<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	>

<channel>
	<title>healthcare &#8211; CalWatchdog.com</title>
	<atom:link href="https://calwatchdog.com/tag/healthcare/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://calwatchdog.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Mar 2015 05:57:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
<site xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">43098748</site>	<item>
		<title>BART strike would provide needed clarity on compensation, union power</title>
		<link>https://calwatchdog.com/2013/08/14/bart-strike-would-provide-needed-clarity/</link>
					<comments>https://calwatchdog.com/2013/08/14/bart-strike-would-provide-needed-clarity/#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Katy Grimes]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Aug 2013 21:00:26 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Breaking News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Columns]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Inside Government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pension]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[strike]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BART]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[union power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bay Area Rapid Transit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[average compensation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[benefits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public sector vs. private sector]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chris Reed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public employee pay]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[health care]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[$92 premiums]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[healthcare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Heritage Foundation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jerry Brown]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Katy Grimes]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://calwatchdog.com/?p=47889</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[If I was an advisor to Gov. Jerry Brown, I&#8217;d recommend he let the BART strike play out without government intervention. California would be much more governable if voters understood]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If I was an advisor to Gov. Jerry Brown, I&#8217;d recommend he let the BART strike play out without government intervention. California would be much more governable if voters understood that collective bargaining is holding taxpayers hostage, and more exposure to BART power plays by organized labor can only hammer that home.</p>
<div title="Page 1">
<p><img fetchpriority="high" decoding="async" class="alignright size-full wp-image-48004" alt="bart.job.action" src="http://calwatchdog.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/bart.job_.action.jpg" width="330" height="255" align="right" hspace="20" srcset="https://calwatchdog.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/bart.job_.action.jpg 330w, https://calwatchdog.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/bart.job_.action-300x231.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 330px) 100vw, 330px" />Instead, Brown announced Friday he will seek a court-ordered, two-month cooling-off period if a contract dispute threatens to stall commuter trains in the San Francisco Bay Area. Sunday, he <a href="http://calwatchdog.com/2013/08/12/art-laffer-dems-understands-taxes-too-high/" target="_blank">got his way</a>.</p>
<p>What does he expect to accomplish with another 60 days? What will negotiators do in 60 days that they cannot do now? This has been going on for months.</p>
<p>The situation is causing a ripple effect on peoples&#8217; lives and on both the Bay Area and the state economies.</p>
<h3>A &#8216;conversation&#8217; about high public pay</h3>
<p>Part of the concern surrounding BART is that in many cases the guy &#8220;driving&#8221; the BART train is making more than the guy sitting in the seat commuting to work in downtown San Francisco.</p>
<p>So if union leadership and sympathizers want to have a &#8220;conversation,&#8221; let&#8217;s have an honest one. The marketplace is out of kilter. According to the Heritage Foundation, private-sector employees <a href="http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/09/government-employees-work-less-than-private-sector-employees" target="_blank" rel="noopener">work longer hours</a>, and work harder. Private-sector employees typically have better education, and by necessity are entrepreneurial, seek to improve skills for advancement, and do it for about 30 percent less money. And there certainly are far fewer pay, benefit or pension guarantees.</p>
<p>The impetus behind this conversation is not jealousy; most just want public union employees such as BART &#8220;drivers&#8221; to be paid a fair wage for their skill set based on supply and demand. That&#8217;s not what happens in the current collective bargaining paradigm. It typically leaves the taxpayer on the short end of the stick because pay is a function of union power, and in California, unions are awfully powerful.</p>
<p>This is a key reason cities in California have been filing bankruptcy, and why<a href="http://watchdog.org/99256/is-california-really-back-10-cities-on-brink-of-bankruptcy/" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> many more are on the brink</a>. Local government simply cannot afford these inflated salaries and particularly the benefits associated with them. Contrary to what union leadership would have us believe, compensation costs are not a minor problem, and there is not an unlimited source of taxpayer funds.</p>
<p><a href="http://calwatchdog.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/bgovernmentworktimecomparisonchart2.gif"><img decoding="async" class="alignright size-medium wp-image-47928" alt="bgovernmentworktimecomparisonchart2" src="http://calwatchdog.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/bgovernmentworktimecomparisonchart2-300x216.gif" width="300" height="216" /></a></p>
<h3>Just the facts, ma&#8217;am</h3>
<p>The Contra Costa Times has done a stellar job of reporting on the BART strike and negotiations, and even <a href="The data shows employees from the two striking unions make around $78,000 to $81,000, including overtime." target="_blank">published the data</a> on the salaries of striking BART workers.</p>
<p>Employees from the two striking unions make $78,000 to $81,000 on average annually, including overtime. (This average excludes police and executives at BART which would bring the average pay of a BART employee even higher.)But their gross compensation is much more generous than one might think from those figures. That&#8217;s because workers pay only $92 per month for health insurance, regardless of how many dependents are on the plan. And they do not contribute anything toward their pensions.</p>
<p>The unions threatening another strike are<a href="http://www.seiu1021.org" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> Service International Union Local 1021</a>, which represents 1,430 mechanics, custodians and clerical workers, and <a href="http://www.atu1555.org" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1555</a>, which represents 945 station agents, train operators and clerical workers.</p>
<p>In July, Alicia Trost, BART spokeswoman, &#8220;said management has moved a great deal since its initial offer to employees in the talks, which began on April 1,&#8221; <a href="http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Union-Leader-Says-BART-Contract-Talks-Tuesday-Were-Unproductive-217695751.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">NBC Bay Area News </a>reported. &#8220;She said management initially wanted to &#8216;take back&#8217; $140 million from employees in wages, retirement costs and health care costs but its most recent proposal would give them an additional $33 million over the next four years.&#8221;</p>
<p id="paragraph11">Trost also said in July, BART doubled its salary proposal to an 8 percent increase over four years (beyond regular step raises), lowered its pension contribution demand to 5 percent of salary after four years, and cut its medical premium contribution to less than what average public and private sector employees pay.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s not remotely good enough for union leaders, who are asking for a 21.5 percent pay increase over three years and want to continue paying just $92 a month for health care and only want to make a 3 percent pension contribution at the end of three years, according to Trost, NBC Bay Area News <a href="http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Union-Leader-Says-BART-Contract-Talks-Tuesday-Were-Unproductive-217695751.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a>.</p>
<p>Here are the current pay averages, <a href="http://www.contracostatimes.com/data/ci_23585525/bart-contract-proposals" target="_blank" rel="noopener">thanks to the Contra Costa Times</a>:</p>
<table width="654" cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td></td>
<td>Average Base*</td>
<td>Median Base*</td>
<td>Average Gross*</td>
<td>Median Gross*</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>AFSCME</td>
<td>$91,371.29</td>
<td>$93,060.11</td>
<td>$104,392.04</td>
<td>$104,392.04</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>ATU</td>
<td>$56,184.97</td>
<td>$62,614.00</td>
<td>$78,369.22</td>
<td>$77,782.57</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>BPMA</td>
<td>$106,271.37</td>
<td>$109,638.48</td>
<td>$145,137.39</td>
<td>$142,576.74</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>BPOA</td>
<td>$74,170.49</td>
<td>$77,735.09</td>
<td>$98,864.11</td>
<td>$93,940.11</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>SEIU</td>
<td>$63,529.55</td>
<td>$73,410.40</td>
<td>$77,587.35</td>
<td>$80,504.36</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Non-Union</td>
<td>$106,006.04</td>
<td>$107,768.96</td>
<td>$110,936.99</td>
<td>$113,619.45</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>* Averages based on the 2012 pay of employees on the books as of July 2, 2013. <a href="http://www.mercurynews.com/salaries/bay-area/2012?Entity=Bay%20Area%20Rapid%20Transit" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Click here for a complete list of 2012 BART employee salaries.</a></p>
<p>The BART employees may get their increase, but at what cost to their community? To their state? What other costs will go up because of this? Will all transit workers in the state demand the same? One union success provides the impetus for others to gouge taxpayers to satisfy their greed.</p>
</div>
<h3>The truth? It&#8217;s an assault on the middle class</h3>
<p><img decoding="async" class="alignright size-full wp-image-47609" alt="unionpowerql4" src="http://calwatchdog.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/unionpowerql4.jpg" width="313" height="320" align="right" hspace="20" srcset="https://calwatchdog.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/unionpowerql4.jpg 313w, https://calwatchdog.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/unionpowerql4-293x300.jpg 293w" sizes="(max-width: 313px) 100vw, 313px" />Allowing BART employees higher salaries and benefits on their already-high compensation will only result in increasing costs and increased fares for the riders.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s too easy to negotiate with other people&#8217;s money, and even easier to end up giving it away.</p>
<div title="Page 2">
