Benefits Changes Raise Complaints

The changes in Harvard's benefits structure, though reached after months of deliberation, are not without their problems, some insiders said yesterday.

A central administration task force, assisted by several advisory groups, worked for months on reviewing and changing Harvard's complex employee benefits system. The major changes were announced to those affected--confidential support staff, exempt staff and faculty--last month.

A statement released by the University says fringe benefit expenses paid by Harvard's schools and departments are expected to fall by about $10 million per year.

According to Candace R. Corvey, associate vice president for human resources, major changes will include some of the following:

*the amount Harvard contributes to health insurance premiums will be pegged to a percentage of the lowest-cost health plans available;

*co-payments for office visits will be uniformly $10, rather than ranging from $0 to $10;

*the University will pro-rate to some degree health benefits for part-time employees;

*Delta Dental will take over from Prudential as the University's dental care benefits provider;

*Harvard will lower its annual contribution to the faculty pension plan by one percentage point;

*Future retirees will be responsible for a share of their medical premiums;

*Harvard will offer new volume discount insurance programs.

The changes will be phased in over several years.

Corvey said the decision-making process was very difficult.

"It would have been a much easier process if one of the major issues had not been cost containment," Corvey had to make a compromise between wanting to respond to the express desires of employees and the need to reduce costs."

Corvey said that the plan has some noticeable benefits for employees. For example, employees now have access to in-house programs such as mortgage and other financing and automobile insurance designed to reduce costs through volume discounts.

And she said the task force felt the final product was "fair," impacting a "wide spectrum" of employees.

But she also said part-time employees, formerly covered the same as full-time employees, are going to be hit hardest by the changes.

"The fact that the University's contributions will be pro-rated is going to be difficult for them," Corvey said.

Bill Jaeger, director of the Harvard Union of Clerical and Technical Workers (HUCTW), said yesterday that the union, which publicly criticized the system of benefits review, is most concerned about the effects of the changeson part-time employees.

Members of HUCTW, like those of Harvard's othereight employee unions, will not be directlyaffected by the changes, as their benefits are setby prior contract. But the changes are expected tobe a factor come renegotiation time.

"We've been spending a fair amount of timetrying to analyze and understand what's in thatpackage," Jaeger said. "We're seeing this as areally serious set of changes."

He said that, however, the union was not toosurprised that they had problems with the finalproduct considering their disagreements with thereview structure.

As set up by the University, the review processwas to be headed by a task force consisting ofadministrators, with faculty and staff representedby advisory committees. The union publiclyrequested a seat on the task force, saying theyfelt their appointed role was insufficient.

"Our sense of people who would make sacrificesfor this plan [are] part-time people andretirees," Jaeger said. "We have some doubts aboutwhether this set of changes asks for greatercontributions from the right people."

Jaeger said that, while there have not beenextensive discussions, the nine Harvard unionshave talked about the plan with each other andplan further analysis.

"We're not going to be sympathetic to theUniversity's argument that we should embrace thesechanges for the sake of consistency," he said,referring to HUCTW.

But Corvey said feedback received from aspecial hotline and three informational meetingshas been fairly positive.

The hotline has received about 20 calls per daysince it was set up late in June, and about 200people attended the three meetings that samemonth.

"There are, of course, people who areunhappy...[but] it's virtually impossible toplease everyone," Corvey said. "In the end, wewere comfortable [that] it was the right way togo.

Members of HUCTW, like those of Harvard's othereight employee unions, will not be directlyaffected by the changes, as their benefits are setby prior contract. But the changes are expected tobe a factor come renegotiation time.

"We've been spending a fair amount of timetrying to analyze and understand what's in thatpackage," Jaeger said. "We're seeing this as areally serious set of changes."

He said that, however, the union was not toosurprised that they had problems with the finalproduct considering their disagreements with thereview structure.

As set up by the University, the review processwas to be headed by a task force consisting ofadministrators, with faculty and staff representedby advisory committees. The union publiclyrequested a seat on the task force, saying theyfelt their appointed role was insufficient.

"Our sense of people who would make sacrificesfor this plan [are] part-time people andretirees," Jaeger said. "We have some doubts aboutwhether this set of changes asks for greatercontributions from the right people."

Jaeger said that, while there have not beenextensive discussions, the nine Harvard unionshave talked about the plan with each other andplan further analysis.

"We're not going to be sympathetic to theUniversity's argument that we should embrace thesechanges for the sake of consistency," he said,referring to HUCTW.

But Corvey said feedback received from aspecial hotline and three informational meetingshas been fairly positive.

The hotline has received about 20 calls per daysince it was set up late in June, and about 200people attended the three meetings that samemonth.

"There are, of course, people who areunhappy...[but] it's virtually impossible toplease everyone," Corvey said. "In the end, wewere comfortable [that] it was the right way togo.