|
Association of
Ameritech/SBC Retirees
Title: United Health vs. Advocate Hospitals Rift To all: I sent a letter this morning to SBC expressing our dismay over an article published in today's Chicago Tribune: As you may know by now, the rift between the Advocate Group and United Health seems to be wider than ever. I reminded them that this has been an issue that has spawned considerable concern with many of our retirees. I believe that if this article were to have appeared last week, some of SBC retirees in the Chicago area might have chosen HMO-Illinois. I find it incredulous that this appears shortly after most enrollment periods have closed. I have requested that SBC extend the enrollment period for Chicago area employees and retirees? I have requested a status report on Hospital coverage in Madison, Wisconsin also. Bruce Beckman President, AASBCR, Inc. INSIDE HEALTH CARE UnitedHealth-Advocate rift alive and well in wake of ruling BRUCE JAPSEN Published December 1, 2005 For Chicago-area customers of managed-care giant UnitedHealth Group, some hospitals and certain doctors affiliated with Advocate Health Care will not be showing up on UnitedHealth's list of providers anytime soon. A high-profile rift that began two years ago returned to the stage recently after a private arbitration panel ruled against United's antitrust complaint naming Oak Brook-based Advocate, the Chicago area's largest provider of medical care. United's United Healthcare of Illinois Inc. subsidiary and Advocate parted ways two years ago in a dispute about rates paid by the insurer to Advocate doctors and hospitals. In the dispute, United lobbed allegations of price-fixing and antitrust violations against Advocate in what Advocate contends was an effort to force more than 600 employed physicians and its eight hospitals to be paid lower rates. United also wanted more than $250 million in damages, Advocate said. But a private arbitration panel recently ruled in Advocate's favor, dismissing all counts against the medical-care provider. The antitrust allegations were arbitrated by a three-person panel of the American Arbitration Association, which adjudicates private commercial cases and labor disputes. The insurer said in a news release it's hopeful a "new relationship that is beneficial for its customers can be established with Advocate." Yet neither Advocate nor United can say when, or if, there will be negotiations. That means United customers will have to pay steeper rates if they want to use Advocate facilities and Advocate-employed doctors. Two years ago, more than 40,000 of United's customers were affected. Many had to choose new doctors and hospitals, although neither side can say for sure how many chose new providers in United's networks or eventually switched insurance plans to maintain access to Advocate providers. The bitter negotiations are still fresh in the minds of Advocate executives. "It was hardball," said Dr. Lee Sacks, executive vice president and chief medical officer at Advocate. Neither side would disclose the specific rate increases or percentages being discussed. "We continue to be open to having a contract with United," Sacks said. "We have not heard from United since the arbitration verdict. Time will tell." |