<p>The best summary I&#8217;ve read on the problem and solution is from a KQED reader who left this <a href="http://blogs.kqed.org/newsfix/2013/08/09/106379/BART-strike-transportation" target="_blank" rel="noopener">comment</a>:</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>&#8220;This debate is between taxpayers and labor. Management has zero skin in the game as does Jerry [Brown](except that he owes the same unions that helped get him elected).</em></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em></em><em>&#8220;Strike now &#8212; PLEASE. Let&#8217;s get on with it and cease this pretense of trying to &#8216;help&#8217;. </em><em>The sooner we start labor digging into its personal bank account of vacation time and savings to pay day-to-day bills during what &#8212; very hopefully &#8212; will be a very lengthy and extended strike, the sooner we interject an ounce of common sense into the discussion.</em></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em></em><em>&#8220;This the ONLY dynamic which will force labor to re-think its position.</em></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em></em><em>&#8220;Anything less is just an attempt to soften taxpayers willingness to pay these guys more.&#8221;</em></p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://calwatchdog.com/2013/08/14/bart-strike-would-provide-needed-clarity/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">47889</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Legislature Advances Dental Socialism</title>
		<link>https://calwatchdog.com/2012/02/14/legislature-advances-dental-socialism/</link>
					<comments>https://calwatchdog.com/2012/02/14/legislature-advances-dental-socialism/#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[CalWatchdog Staff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 17:08:34 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Inside Government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legislature]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[California budget]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[recession]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[California Legislature]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[darrell Steinberg]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republicans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sacramento]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Education]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax increases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[healthcare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unemployment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jerry Brown]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jobs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[waste]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[budget deficit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Katy Grimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[California]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.calwatchdog.com/?p=26083</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[FEB. 14, 2012 By KATY GRIMES As voters are growing increasingly wary of ObamaCare, the President&#8217;s nationalized healthcare plan, voters in California are also growing skeptical of legislators&#8217; attempts to]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>FEB. 14, 2012</p>
<p>By KATY GRIMES</p>
<p>As voters are growing increasingly wary of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ObamaCare</a>, the President&#8217;s nationalized healthcare plan, voters in California are also growing skeptical of legislators&#8217; attempts to increase statewide healthcare. Fully implementing health care for all has drawn legal challenges all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.calwatchdog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Health-Care-Protesters.jpg"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="alignright size-full wp-image-19830" title="Health Care Protesters" src="http://www.calwatchdog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Health-Care-Protesters.jpg" alt="" width="300" height="225" align="right" hspace="20" /></a></p>
<p>California&#8217;s latest version of state-funded health care recently failed to pass the state Senate. However, it is not gone. Expect to see it reincarnated.</p>
<p>And now, state government-funded healthcare advocates are proposing parsing out pieces of the health plan to try to get it passed. And they are doing this with the media&#8217;s help.</p>
<p>In late January, the state Senate Appropriations Committee passed single-payer health care bill <a href="http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=sb_810&amp;sess=CUR&amp;house=B&amp;author=leno" target="_blank" rel="noopener">SB 810</a>, by state Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, out of the committee on a party-line vote of 6-2. The committee estimated the cost of a single-payer healthcare system in the state to be as high as $250 billion annually.</p>
<p>However, the bill failed to pass the full Senate, surprising many supporters. This happened despite carefully scripted, dire warnings from legislators that  tooth decay in children can lead to a life in prison.</p>
<p>Leno didn&#8217;t even get enough votes from his own party to pass SB 810.</p>
<h3><strong>Next: Dental Care For All</strong></h3>
<p>Anyone observing the Legislature could see the next move coming from a mile away. Monday, Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg announced a state review of a Sacramento County pilot program that provides state-funded dental coverage for more than 100,00 low-income children.</p>
<p>Steinberg sent a letter to Department of Health Care Services Director Toby Douglas, and asked for an “urgent departmental review of the allegations with an accounting of proposed remedies to ensure timely access for more than 110,000 young patients whose dental needs are supposed to be met under the county’s managed care program.”</p>
<p>Steinberg’s letter is a response to a <a href="http://centerforhealthreporting.org/project/cavity-kids-poor-sacramento-children-have-low-access-dental-care" target="_blank" rel="noopener">story</a> by the <a href="http://www.chcf.org/projects/2009/chcf-center-for-health-reporting" target="_blank" rel="noopener">California HealthCare Foundation Center for Health Reporting</a>, which ran in The Sacramento Bee on Sunday, February 12, 2012. The story documented the many problems with the “geographic managed care” dental system.</p>
