New health plan holds surprises
Students who purchase the UVic Students’ Society (UVSS) health and dental plan are not getting the best deal available, according to UVSS Chairperson James Coccola.
Under the new plan, which will take effect in September, students will pay $148 for health coverage and $140 for dental, totaling $288. The premium paid to insurance provider Greenshield is $256.08 per student; the extra $31.92 is collected by the UVSS as an administrative fee. This year, approximately $200,000 will be collected in administrative fees.
But Coccola, who campaigned on reforming the health plan, doesn’t feel the new plan is the best deal available.
“I think that if we’d done it differently, we could have done a better deal,” he said.
The contract for the new health plan was signed by outgoing Director of Finance Edward Pullman on April 29.
Coccola said he is disappointed this contract was signed before the incoming board had a chance to look at it.
“It’s really unfortunate that we are where we are,” he said.
Coccola says that, under UVSS policy, the Director of Finance is supposed to come to the board with contracts of this size, but adds “that hasn’t been followed in recent years.”
Pullman, however, says that, historically, it is the outgoing Director of Finance who signs the health contract for the incoming board.
“Typically, each year how it’s worked is the health plan and the handbook are handled by the previous board for the board coming in, because there are certain deadlines that have to be met,” said Pullman. “Basically there’s no precedent in previous years for that carrying over into the summer.”
Student Union Building (SUB)General Manager Marne Jensen, who has worked for the UVSS for nine years, agrees.
“It hasn’t come up as an issue with the new board in the past,” she said.
One issue new board members identified with the plan is a decrease in dental coverage from $1,000 to $750, and from two checkups per year down to one.
Pullman said this is due to an increase in usage of the dental coverage.
“Like any good insurance company, they’re going to say if you want to maintain that level of coverage, we’re going to have to jack up your premium substantially,” he said. “Sometimes it’s simply impossible to maintain a certain level of coverage without having to put up your fees and when you can’t put up your fees above a certain point you have to look at increasing your deductible.”
Jensen said Greenshield is reviewing the increase in dental usage.
“The insurance company is currently reviewing the dental claims to see if there are any unusual patterns or billing practices that could explain that,” she said, “but that’ll take some time.”
Pullman said if the current board isn’t happy with the contract, they have the ability to change it. However, he added, they are currently choosing not to.
“I believe that’s because they also realize that’s the best decision to make with the current situation,” said Pullman.
But Coccola said changing the contract simply isn’t easy to do.
“There is a risk in simply tearing up the contract. It could cost us money to tear it up,” said Coccola. “And we do need to have a contract in very soon.”
According to Pullman, the UVSS received two bids for the contract, Greenshield and a Quebec-based company called Desjardins. Pullman says that while both bids were good, Greenshield was selected because they offered greater flexibility for students opting out of the plan.
“I don’t buy the argument that the board finds that unacceptable,” he said.
The fact that the plan was signed by the outgoing Director of Finance is not the only thing worrying new board members, however. They are also concerned about the $200,000 that is being collected as administrative fees.
UVSS audits from 2007, 2008 and 2009 show administration fees of approximately $90,000 per year.
“There are obviously administrative fees to covering a plan like this. We have management that’s working on this very heavily and we have a lot of staff,” said Coccola. “But it shouldn’t cost as much as they’re charging for it. Where exactly it goes I’m not exactly sure.”
Jensen said the administrative fee goes towards the infrastructure that supports the health plan, including things like staffing the info booth, support services and the administration manager. She said the additional funds go into the operations fund to help balance the budget.
Current Director of Finance Kelsey Hannan said he didn’t know about the administration fee until he took office on May 1 and gained access to all the UVSS financial documents.
“[In spring 2009] our finance director made an agreement to reduce our coverage and our premiums. So they reduced the coverage by eight per cent. The quality of the plan went down. But instead of the plan becoming cheaper they increased the amount they took. And this was essentially a way of reducing the deficit,” said Hannan. “Basically what they did is they reduced student’s coverage, made the plan cheaper, but didn’t make the plan cheaper because they took the extra cut.”
Jensen also says that, while the amount the UVSS pays Greenshield decreased, the amount students paid did not.
“This past year we saw an eight per cent reduction in our premiums; we did not pass that to the students,” she said.
Jensen said that because of the UVSS’ financial situation, management advised the UVSS to take advantage of the fee.
“Because there’s a significant deficit coming from the strike and the cost of the wage package coming from the strike, we’re still struggling to rebalance the profitability of our operations,” she said. “And so we’re relying on heavily on the admin fee while we make the structural changes to bring the costs in line.”
Hannan does not feel this increase in administration fees is fair to students who purchase the health plan.
“It’s sort of a back door tax in some ways,” he said. “We’re getting this top up that we don’t think is right; I want to make that clear.”
