The rising cost of a college education is well understood by most students. We’re paying more and more to get our degrees. However, no conversation about rapidly increasing costs is complete without one under-the-radar expense – employee health benefits.
According to the Cal State University website, the CSU pays 95 percent of its employees health premium costs, the monthly fee charged by health insurance companies. Most private companies pay about 80 percent.
For the 2011-12 school year, that 95 percent came out to $356 million. By 2013, the annual cost for employee health coverage is expected to rise to $392 million, a $36 million increase attributed to inflation of medical expenses.
The CSU Board of Trustees will be voting soon on a new batch of student fees that would generate an additional $35 million for the CSU by charging students who are taking over 16 units, have taken more than 150 total units or are repeating a class. That sounds like a lot of money.
That is, until you consider employee medical costs alone will rise by $36 million over the next two years. Theoretically, all the money raised through the student fees could be put towards the new medical costs and still fall short of covering the tab.
I wonder if there are cheaper, more cost effective employee health care alternatives to Calpers, the California executive branch agency that manages the pension and health benefits of California public employees. I’m sure the CSU wonders too, but we’ll never know because the CSU is mandated by law to use Calpers. Any search for an alternative is out of the question.
I understand that CSU employees pay into their health coverage and that covers part of the total expense, but at what point does the CSU’s responsibility shift from providing for those who work or worked for it to providing California’s youth with an affordable education? How can medical costs be allowed to continue growing at the rate they have been? It’s unsustainable.
The problem is this topic raises more questions than answers. It does seem that measures have been put into effect to curb medical expenses.
Most new professors are hired as lecturers, part-time employees who do not receive the same benefits as full-time professors and therefore cost the CSU less money. This does not address the huge number of full-time employees and the new costs they will accrue in years ahead.
I’m not suggesting that medical costs are the biggest financial issue for the CSU – they’re not. I’m not saying CSU employees should have medical coverage taken away – they shouldn’t. But, if all options are on the table and the students are the CSU’s main focus, then the meteoric ascent of employee health care costs should be considered with everything else when it comes time to find a way to balance our budget.
Daniel Serrano is a senior double major in English and journalism and an assistant city editor for the Daily 49er.
