Union Members Rally to Support Co-Pay Change

Candles burned bright last night outside Massachusetts Hall as approximately 75 members of the Harvard Union of Clerical and Technical Workers (HUCTW) gathered to show support for a new proposal to cap the total amount of money members have to pay each time they see a doctor.

The Joint Committee on Benefits (ICB), made up of HUCTW members, University administrators and members of the faculty, has come to an agreement that no individual or family should have to pay more than $100 in co-payments. HUCTW leaders said yesterday.

"The whole committee agrees with that [$100 cap], but no one told [Provost Albert S. Carnesale] there's a Union," Donene Williams, the president of HUCTW, said at yesterday's rally. "So we thought we'd gather outside his office with a little fire to remind him."

The current benefits package for Union members includes a $10 fee that must be paid before any member can see a doctor.

Members built three snow-workers on the north side of Massachusetts Hall to keep the vigil through the night. Signs reading "Don't mess with the JCB" and "Harvard, don't get cold feet" were planted around the figures.

The group also serenaded Massachusetts Hall with a song entitled, "Workers's Wonderland," drawing applause from some student residents of the hall. The demonstrators then circled the building, singing "We shall not be moved."

Linda Schmeder, who works at University Health Services, said she came out to support the Union in their discussions with the University.

"They've been working with the administration for a long time," Schnieder said. "We're trying to respect the University's need for keeping down frivolous visits, but to the people who are...chronically sick, it's really important."

Bill Jaeger, the director of HUCTW, said he felt the plan was a good compromise between University and HUCTW interests.

"It's good, healthy, middle ground," Jaeger said last night. "The University was really vigorous in seeking the $10 per visit payment. But for people with chronic health conditions or a couple of kids who get a couple of earaches...some of our members could pay $500 to $600 in co-payments."

"That's too heavy a burden and isn't good policy," Jaeger continued. "I think almost everyone agrees...that there ought to be something in place to prevent inequity that could result from a flat co-pay."

The JCB, which has a subcommittee devoted solely to the subject of copayments, has been meeting for several months. Before the JCB was created with the signing of a new contract, HUCTW negotiators pointed to the co-payment as one of the chief difficulties in the benefits package.

In a letter sent to Union members in October, the HUCTW leadership said that before the new benefits package took effect this year, some changes would be considered, but yesterday was the first time any alteration was publicly expressed.

"In our view, all these issues can and should be studied thoroughly and modifications considered before their scheduled implementation date of Jan. 1, 1996," the letter read.

"The reason we need to go to Mass. Hall tonight is because we needed people who work in Mass. Hall to take this committee more seriously," Williams said in an interview last night. "It's January 11 and we don't yet have a published resolution. Ideally, we would have been able to announce it January 1."

Jaeger said HUCTW leaders have been in close contact with members who are particularly concerned about co-payments.

"We've tried to be in touch with our members. We're saying: 'Save your receipts,'" Jaeger said. "We expect to officially announce the program within the next two weeks."

"We'll go through whatever motions we need to," Jaeger said

"They've been working with the administration for a long time," Schnieder said. "We're trying to respect the University's need for keeping down frivolous visits, but to the people who are...chronically sick, it's really important."

Bill Jaeger, the director of HUCTW, said he felt the plan was a good compromise between University and HUCTW interests.

"It's good, healthy, middle ground," Jaeger said last night. "The University was really vigorous in seeking the $10 per visit payment. But for people with chronic health conditions or a couple of kids who get a couple of earaches...some of our members could pay $500 to $600 in co-payments."

"That's too heavy a burden and isn't good policy," Jaeger continued. "I think almost everyone agrees...that there ought to be something in place to prevent inequity that could result from a flat co-pay."

The JCB, which has a subcommittee devoted solely to the subject of copayments, has been meeting for several months. Before the JCB was created with the signing of a new contract, HUCTW negotiators pointed to the co-payment as one of the chief difficulties in the benefits package.

In a letter sent to Union members in October, the HUCTW leadership said that before the new benefits package took effect this year, some changes would be considered, but yesterday was the first time any alteration was publicly expressed.

"In our view, all these issues can and should be studied thoroughly and modifications considered before their scheduled implementation date of Jan. 1, 1996," the letter read.

"The reason we need to go to Mass. Hall tonight is because we needed people who work in Mass. Hall to take this committee more seriously," Williams said in an interview last night. "It's January 11 and we don't yet have a published resolution. Ideally, we would have been able to announce it January 1."

Jaeger said HUCTW leaders have been in close contact with members who are particularly concerned about co-payments.

"We've tried to be in touch with our members. We're saying: 'Save your receipts,'" Jaeger said. "We expect to officially announce the program within the next two weeks."

"We'll go through whatever motions we need to," Jaeger said