While Coccola and Hannan want to see the administrative fee reduced, Hannan notes that doing so will not be an easy task, given the UVSS’ current financial situation.
“The scariest part about this is we’ve got $200,000 on the plan and we still posted a deficit that year,” he said. “That means even with this bump up we’re in a bad financial situation, and that means a lot of tough decisions.
“We’re even further behind than we thought.`
-with files from Gemma Karstens-Smith


28 Comments
The Martlet has an open comments policy and will endeavour to promote healthy discussion. We strive to act as an agent of constructive social change and will remove racist, sexist, homophobic, or otherwise oppressive comments.
Leave a Comment
David Foster May 13, 2010, 5:19 p.m.
I'm sure this is just the tip of the iceberg. What else have the UVSS execs been hiding, I wonder?
David Foster May 13, 2010, 5:19 p.m.
I'm sure this is just the tip of the iceberg. What else have the UVSS execs been hiding, I wonder?
Poh May 15, 2010, 10:48 a.m.
Fraud? Criminal charges for Pullman and Jensen?
Poh May 15, 2010, 10:48 a.m.
Fraud? Criminal charges for Pullman and Jensen?
Ross May 15, 2010, 5:06 p.m.
String'em up!!!! but first ask the current board if they are going to lower those fees, because i'm under the impression that they have that power. if they're not going to then it's hard to blame everything on Ed isn't it?
Ross May 15, 2010, 5:06 p.m.
String'em up!!!! but first ask the current board if they are going to lower those fees, because i'm under the impression that they have that power. if they're not going to then it's hard to blame everything on Ed isn't it?
Andrew A May 17, 2010, 5:18 a.m.
It's a shitty position for the board to be in no matter which direction we take. If you give it back to students you're now working with a deficit of roughly $250 000 and if you don't then you might be violating the UVSS constitution or Society Act, in addition to effectively gouging students on the plan.
Andrew A May 17, 2010, 5:18 a.m.
It's a shitty position for the board to be in no matter which direction we take. If you give it back to students you're now working with a deficit of roughly $250 000 and if you don't then you might be violating the UVSS constitution or Society Act, in addition to effectively gouging students on the plan.
Fly May 19, 2010, 1:57 a.m.
Luckily we have David and his trusty sidekick, Kailey, on the case! All will be resolved.
Fly May 19, 2010, 1:57 a.m.
Luckily we have David and his trusty sidekick, Kailey, on the case! All will be resolved.
albert May 20, 2010, 10:04 p.m.
Fly = Adam Friesen
albert May 20, 2010, 10:04 p.m.
Fly = Adam Friesen
lisa May 23, 2010, 3:30 a.m.
Why call Eddy names? What did he have to do with it? This is not something he would even have a clue how to do. What do you think the elected students do? Run the student Society? Think again. There's a General Manager. That would be the person making all decisions like this, not the student Finance Director. He probably didn't even know about it. Or was told that this is just how things are done. Too trusting!
lisa May 23, 2010, 3:30 a.m.
Why call Eddy names? What did he have to do with it? This is not something he would even have a clue how to do. What do you think the elected students do? Run the student Society? Think again. There's a General Manager. That would be the person making all decisions like this, not the student Finance Director. He probably didn't even know about it. Or was told that this is just how things are done. Too trusting!
Aria Alavi May 23, 2010, 4:04 a.m.
Well, Pullman signed a contract and trapped the new board members in a very complicated situation. However, Pullman Forgot that the current UVSS deficit is the fault of the current management ( people like Jensen) and the previous board members. Interestingly enough, with the huge deficit, the management salary has been increased drastically while the quality of students' health and dental plan decreased significantly.
Aria Alavi May 23, 2010, 4:04 a.m.
Well, Pullman signed a contract and trapped the new board members in a very complicated situation. However, Pullman Forgot that the current UVSS deficit is the fault of the current management ( people like Jensen) and the previous board members. Interestingly enough, with the huge deficit, the management salary has been increased drastically while the quality of students' health and dental plan decreased significantly.
Dylan Sherlock May 23, 2010, 7:20 p.m.
Hi Martlet readers, I'm one of your elected directors at large and a member of the finance committee (which scandalously, has not yet met). I feel the need to clear up an issue that may be misleading in this article and comments that follow it. Our new director of finance, Kelsey Hannan, has had the power to reduce the administrative fee for over a month now and in the article, he expresses that he is not interested in doing so, for the exact same reason why Eddie left it where it was. We're broke. Any claims that you wish to level at poor (gone) Eddie, now need to be laid entirely at Kelsey and the new board.
