Health care makes strange bedfellows, and there is perhaps no odder combination than UAW Pres. Ron Gettelfinger and Sen Orrin Hatch (R-Utah). Especially when both agree that health care is a national crisis, and both are affiliated with organizations that agree the feds should guarantee health care access to all.
In a landmark speech a couple days ago, UAW President Ron Gettelfinger acknowledged the cost of health care benefits is one of the key problems facing the declining US auto industry, and called for the union’s 600,000 members to be part of the solution. In his hour-long speech, Gettelfinger mentioned health care a dozen times, paying special attention to national health care policy. He blamed Pres. Bush for a failure to address the problem, and specifically called for a national single payer approach. But readers who only absorb that sound bite miss Gettelfinger’s core message; without a rational approach to health care, the US will not survive economically. Here are a few quotes…
“U.S. automakers (are) at a severe competitive disadvantage…It’s time to level the playing field. Health care is another area where we are at a competitive disadvantage…”
“In the 2003 national auto negotiations we were successful at preserving health care. However, last year the financial situation at GM and Ford was such that our retiree’s health care was at risk and I made the difficult decision to negotiate an agreement to address the huge and growing retirees’ health care liability carried by these companies.”
The UAW knows that economic survival depends on a competitive automobile industry, and with health care costs at Ford and GM totaling $9 billion, that survival is in doubt.
“Assuring health care is a shared social responsibility.” No, that’s not another line from Gettelfinger’s speech, but rather from the interim report of the Citizens’ Health Care Working Group, a non-partisan Congressionally-funded research project started by Sens. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Ron Wyden (D-OR). This statement came out in the group’s preliminary report, along with a recommendation that the federal government guarantee access to health care for all Americans.
Sure, there are differences in approach, but there are a lot more similarities than differences. Could it be that we’re getting closer to addressing the health care problem?
Jun
14
Everyone was horrified when it was disclosed that WalMart was screening perspective employee’s for those who ‘looked healthy’. However, as a small employer, if I hire the most qualified candidate and that person turns out to have chronic health issues, I KNOW my premiums will be going up next year. Ethically, I don’t feel right to try and ‘guess’ the health status of job candidates. Once I start ‘passing’ on the candidate who smells of cigarette smoke, next is the overweight candidate, then the older worker, then the young women (who might get pregnant). We’re right back to the 1950’s and civil rights discrimination. I have resisted the impluse to screen for health status. But am I in the majority or minority of employers? I’m not much of a fan of Senator Hatch, nor of the UAW. However, they are on target with Universal Health Care.