<p>Steinberg <a href=" http://www.chcf.org/projects/2009/chcf-center-for-health-reporting#ixzz1mN27zz00" target="_blank">referenced the report </a>by the CHFC Center for Health Reporting, a project of University of Southern California&#8217;s Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism. CHFC stands for California HealthCare Foundation.</p>
<p>The <a href="http://sd06.senate.ca.gov/sites/sd06.senate.ca.gov/files/Letter%20from%20Senate%20Pro%20Tem%20Steinberg_0.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">letter</a>, posted on Steinberg’s Senate <a href="http://sd06.senate.ca.gov/sites/sd06.senate.ca.gov/files/Letter%20from%20Senate%20Pro%20Tem%20Steinberg_0.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">website</a>, states, “It is with great concern that I write regarding the operation and apparent lack of oversight of Medi-Cal Dental Managed Care in Sacramento. I ask that you review the allegations and rectify the problems you identify.”</p>
<p>In what appears to be a carefully orchestrated legislative and media-supported event, Steinberg references the Sacramento Bee story as proof of the Medi-Cal dental need: “The February 12, 2012 article in the Sacramento Bee articulates the crucial patient need for timely and medically necessary dental care which is supposed to  be provided to patients enrolled in the Medi-Cal Program. Despite that state funding, disturbing specific patient cases as well as the department’s own data cited in the article make it abundantly clear that prevention and treatment services are woefully inadequate for those children most in need.”</p>
<p>The Sacramento Bee published an <a href="http://www.sacbee.com/2012/02/14/4261500/dental-plan-for-poor-kids-is-a.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">editorial today </a>which states, &#8220;Dental plan for poor kids is a mess.&#8221; The Bee charged that &#8220;no one from the state bothered to monitor the program to make sure children were getting the services for which the state paid.&#8221;</p>
<p>A recently published report funded by First 5 Sacramento also document severe issues with Medi-Cal Dental Managed Care in Sacramento,” Steinberg&#8217;s letter addressed.</p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.ccfc.ca.gov/Help/kids_teeth.asp" target="_blank" rel="noopener">report</a> Steinberg references is available on the <a href="http://www.ccfc.ca.gov/Help/kids_teeth.asp" target="_blank" rel="noopener">First 5 website. </a>First 5 states, “Based on a recent survey of over 20,000 California children, it is estimated that 50 percent of Kindergarteners have dental decay. Poor oral health not only causes pain and infection, it is also one of the most common reasons that children miss school. In addition, it can lead to impaired speech development, an inability to concentrate, lower self-esteem, poor sleep.”</p>
<p>According to many medical providers, the bigger problem is that the very low rate of Medi-Cal reimbursement does not always attract the most qualified dentists.</p>
<p>And there is no discussion anywhere of parental responsibility. It does not take money to make sure that children brush their teeth, and eat healthy foods.</p>
<h3><strong>Plan B</strong></h3>
<p>The constant legislative references to the important need for dental care have been telling. “Twelve million Californians went without some type of health care last year,” Leno said during Senate floor debate in January. “500,000 children missed school last year due to tooth decay. This is criminal.” Leno said that tooth decay leads to missing classes, which leads to dropping out of school, no diploma, no job and eventually prison.</p>
<p>An equally goofy analogy was used by Sen. Loni Hancock, D-Berkeley. “Medicare for all extends to every human being in California. Our prisons are filled with people who couldn’t succeed in school because of dental pain, because they couldn’t hear or see,” said Hancock, drawing the same analogy that a lack of health care leads to prison.</p>
<h3><strong>Government Funded Managed Care</strong></h3>
<p>Gov. Jerry Brown has proposed shifting hundreds of thousands of residents eligible for both Medi-Cal and Medicare into managed care plans, and claims that the moves will save the state close to $700 million. Brown has proposed authorizing the <a href="http://www.dhcs.ca.gov/Pages/default.aspx" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Department of Health Care Services</a> to submit a demonstration project proposal to the federal government this spring, which would shift thousands of people who are eligible for both Medicare and Medi-Cal, into managed or coordinated care plans in at least four counties, eventually expanding to 10 more counties.</p>
<p>Steinberg has his own answer to Brown’s plan: “I am seeking timely resolution to improving these vital dental services to enable patients to obtain the prevention and treatment services they deserve,” he wrote in the letter.  “Furthermore, the significant issues identified here raise the overarching concern of whether or not the state is prepared and equipped to proceed with any Medi-Cal managed care program expansions this year as proposed in the Governor’s January budget.”</p>
<p>Where many voters disagree is with the use of the word &#8220;deserve.&#8221; While government is expected to provide basic services which individuals cannot provide for themselves &#8212; roads, water, utilities &#8212; expanding government into the health care for all is a growing bone of contention.</p>
<p>Government-funded state health care is predictably sponsored by the California Nurses Association and the California School Employees Association, and  would have provided healthcare for all 37 million California residents.</p>
<p>Without passage yet, expect to see legislation and more attempts like government-funded dental care for all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://calwatchdog.com/2012/02/14/legislature-advances-dental-socialism/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">26083</post-id>	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!--
Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: https://www.boldgrid.com/w3-total-cache/


Served from: calwatchdog.com @ 2026-04-15 15:23:20 by W3 Total Cache
-->