New Medical Shenanigans
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Oct 2017
Posts: 306
New Medical Shenanigans
Buried in the new benefits package is a potential landmine, the mandatory review by a company selected doctor. Before the company will pay for a spine procedure you must get an eReview. Based on this review they can force you to go to travel to another state, for their doctor to look at you. Think of this as an arbitration hearing for your healthcare. The company is willing to pay to fly you, and put you up in a hotel to see this doctor. How do you think he is going to find for your upcoming procedure? Now in any fights with the insurance company you will have your doctors vs this company shill.
We have seen how this works in "binding arbitration", where the arbitrators are chosen by the company. The outcomes are nearly always in the companies favor, and if they aren't damages awarded are tiny. Right now its limited to spinal care (good thing pilots don't get back pain), but I expect this to expand.
Here is the full text:
A note about Spine Support: Before your spine procedure can be covered by JetBlue Medical, Crewmembers and dependents will need to have a mandatory eReview from experts at Mayo Clinic, which is covered at 100%. If onsite travel to Mayo Clinic is recommended, the cost is covered by JetBlue, based on your Medical Option.
We have seen how this works in "binding arbitration", where the arbitrators are chosen by the company. The outcomes are nearly always in the companies favor, and if they aren't damages awarded are tiny. Right now its limited to spinal care (good thing pilots don't get back pain), but I expect this to expand.
Here is the full text:
A note about Spine Support: Before your spine procedure can be covered by JetBlue Medical, Crewmembers and dependents will need to have a mandatory eReview from experts at Mayo Clinic, which is covered at 100%. If onsite travel to Mayo Clinic is recommended, the cost is covered by JetBlue, based on your Medical Option.
#2
On Reserve
Joined APC: Jun 2019
Posts: 11
Will a doctor at the Mayo Clinic be a quack company shill or an ethical medical professional who upholds the hipocratic oath? I’m thinking the latter. Especially for something as important as a spine procedure. The Mayo Clinic isn’t Bob’s Corner Spine Surgery.
#3
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Oct 2017
Posts: 306
I didnt know that doctors can't be corrupted. I guess that all those drug reps paid bug money to giveout free vacations, and kickbacks in exchange for their drug being pushed in clinics were misguided.
So in your mind arbitrators chosen by the company are fair minded and neutral as well? I mean, they are members of the bar so...
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: Admiral
Posts: 726
Having access to the Mayo Clinic is a pretty big deal. With the reputation that the Mayo Clinic has, I find it highly unlikely that anyone would willfully tarnish it, let alone risk ruining their personal careers for the likes of JetBlue.
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Oct 2017
Posts: 306
Having access, and being mandated to go there are two different things.
Last year, if your doctor thought you needed spine surgery, you got it. Next year that won't be the case. Why do you think that is?
It must be because jetblue cares so much about us.
Last year, if your doctor thought you needed spine surgery, you got it. Next year that won't be the case. Why do you think that is?
It must be because jetblue cares so much about us.
#6
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: Admiral
Posts: 726
Honestly, I'd much rather have the second opinion from the mayo clinic. If it could save me from an unnecessary spinal surgery (and all the issues that go with it) vs other effective medical treatments, I'm all for it.
Quite often, surgery isn't the best option but is still what surgeons opt for.
A quick google search finds this: https://www.npr.org/templates/story/...ryId=125627307
Sure, why wouldn't the company want to save money if it's not even needed for effective treatment? If it helps you why not? If it keeps my insurance premiums down, why not?
Sounds more to me that you like getting upset for the sake of being upset, especially when it's the Mayo Clinic and not some fly by night dr.
Quite often, surgery isn't the best option but is still what surgeons opt for.
A quick google search finds this: https://www.npr.org/templates/story/...ryId=125627307
Sure, why wouldn't the company want to save money if it's not even needed for effective treatment? If it helps you why not? If it keeps my insurance premiums down, why not?
Sounds more to me that you like getting upset for the sake of being upset, especially when it's the Mayo Clinic and not some fly by night dr.
#7
Covfefe
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,001
Honestly, I'd much rather have the second opinion from the mayo clinic. If it could save me from an unnecessary spinal surgery (and all the issues that go with it) vs other effective medical treatments, I'm all for it.
Quite often, surgery isn't the best option but is still what surgeons opt for.
A quick google search finds this: https://www.npr.org/templates/story/...ryId=125627307
Sure, why wouldn't the company want to save money if it's not even needed for effective treatment? If it helps you why not? If it keeps my insurance premiums down, why not?
Sounds more to me that you like getting upset for the sake of being upset, especially when it's the Mayo Clinic and not some fly by night dr.
Quite often, surgery isn't the best option but is still what surgeons opt for.
A quick google search finds this: https://www.npr.org/templates/story/...ryId=125627307
Sure, why wouldn't the company want to save money if it's not even needed for effective treatment? If it helps you why not? If it keeps my insurance premiums down, why not?
Sounds more to me that you like getting upset for the sake of being upset, especially when it's the Mayo Clinic and not some fly by night dr.
Why would anybody favor healthcare mandates? What if they decide to change “mayo clinic” to “jetblue clinic with jetblue doctor,” or some fly by night garbage medical facility…would you still be in favor of it? What if they expand it from spine to any other procedure? What if this adds 6 months to your wait time while you’re out on disability unable to work? You’re focusing too much on the details of “spine, second opinion, and Mayo Clinic,” and not the broader implications of company controlled and micromanaged healthcare with the ability to put somebody of their choosing on payroll to be the arbiter of what and potentially when medical procedures can or can’t be performed. Of course it starts with something that doesn’t seem like a bad idea on the surface (rare surgery that often should have a second opinion anyway, by a big name trusted medical group). But this would be opening pandora’s box.
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,327
What is preventing you from getting a second opinion as it is? If this was an addition that said “you *can* now get a second opinion by the Mayo Clinic for spine surgery at JetBlue’s expense,” that’d be one thing. But it’s not. It’s a mandate. They choose what procedure they want to further look into, they choose the doctor, all on their terms.
Why would anybody favor healthcare mandates? What if they decide to change “mayo clinic” to “jetblue clinic with jetblue doctor,” or some fly by night garbage medical facility…would you still be in favor of it? What if they expand it from spine to any other procedure? What if this adds 6 months to your wait time while you’re out on disability unable to work? You’re focusing too much on the details of “spine, second opinion, and Mayo Clinic,” and not the broader implications of company controlled and micromanaged healthcare with the ability to put somebody of their choosing on payroll to be the arbiter of what and potentially when medical procedures can or can’t be performed. Of course it starts with something that doesn’t seem like a bad idea on the surface (rare surgery that often should have a second opinion anyway, by a big name trusted medical group). But this would be opening pandora’s box.
Why would anybody favor healthcare mandates? What if they decide to change “mayo clinic” to “jetblue clinic with jetblue doctor,” or some fly by night garbage medical facility…would you still be in favor of it? What if they expand it from spine to any other procedure? What if this adds 6 months to your wait time while you’re out on disability unable to work? You’re focusing too much on the details of “spine, second opinion, and Mayo Clinic,” and not the broader implications of company controlled and micromanaged healthcare with the ability to put somebody of their choosing on payroll to be the arbiter of what and potentially when medical procedures can or can’t be performed. Of course it starts with something that doesn’t seem like a bad idea on the surface (rare surgery that often should have a second opinion anyway, by a big name trusted medical group). But this would be opening pandora’s box.
#9
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Posts: 322
Without knowing any details, it's possible that this change was recommended to the company for loss prevention and/or fraud prevention. If similar companies were seeing a trend of, say, higher disability claims for "lower back pain", and one way to screen out false claims was to require a workup by a competent facility, then it might be worth it to eat the cost of such screening.
#10
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: Admiral
Posts: 726
What is preventing you from getting a second opinion as it is? If this was an addition that said “you *can* now get a second opinion by the Mayo Clinic for spine surgery at JetBlue’s expense,” that’d be one thing. But it’s not. It’s a mandate. They choose what procedure they want to further look into, they choose the doctor, all on their terms.
Why would anybody favor healthcare mandates? What if they decide to change “mayo clinic” to “jetblue clinic with jetblue doctor,” or some fly by night garbage medical facility…would you still be in favor of it? What if they expand it from spine to any other procedure? What if this adds 6 months to your wait time while you’re out on disability unable to work? You’re focusing too much on the details of “spine, second opinion, and Mayo Clinic,” and not the broader implications of company controlled and micromanaged healthcare with the ability to put somebody of their choosing on payroll to be the arbiter of what and potentially when medical procedures can or can’t be performed. Of course it starts with something that doesn’t seem like a bad idea on the surface (rare surgery that often should have a second opinion anyway, by a big name trusted medical group). But this would be opening pandora’s box.
Why would anybody favor healthcare mandates? What if they decide to change “mayo clinic” to “jetblue clinic with jetblue doctor,” or some fly by night garbage medical facility…would you still be in favor of it? What if they expand it from spine to any other procedure? What if this adds 6 months to your wait time while you’re out on disability unable to work? You’re focusing too much on the details of “spine, second opinion, and Mayo Clinic,” and not the broader implications of company controlled and micromanaged healthcare with the ability to put somebody of their choosing on payroll to be the arbiter of what and potentially when medical procedures can or can’t be performed. Of course it starts with something that doesn’t seem like a bad idea on the surface (rare surgery that often should have a second opinion anyway, by a big name trusted medical group). But this would be opening pandora’s box.
Where we perhaps differ, is that I don't buy into slippery slope arguments.
Looking at the singular issue at hand, I think it's ultimately a good thing for the pilot group.
Had any number of variables been different, I would perhaps have another opinion about it.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post