. 



                                  ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                                  We looked at it as using the $250 a month to pay for our health insurance and if I die first she will use our retirement/401K funds to cover her HC. I do not want to give IBM $700 a year for maybe the next 10-20 years and then have them give my bride $1100 for 3-5 years after I go. The plan is IBM gets nothing .        Life is Great 



                                  ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                                  Here is my analysis of the situation (I am in the same boat as you are):


                                  You have a choice of either receiving $3,000 per year, or $2,374 with spouse coverage after your death.


                                  A.  If you choose $2,374 each one of you will have $1,187 per year ($98.91 per month). Not much, but it is stable (assuming IBM does not change it).


                                  B.  If you choose $3,000 now you each can spend $1,500 per year ($125 per month).  In this case:

                                       B1:  You die first, your spouse gets nothing.

                                       B2:  Your spouse dies first and you will continue with $125 per month ($26.09 more than case A)


                                  The difference between A and B is $26.09 each or $52.18 total now and $26.09 if she dies first. 


                                  The decision depends on each person's situation.  Is it worth $52.18 per month  to continue with the present insurance, or is it better to use that money to buy life insurance.  It depends on many factors, all very personal.



                                  ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                                  Per month? That would sure be nice – but most of us will get $3,000 per YEAR, which is $250/month. And the reduction is indeed about $626 per YEAR.

                                   

                                     Ernie

                                   

                                  From: ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of bmcfarlin
                                  Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 4:27 PM
                                  To: ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com
                                  Subject: [IBM Retiree] RE: HRA Survivor Decison

                                   

                                   

                                  Dave, I think everyone has to analyze their own situation.  In your choice just make sure you spend that $626 as part of the $3000. BTW, that's per month, not per year as your note refers to.   In my case, I'm comfortable choosing the survivor choice as I believe as time goes on, health insurance premiums will continue rise and the $1187 available to my spouse will ease that cost somewhat.



                                  ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                                  Received the letter in the mail regarding making the decision to elect NO IBM survivor coverage or elect IBM survivor coverage.

                                  In my case it will cost me $626.00 a year to take the survivor coverage.

                                  Would appreciage a sanity check on my decison.

                                  I would not take the survivor coverage.

                                  Wife is 15 months younger than I.

                                  I have a $112K life Ins. policy.

                                  She is not going to be hurting when I die.

                                  Might just as well use the $626.00 while still living.

                                  Am i not taking somethig into consideration?

                                  Thoughts?

                                  Dave BTV '92

                                • grandpafromli
                                  Like someone else that mentioned it, I believe IBM will shaft us even more in the future, probably in the next year or two. Take the $3000 and run, because
                                  Message 16 of 19 , Oct 25, 2013

                                     Like someone else that mentioned it, I believe IBM will shaft us even more in the future, probably in the next year or two. Take the $3000 and run, because this offer is like the frog being slowly heated. We are being slowly heated and eventually will find no help from IBM. IBM has become even more vicious than other companies, if that is possible. What really amazes me is the fact that RHEE lied thru his teeth, when he said there would be more choices with ExtendHealth. He had to know his lie would be revealed as soon as we signed onto ExtendHealth and saw the few options we had, and how those options are much more expensive, and offer less. Just look at the dental offerings, the costs and the ridiculous limitations and low limits. 



                                    ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                                    I felt the same way, then came 2012-13.  Oct, stomach problems, April was told I had 3 to 6 months, Kidney Cancer.  Still fighting it and now the prognosis is 1 to 2 years.  You can bet I will keep the survivor coverage.



                                    ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                                    Some are arguing that the 3000/3500 could disappear in a few years anyway. Speculation, of course, but based on the history of other benefits eroding. 



                                    ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <K1OXD@...> wrote:

                                    Received the letter in the mail regarding making the decision to elect NO IBM survivor coverage or elect IBM survivor coverage.

                                    In my case it will cost me $626.00 a year to take the survivor coverage.

                                    Would appreciage a sanity check on my decison.

