|
Originally Posted by WhiskeyDelta
(Post 2394222)
I am paying only about $50 less a month in premiums for the Gold HSA at Delta versus for that PPO plan at my regional. Not even a close comparison. I was spoiled beyond belief with that great plan.
Edit: after the quick math you proposed, it was $5000 cheaper at my regional for a kid. Bottom line, we have room for great improvement in our plans. |
Originally Posted by OOfff
(Post 2394234)
Does that $50 difference include your HSA contribution? And is it a comparison of family premium to family premium?
No. Just premiums. The Gold HSA here is $348/mo. The $0 deductible and co-insurance plan there was about $400/mo for a family. Also, it had DAILY chiropractic maintenance visits for just a $15 co-pay per visit. I think I miss that the most. Again, really no comparison. We sorely lack in healthcare plans. As I've stated way above, this is my number one item next contract cycle. If we can't secure lower premiums and higher coverage. We at least need more funding from the company. To be clear, don't take any of this to suggest I'd rather be back there. Just pointing out that better does exist and I hope we can make gains going forward. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
Originally Posted by Sputnik
(Post 2393804)
As a military retiree I [for the moment] have pretty great healthcare. There are quite a few of us at DL.
Consequently healthcare isnt a super high contract priority for me. I concede that I may be shortsighted on this. What changes do your foresee that would motivate this chunk of our pilot group? |
Originally Posted by WhiskeyDelta
(Post 2394241)
No. Just premiums. The Gold HSA here is $348/mo. The $0 deductible and co-insurance plan there was about $400/mo for a family. Also, it had DAILY chiropractic maintenance visits for just a $15 co-pay per visit. I think I miss that the most.
Again, really no comparison. We sorely lack in healthcare plans. As I've stated way above, this is my number one item next contract cycle. If we can't secure lower premiums and higher coverage. We at least need more funding from the company. To be clear, don't take any of this to suggest I'd rather be back there. Just pointing out that better does exist and I hope we can make gains going forward. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
Originally Posted by OOfff
(Post 2394712)
Losing chiropractic coverage is probably for the better. Quackery shouldn't be included
With a statement like that I hope you have experience with one. If you have then you didn't go to a good one. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
Originally Posted by OOfff
(Post 2394712)
Losing chiropractic coverage is probably for the better. Quackery shouldn't be included
|
Originally Posted by notEnuf
(Post 2394715)
If you have never had back issues, you wouldn't understand. Relief without medication is just that. Relief WITHOUT medication. No narcotics is a good thing if you want to fly.
With a statement like that, I hope you have experience with narcotics. If you do then you didn't use a good one. .....just couldn't resist! [emoji6] Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
Originally Posted by WhiskeyDelta
(Post 2394714)
With a statement like that I hope you have experience with one. If you have then you didn't go to a good one.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
Vicodin was the wonder drug of the 90's. Got me a 2 weeks off one summer. Getting high and flying are two different things... unless your in the Denver airport. :D
|
Originally Posted by notEnuf
(Post 2394715)
If you have never had back issues, you wouldn't understand. Relief without medication is just that. Relief WITHOUT medication. No narcotics is a good thing if you want to fly.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:48 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands