Setting Your Plan Up for Success During Open Enrollment Season

By making health benefits more affordable for employees and ensuring there is time to explore all offerings, one midsize employer saw increased engagement during open enrollment season.

 

After struggling to motivate employees to enroll in health benefits in years past, Whitney Stuckey, the people and development manager at real estate company the Paskin Group, saw tangible improvements in employee engagement after collaborating with benefits brokerage firm Nava Benefits during her plan’s open enrollment in June.

Strategies like consolidating all offerings into one benefits guide, making information easily accessible to employees and providing ample time to review options are recommended to plan sponsors looking to increase engagement, according to Nick Severson, a client manager at Nava Benefits.

Get more!  Sign up for PLANSPONSOR newsletters.

Addressing Low Enrollment

While open enrollment season is typically a two-to-three-week period in October or November for most employers, the Paskin Group, headquartered in Santa Barbara, California, starts its plan in July, requiring it to conduct open enrollment substantially earlier than most.

Stuckey says her plan needed more than 50% of its eligible population to be enrolled in the employer-provided health insurance offering to be considered a “large group” by its health insurance company. The Paskin Group is considered a medium-sized employer and currently has 86 employees.

“We had so many people waiving [benefits], because all of our plans were pretty expensive for our employees,” Stuckey says. “We were only covering 50% of the premium for all of our employees, regardless of the plan, and we had different tiers of plans. A lot of people who were waiving benefits were gambling a bit, because they were just hoping they didn’t have an injury.”

Severson explains that in California, medical benefits are “age-banded,” meaning that bands of older employees pay incrementally more than bands of younger employees if the plan is not considered a large group.

But once a plan is categorized as a large group, Severson says it becomes a more simplified, four-tier system with a fixed cost for each category: employee only; employee plus spouse; employee plus children; and family.

“This makes open enrollment easier, makes employees happier, and it’s just more plannable in terms of cost,” Severson says.

In order to be placed in the “large group” category of employers, Stuckey says she worked with her leadership team and figured out a structure the company could use to provide a higher contribution to the premium for the lowest tier of coverage.

For example, for the plan that offered the least amount of coverage, the company now offers to pay 80% of the premium, allowing employees to only pay 20%. For the medium tier, the company pays 70%, and for the gold tier, which offers the most coverage, the company pays 60%.

Stuckey says this change caused many more people to enroll, particularly in the lowest tier, and carried the plan past the 50% enrollment threshold.

“As much as you want to emphasize the [health insurance] plans and the importance of the benefit and being insured, employees care a lot about what’s coming out of their paycheck,” Stuckey says. “In the moment, they’re thinking about that biweekly deduction versus what the doctor bill is going to be.”

Now that the plan’s enrollment exceeds 50%, Stuckey is hopeful that for next year, she will have available more health benefits and more affordable health benefits.

Path to Increased Engagement

Stuckey says the Paskin Group began working with Nava Benefits in 2021 and found that the brokerage understood her predicament and wanted to help the company reach the goal of being classified as a “large group” in order to offer better benefits, all without blowing its budget.

During this summer’s open enrollment, Stuckey says Nava helped put together a benefits guide that consolidated all of the benefits available to employees. In one PDF document, the guide laid out the options for medical benefits and dental benefits, 401(k) contribution requirements, life insurance options and a page dedicated to the company’s Employee Assistance Program.

Inevitably, Stuckey says participants will be required to have multiple logins, such as for their health insurance or to check their 401(k) balance, but she found it effective to aggregate all the links to various benefit portals in one place.

“[The benefits guide] is something that we revise now every year right before we go through open enrollment, and we release that out before open enrollment even opens so that people have a week or a weekend to page through that [document] with a family member or by themselves,” Stuckey says.

Stuckey and her team also surveyed employees well before open enrollment and asked employees their thoughts about the benefits being offered and to identify any pain points. Many employees had concerns about the costs of benefits, which informed the team’s decision to subsidize more health benefits.

“Getting that engagement from [participants] proactively, as opposed to waiting to hear about it during open enrollment and hearing that people are overwhelmed or that they don’t like what they’re seeing … I think that’s really big,” Nava’s Severson says.

Severson adds that if a plan sponsor is conducting a virtual presentation about benefits during open enrollment, they should make sure the presentation is recorded and available for people to refer back to. Educating people about benefits in relatable terms is also essential, Severson explains, as some people might not know what a $10 copay means. He says providing an anecdote or story related to pieces of data will help people retain and understand the information.

“From an HR perspective, we understand this stuff because we’re talking about it every day,” Stuckey says. “Having set hours or benefits windows of time where people can come and ask questions is really beneficial.”

Plaintiffs File Dueling Motion in NYC Pension Funds ESG Lawsuit

Plaintiffs seek to add former U.S. Labor Secretary Eugene Scalia to their legal team.

Plaintiffs suing New York City Public Pension Funds for allegedly jeopardizing the retirement security of participants by permitting environmental, social and governance factors to be considered in the fund are seeking rejection of a motion to dismiss the case, according to their filing Thursday in New York State Supreme Court.

The plaintiffs argued against the defense’s request that the case be dismissed and said the litigation should proceed.

Never miss a story — sign up for PLANSPONSOR newsletters to keep up on the latest retirement plan benefits news.

The initial lawsuit, filed in May, alleged fiduciary breaches by five New York City public-employee pension funds for failing to administer the pension funds solely in the interests of the plans’ participants and beneficiaries and for the exclusive purpose of providing retirement benefits.

“The complaint amply alleges how defendants failed in those duties by openly, serially, and egregiously dividing their loyalties between plaintiffs’ interests and a social and political climate change agenda that defendants allowed to dictate how they administered the plans,” the attorneys for the plaintiffs wrote.

The city funds’ attorneys cited fatal failings they claim require the dismissal of the complaint, Wayne Wong et al. v. New York City Employees’ Retirement System et al.

“Plaintiffs’ brief changes nothing—this lawsuit is totally meritless,” New York City Law Department spokesman Nick Paolucci, says by email. ” [The pension funds] NYCERS, BERS, and TRS put their participants and beneficiaries first when they each decided to stop investing in fossil fuel companies, following years of financial analysis. The funds will respond in the litigation.”

The plaintiffs argued—in opposing the defendants’ motion to dismiss—that the defendants committed breaches of fiduciary duties regardless of the monetary losses suffered by plaintiffs and therefore demonstrated that a legally recognizable, tangible and redressable harm has occurred.

The defendants’ dual arguments for dismissal—lack of standing and failure to adequately allege fiduciary breaches—“are without merit,” plaintiffs’ counsel argued.

The plaintiffs’ attorneys wrote that there is precedent in “the common law and repeatedly affirmed by the New York Court of Appeals” that provides grounds for the case to proceed based on “defendants’ breaches of fiduciary duties, regardless of the pecuniary losses suffered by plaintiffs.”

Additionally, the plaintiffs argued that the pension funds breached the duty of loyalty by acting in their roles as plan fiduciaries to advance their own political and policy objectives ahead of the plaintiffs’ retirement interests, the attorneys wrote.

Plaintiffs’ counsel also requested the court admit former U.S. Secretary of Labor Eugene Scalia, a partner in Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP in Washington, D.C., to participate in the lawsuit. Akiva Shapiro, a litigation partner in Gibson Dunn, is the lead attorney, the filing shows.  

In 2018the New York City pension funds’ trustees set a goal to prepare a five-year strategy to sell assets in fossil fuel reserve holdings.

Four individuals that are members of the NYC pension funds—a subway train operator, a public school teacher, a school secretary and an occupational therapist in an elementary school—are the plaintiffs in the case. The conservative nonprofit Americans for Fair Treatment is also named as a plaintiff in the case, according to the complaint.

Request for comment to plaintiffs’ lawyers were not returned. 

The city pension funds are represented by Corporation Counsel of the City of New York, senior counsels at the New York City Law Department and attorneys with the Groom Law Group. 

«

 

You’re viewing the first of three free articles.

 Subscribe to a free PW Newsletter! 

…subscribing gets you free access to PW’s online content!

If you’re a subscriber, please login.

Close