City Employee Health Plan Could Switch to Lower-Cost Company Under New Proposal

Hundreds of thousands of city workers and their dependents could have their healthcare shifted to a cheaper plan by 2024, documents show.

Sam Mellins   ·   June 15, 2022
EMTs respond to a person in distress on 125th Street in Harlem, July 20, 2021 | Ben Fractenberg/THE CITY

This article was published in partnership with THE CITY.


New York City is seeking to replace the main health insurance plan that it provides to its employees with a new, lower-cost option, documents obtained by New York Focus reveal. The shift is currently only a possibility under consideration, but if it goes through, roughly 750,000 employees, retirees and dependents will have their current insurance switched to an as-yet undetermined plan.


One goal of the potential replacement is to cut costs “by at least 10%” without compromising the quality of care or forcing city workers to pay more out of pocket, the documents say.


The plan that currently covers most city employees and their dependents, GHI Emblem Health, began covering municipal workers under the administration of Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia in the 1940s.


On Thursday, the city’s Office of Labor Relations will begin accepting submissions from health insurance companies outlining plans to replace GHI EmblemHealth. The “target effective date” of a new plan is Jan. 1, 2024.


The Municipal Labor Committee, a group representing most of the city’s local government unions, is supporting the move. In an email to union leaders reviewed by New York Focus, Ellen Medwid, executive secretary of the Municipal Labor Committee, said that the city’s request for information from insurance companies “will allow both the MLC and the City to become better educated as to possibilities to ensure quality care at a hopefully reduced cost.”


In the email, Medwid noted that the request for information “does not obligate any action” by the city or the unions, which could choose to simply continue with GHI EmblemHealth if they decide none of the proposals would be an improvement.


Medwid did not respond to a request for comment from New York Focus.


According to the documents, the city is seeking to “redesign” the plan to “provide a state of the art, cost-effective, member-focused program.” GHI Emblem health currently provides premium-free coverage for most public employees, younger retirees, and their dependents, with a zero dollar deductible and a yearly out-of-pocket maximum of $4,550 for in-network care for one individual.


Some health care experts doubt that cutting costs for the city by a tenth without raising costs for workers, while preserving the plan’s quality, would be possible. 


“They're clearly trying to cut the benefits, or the value of the health care benefits,” said Naomi Zewde, professor of health policy and management at the City University of New York. “People should stay aware of what might happen.” 


How the switch would affect workers largely depends on the details of a potential future plan. “I'm not sure if we can tell from this document what the risks might be to enrollees,” said David Meyers, a professor of public health at Brown. “It just depends on how they all come together in a new benefit package.”


The switch would also affect at least some retired city workers. Retirees who are younger than 65 and therefore not yet eligible for Medicare are generally still covered by GHI EmblemHealth. 


It’s not immediately clear whether the proposed plan redesign would affect retirees over 65, most of whom are covered through a different but related plan called Senior Care. 


“On the face of it it looks like they’re two separate plans,” said John Murphy, the former executive director of the New York City Employees’ Retirement System, the city’s largest pension fund. 


But Murphy added that the proposed switch could affect retirees covered by Senior Care “depending upon how they have them interconnected.”


For over a year, as part of a deal with the MLC tied to pay raises, the city has been attempting to save millions by switching roughly 250,000 retired employees from their current Medicare plans with free supplemental coverage to privately run “Medicare Advantage” plans that retirees say could cost more and cover less care. That initiative has been on ice since March, when a State Supreme Court judge ruled that city law barred the Adams administration from charging retirees for the coverage that they currently get for free.


A spokesperson for the city Office of Labor Relations did not respond to inquiries on whether Senior Care enrollees would be affected by the shift or to other questions about the potential change. A spokesperson for Mayor Eric Adams did not respond to a request for comment.


Marianne Pizzitola, president of the New York Organization of Public Service Retirees, the group that sued to stop the retiree health care switch, said that she understands the city’s desire to save money, but that it shouldn’t come at the expense of workers’ healthcare.


“You want to support them doing things that are fiscally sound,” she said. “I'm not saying that they should give me some crazy-ass Cadillac plan, but at the same time, don't diminish what I already have.”

At New York Focus, our central mission is to help readers better understand how New York really works. If you think this article succeeded, please consider supporting our mission and making more stories like this one possible.

New York is an incongruous state. We’re home to fabulous wealth — if the state were a country, it would have the tenth largest economy in the world — but also the highest rate of wealth inequality. We’re among the most diverse – but also the most segregated. We passed the nation’s most ambitious climate law — but haven’t been meeting its deadlines and continue to subsidize industries hastening the climate crisis.

As New York’s only statewide nonprofit news publication, our journalism exists to help you make sense of these contradictions. Our work scrutinizes how power works in the state, unpacks who’s really calling the shots, and reveals how obscure decisions shape ordinary New Yorkers’ lives.

In the last two decades, the number of local news outlets in New York have been nearly slashed in half, allowing elected officials and powerful individuals to increasingly operate in the dark — with the average New Yorker none the wiser.

We’re on a mission to change that. Our work has already shown what can happen when those with power know that someone is watching, with stories that have prompted policy changes and spurred legislation. We have ambitious plans for the rest of the year and beyond, including tackling new beats and more hard-hitting stories — but we need your help to make them a reality.

If you’re able, please consider supporting our journalism with a one-time gift or a monthly gift. We can't do this work without you.

Thank you,

Akash Mehta
Editor-in-Chief
Sam Mellins is senior reporter at New York Focus, which he has been a part of since launch day. His reporting has also appeared in The San Francisco Chronicle, The Intercept, THE CITY, and The Nation. 
Also filed in Health

New York’s home care workers are suing insurance companies for systematically underpaying them for grueling, around-the-clock work.

One Brighton Beach property connects political donations, Medicaid scams, and a Turkish charity

Suozzi’s unreported financial interest in a promising healthcare startup highlights blurred lines between politics and profit.

Also filed in New York City

The foundation offered few explanations for its hefty spending on overhead, or what it’s doing with millions in government grants.

New York could see more frequent and destructive blazes, but the state doesn’t have enough forest rangers and firefighters to respond to the growing threat.

Also filed in Labor

The Business Council, whose members include major warehouse owners UPS and Amazon, is pressing Governor Kathy Hochul to veto or amend the bill.

Nearly half of the state’s child care providers have raised tuition and a third have lost staff, a new report found.

Before Kathy Hochul paused it, the tolling program lost the little labor support it had when the Transport Workers Union withdrew its backing this spring.