health benfits

[mbozek]

Cal. recently enacted a law which requires that employees in insured health plans who exhaust their 18 months of cobra coverage under fed law must be offerred the opportunity to extend their cobra benefits for an additional 18 months. The law was effective for employees terminating 1/1/03 which means that employees will be eligible beginning 7/1/04. Has this law been challenged by employers or trade associations because it imposes administrative burdens on plan administrators to provide notice to employees by amending their cobra notices and directing them to the appropriate HMO or insurer?

[Mary C]

The new law has not been challenged as of today. California has based this new law on their older law, Senate Bill 761, which only mandated insurance companies to continue coverage for COBRA participants age 60 and over at the time of the qualifying event. Senate Bill 761 placed the same notification burden on employers that the Cal Cobra extension does and to the best of my knowledge it has not been challenged since it was passed in 1997.

[Guest AHayhow]

Are Plan Administrators required to send a new initial notice for the CAL COBRA law to participants that relocate to California?

[Guest cherryred]

I keep reading that this law does not apply to self-insured plans, but I can't seem to find the language that exempts these plans. Does anyone have a cite to which they can refer me?

[Mary C]

Try California AB Bill 1401

I think it amends the following sections:

California Health & Safety Code 1373.621

California Insurance Code 10116.5

California Labor Code 2807.5

[Guest cherryred]

I have read and read AB 1401. I have even gone back to the original law to find the definition of health care service plan. I don't see how self-insured plans are carved out. Does anyone know how we get to this result - case law, perhaps? Thanks.

[mbozek]

ERISA 514(a) preempts state laws that apply to noninsured plans.