More information needed from Harvard to explain these change

We are all angry about these changes, the question is what we can do about it. Some of my colleagues and I have been considering requesting a meeting in which we ask the Benefits Office to respond to specific questions about what was considered and why this direction was chosen. To help those who are not able to express an opinion publicly, we thought we might try to pre-select questions via an anonymous voting process and then have the selected questions asked by either a faculty member or a member of the union. 

For example, I would like to know whether the committee considered changing the tiers so that there is a much lower cost for people paid below $95,000 and higher costs for people paid more than $150,000 and more than $250,000. It is absolutely wrong that there is no distinction between people making under $70,000 and people making under $50,000.  How much extra would highly-paid employees have to pay to save Harvard th4e same amount of money while still protecting the most vulnerable employees?

Would other people on the forum like to participate in such a meeting? What would your question be? 

That's a good one. What were the scenarios, who provided them and why?

I would also like to know whether any thought was given to the fact that pregnant women, who have been planning the birth of their children for over 6 months, would suddenly find that the cost of their hospital care had rocketed -- with the added worry that if their newborn baby has any issues, this would also have a financial impact.

I mean, they gave us 6 months to think through the "bring your own phone" policy. One month to adjust to a new healthcare policy really isn't adequate...

can you turn that into a question? e.g. Where did the information come from that the health care costs for the University had increased from 8% to 12%, how much of this has turned out to be due to rising staff numbers instead of rising per capita costs, and what do the per capita costs actually look like?

As I understand it from talking with a former member of the University Benefits Committee, Prof Nancy Kane and Prof Nancy Turnbull (both of HSPH) were asked to stop participating in the UBC in the summer of 2012. Then Bill Jaeger and Donene Williams of HUCTW were removed in the summer of 2013. Also, Prof David Cutler from FAS stopped participating in 2012, but it's unclear whether he jumped or was pushed... At least on paper, changes in the UBC membership are the province of Provost Alan Garber.

They knew the healthcare changes were coming which is why they took such a long approach with the bring your own phone rollout.  Bringing ubiquitous technology to work on your own dime is at least something I can appreciate as a policy - taking a pay cut as a result of healthcare changes is something I would have preferred to have more time with.