If students demand that we change the fee, we can and will. The administrative fee is entirely on our side and requires no real negotiation with the insurance provider (all they are concerned about is their own premium). However, I would agree with Kelsey that it would be a hard decision to cut it, because of the negative state of our finances right now. But, we could change it at any time, and put even the entire $31.92 administrative fee back into student's pockets. Not charging that fee would likely bankrupt our society... but well... It would be a bad idea, but we have the power to do so at any time. There is nothing sneaky about that, other than claiming, falsely, that it is out of our hands now. That is patently false.
Of course, we need to pay the costs of administering the health plan, as James has said, and beyond that bare-minimum (about half what we are currently collecting) I would guess that no one raised an eyebrow at this high fee before, because it helps us keep other programs afloat. Like I said, I agree with Kelsey, that our fiscal situation demands this
backdoorfee. But I acknowledge the problematic nature of it. If enough of our constituents express that they wish the administrative fee reduced or even revoked, I think we will need to have a serious discussion about it on the board. If you are one of those people angry about the fee, I am welcome to hearing any and all of your concerns, as I think any of the other directors will be.You can contact me at dylansherlock@gmail.com or Kelsey Hannan at finance@uvss.ca
Dylan Sherlock May 23, 2010, 7:20 p.m.
Hi Martlet readers, I'm one of your elected directors at large and a member of the finance committee (which scandalously, has not yet met). I feel the need to clear up an issue that may be misleading in this article and comments that follow it. Our new director of finance, Kelsey Hannan, has had the power to reduce the administrative fee for over a month now and in the article, he expresses that he is not interested in doing so, for the exact same reason why Eddie left it where it was. We're broke. Any claims that you wish to level at poor (gone) Eddie, now need to be laid entirely at Kelsey and the new board.
If students demand that we change the fee, we can and will. The administrative fee is entirely on our side and requires no real negotiation with the insurance provider (all they are concerned about is their own premium). However, I would agree with Kelsey that it would be a hard decision to cut it, because of the negative state of our finances right now. But, we could change it at any time, and put even the entire $31.92 administrative fee back into student's pockets. Not charging that fee would likely bankrupt our society... but well... It would be a bad idea, but we have the power to do so at any time. There is nothing sneaky about that, other than claiming, falsely, that it is out of our hands now. That is patently false.
Of course, we need to pay the costs of administering the health plan, as James has said, and beyond that bare-minimum (about half what we are currently collecting) I would guess that no one raised an eyebrow at this high fee before, because it helps us keep other programs afloat. Like I said, I agree with Kelsey, that our fiscal situation demands this
backdoorfee. But I acknowledge the problematic nature of it. If enough of our constituents express that they wish the administrative fee reduced or even revoked, I think we will need to have a serious discussion about it on the board. If you are one of those people angry about the fee, I am welcome to hearing any and all of your concerns, as I think any of the other directors will be.You can contact me at dylansherlock@gmail.com or Kelsey Hannan at finance@uvss.ca
Editor May 23, 2010, 8:44 p.m.
Comments that violate our commenting policy have been deleted.
Please contact edit@martlet.ca if you have any questions or concerns regarding our commenting policy.
Editor May 23, 2010, 8:44 p.m.
Comments that violate our commenting policy have been deleted.
Please contact edit@martlet.ca if you have any questions or concerns regarding our commenting policy.
Fly May 25, 2010, 9:40 p.m.
@albert
haha i'm flattered, but no.
Fly May 25, 2010, 9:40 p.m.
@albert
haha i'm flattered, but no.
Nicole May 25, 2010, 9:47 p.m.
Only Edward Pullman or Adam Friesen would be flattered to have someone believe that they're Adam Friesen. Therefore, it's one of the two.
I'm reasonably confident that most (if not all) of the weekly comments trashing the board and accusing The Martlet of bias are these two.
Adam Friesen and Edward Pullman are the pasty white, anonymous trash talking dream team supreme.
Nicole May 25, 2010, 9:47 p.m.
Only Edward Pullman or Adam Friesen would be flattered to have someone believe that they're Adam Friesen. Therefore, it's one of the two.
I'm reasonably confident that most (if not all) of the weekly comments trashing the board and accusing The Martlet of bias are these two.
Adam Friesen and Edward Pullman are the pasty white, anonymous trash talking dream team supreme.
Fly May 26, 2010, 12:59 a.m.
@Nicole, try again :)
Fly May 26, 2010, 12:59 a.m.
@Nicole, try again :)
David Foster June 14, 2010, 5:07 p.m.
@Dylan: I don't think the Board should necessarily get rid of the admin fee but they should reduce it to where it was before it was increased in spring 2009.
David Foster June 14, 2010, 5:07 p.m.
@Dylan: I don't think the Board should necessarily get rid of the admin fee but they should reduce it to where it was before it was increased in spring 2009.