A few of our stories and columns are now in front of the paywall. We at The Chief remain committed to independent reporting on labor and civil service. It's been our mission since 1897. You can have a hand in ensuring that our reporting remains relevant in the decades to come. Consider supporting The Chief, which you can do for as little as $3.20 a month.
To the editor:
The Chief’s coverage of the Municipal Labor Committee’s “selling” of members’ prescription drug data to EmblemHealth and United Healthcare for $100 million in savings (Feb. 27, “As part of cost-saving plan, MLC may share city employee healthcare data”) exposes the continued lack of transparency by leadership. Some unions had advance notice of this NYCE PPO contract requirement, while others were blindsided.
The ask by MLC leadership of each union to sign a confidential agreement consenting to the disclosure of sensitive personal information was couched in coercion. Unions were told that noncompliance would create a gap in health cost savings that could be used by the City as a cudgel in future negotiations and potentially pending arbitration.
It’s disconcerting that not only would the prescription drug data be used by the insurance companies (utilizing Artificial Intelligence!) to assign tiered risk scores to the rank and file (and their dependents), but that they wouldn’t be able to view those consequential ratings.
Unions should not be bulldozed into acquiescing. There needs to be transparent oversight of prescription drug data use. The risk scores must be disclosed to patients, and they must be able to appeal to actual human reviewers.
Harry Weiner
1 comment on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
wpeakes
I wholeheartedly agree! It seems the reason EmblemHealth and United Healthcare are willing to spend $100 million for the private prescription drug information of city employees is not to create efficiencies in service delivery but to create new tiered health insurance based on pharmacy usage. Simply put, based on what prescriptions are filled, a employee and/or their family can be assigned a higher risk category with higher copays, supplemental premiums, or denial of care. The lack of transparency regarding this decision is outrageous because there was no real attempt to inform the people most affected.
Friday, March 6 Report this