                                    I would not take the survivor coverage.

                                    Wife is 15 months younger than I.

                                    I have a $112K life Ins. policy.

                                    She is not going to be hurting when I die.

                                    Might just as well use the $626.00 while still living.

                                    Am i not taking somethig into consideration?

                                    Thoughts?

                                    Dave BTV '92

                                  • EG Fine
                                    Agreed. Performed the same analysis, and came to the same conclusion. Ernie From: ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
                                    Message 17 of 19 , Oct 25, 2013

                                      Agreed. Performed the same analysis, and came to the same conclusion.

                                       

                                          Ernie

                                       

                                      From: ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of lastdino1
                                      Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2013 10:28 PM
                                      To: ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com
                                      Subject: RE: RE: RE: [IBM Retiree] RE: HRA Survivor Decison

                                       

                                       

                                      We looked at it as using the $250 a month to pay for our health insurance and if I die first she will use our retirement/401K funds to cover her HC. I do not want to give IBM $700 a year for maybe the next 10-20 years and then have them give my bride $1100 for 3-5 years after I go. The plan is IBM gets nothing .        Life is Great 



                                      ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                                      Here is my analysis of the situation (I am in the same boat as you are):

                                       

                                      You have a choice of either receiving $3,000 per year, or $2,374 with spouse coverage after your death.

                                       

                                      A.  If you choose $2,374 each one of you will have $1,187 per year ($98.91 per month). Not much, but it is stable (assuming IBM does not change it).

                                       

                                      B.  If you choose $3,000 now you each can spend $1,500 per year ($125 per month).  In this case:

                                           B1:  You die first, your spouse gets nothing.

                                           B2:  Your spouse dies first and you will continue with $125 per month ($26.09 more than case A)

                                       

                                      The difference between A and B is $26.09 each or $52.18 total now and $26.09 if she dies first. 

                                       

                                      The decision depends on each person's situation.  Is it worth $52.18 per month  to continue with the present insurance, or is it better to use that money to buy life insurance.  It depends on many factors, all very personal.



                                      ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                                      Per month? That would sure be nice – but most of us will get $3,000 per YEAR, which is $250/month. And the reduction is indeed about $626 per YEAR.

                                       

                                         Ernie

                                       

                                      From: ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of bmcfarlin
                                      Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 4:27 PM
                                      To: ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com
                                      Subject: [IBM Retiree] RE: HRA Survivor Decison

                                       

                                       

                                      Dave, I think everyone has to analyze their own situation.  In your choice just make sure you spend that $626 as part of the $3000. BTW, that's per month, not per year as your note refers to.   In my case, I'm comfortable choosing the survivor choice as I believe as time goes on, health insurance premiums will continue rise and the $1187 available to my spouse will ease that cost somewhat.



                                      ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                                      Received the letter in the mail regarding making the decision to elect NO IBM survivor coverage or elect IBM survivor coverage.

                                      In my case it will cost me $626.00 a year to take the survivor coverage.

                                      Would appreciage a sanity check on my decison.

                                      I would not take the survivor coverage.

                                      Wife is 15 months younger than I.

                                      I have a $112K life Ins. policy.

                                      She is not going to be hurting when I die.

                                      Might just as well use the $626.00 while still living.

                                      Am i not taking somethig into consideration?

                                      Thoughts?

                                      Dave BTV '92

                                    • lastdino1
                                      Yep just look at the history and use up all that subsidy money. Then you also need to plan for when they take it away. Life is Great ... Like someone else
                                      Message 18 of 19 , Oct 25, 2013

                                        Yep just look at the history and use up all that subsidy money. Then you also need to plan for when they take it away.    Life is Great 



                                        ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                                         Like someone else that mentioned it, I believe IBM will shaft us even more in the future, probably in the next year or two. Take the $3000 and run, because this offer is like the frog being slowly heated. We are being slowly heated and eventually will find no help from IBM. IBM has become even more vicious than other companies, if that is possible. What really amazes me is the fact that RHEE lied thru his teeth, when he said there would be more choices with ExtendHealth. He had to know his lie would be revealed as soon as we signed onto ExtendHealth and saw the few options we had, and how those options are much more expensive, and offer less. Just look at the dental offerings, the costs and the ridiculous limitations and low limits. 



                                        ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                                        I felt the same way, then came 2012-13.  Oct, stomach problems, April was told I had 3 to 6 months, Kidney Cancer.  Still fighting it and now the prognosis is 1 to 2 years.  You can bet I will keep the survivor coverage.



                                        ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                                        Some are arguing that the 3000/3500 could disappear in a few years anyway. Speculation, of course, but based on the history of other benefits eroding. 



                                        ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <K1OXD@...> wrote:

                                        Received the letter in the mail regarding making the decision to elect NO IBM survivor coverage or elect IBM survivor coverage.

                                        In my case it will cost me $626.00 a year to take the survivor coverage.

                                        Would appreciage a sanity check on my decison.

                                        I would not take the survivor coverage.

                                        Wife is 15 months younger than I.

                                        I have a $112K life Ins. policy.

                                        She is not going to be hurting when I die.

                                        Might just as well use the $626.00 while still living.

                                        Am i not taking somethig into consideration?

                                        Thoughts?

                                        Dave BTV '92

                                      • Michael
                                        Consider Rhee s statement may not have been a lie, just misleading. For 2013 IBM gave me 9 plans to choose from. I picked the Aetna Medicare Advantage PPO. For
                                        Message 19 of 19 , Oct 25, 2013
                                          Consider Rhee's statement may not have been a lie, just misleading. For 2013 IBM gave me 9 plans to choose from. I picked the Aetna Medicare Advantage PPO. For 2014 IBM is still giving me that one plan to choose from - the "choice" is take it or leave it. So if I decide to go with EH instead of IBM for 2014 I will have many more plans and options to choose from.

                                          I can stay on that plan for two more years and then must go with EH in 2016. This leads me to guess that IBM will get out of the healthcare business for all its employees and retirees in 2016 and we retirees are the pilot project for the mass exodus from IBM. Better for IBM to make its mistakes and learn from our less numerous population of retirees so they will be more prepared to do a better job of jettisoning current employees.


                                          On Oct 25, 2013, at 9:46 AM, grandpafromli wrote:

                                           

                                           Like someone else that mentioned it, I believe IBM will shaft us even more in the future, probably in the next year or two. Take the $3000 and run, because this offer is like the frog being slowly heated. We are being slowly heated and eventually will find no help from IBM. IBM has become even more vicious than other companies, if that is possible. What really amazes me is the fact that RHEE lied thru his teeth, when he said there would be more choices with ExtendHealth. He had to know his lie would be revealed as soon as we signed onto ExtendHealth and saw the few options we had, and how those options are much more expensive, and offer less. Just look at the dental offerings, the costs and the ridiculous limitations and low limits. 



                                          ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                                          I felt the same way, then came 2012-13.  Oct, stomach problems, April was told I had 3 to 6 months, Kidney Cancer.  Still fighting it and now the prognosis is 1 to 2 years.  You can bet I will keep the survivor coverage.



                                          ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                                          Some are arguing that the 3000/3500 could disappear in a few years anyway. Speculation, of course, but based on the history of other benefits eroding. 



                                          ---In ibmretiree@yahoogroups.com, <K1OXD@...> wrote:

                                          Received the letter in the mail regarding making the decision to elect NO IBM survivor coverage or elect IBM survivor coverage.

                                          In my case it will cost me $626.00 a year to take the survivor coverage.

                                          Would appreciage a sanity check on my decison.

                                          I would not take the survivor coverage.

                                          Wife is 15 months younger than I.

                                          I have a $112K life Ins. policy.

                                          She is not going to be hurting when I die.

                                          Might just as well use the $626.00 while still living.

                                          Am i not taking somethig into consideration?

                                          Thoughts?

                                          Dave BTV '92




                                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.