Lawsuit Possible to Regain UC Health Care
By The Independent
Those who were hired at Lawrence Livermore
National Laboratory before 1990 appear to have a Òviable claimÓ to be reinstated
to University of California health programs, according to attorneys for the
Lawrence Livermore Laboratory Retiree Group.
Those who retired in 1990 or later might also
have a claim. However, it could be less solid because 1990 seems to be the
first year that UC Regents reserved the right to make unilateral changes to
retiree benefits.
The attorneys have formed tentative
conclusions based on interviews and on public documents as well as those
contained in the files of retirees. To find out for sure, the attorneys
advise, it will be necessary to file suit to determine whether there are still
more documents indicating what claims the Regents made, when they made them,
and how they communicated them to retirees if at all.
Lawrence Livermore Lab employees and retirees
were provided UC group health coverage under a succession of contracts that
lasted more than 50 years but ended in 2008, when a new contractor took over
Laboratory management from University of California. At the time, the new
contract promised continued benefits that were Òsubstantially equivalentÓ to
UCÕs. However, the new contractor changed them a year later.
In order to take the next step toward
regaining UC health benefits, Retiree Group leader Joe Requa says, the group
will need to generate a budget of $75,000 to $150,000 to cover legal costs.
In an email earlier this month, he surveyed
Retiree Group members to learn whether they would support the continued effort,
including raising more money. Most responders are willing to do so, he
said. Retiree Group leaders will soon meet to discuss next steps,
including whether to conduct a formal ballot before undertaking a major
fund-raising effort, he said.
The group already has financial
reserves. Last summer, while emphasizing its wish to avoid legal action,
it raised some $80,000 Ñ more than enough to hire three legal firms for an
analysis based on their expertise in labor, employment and administration
issues.
Further fund-raising is needed to be sure the
groupÕs Legal Defense Fund can cover all costs prior to signing a contract for
formal legal action, Requa says.
The next legal step would include a
court-enforced ÒdiscoveryÓ process in which UC is required to produce relevant
documents.
ÒBetween 1962 and 2005, the Regents passed or
modified provisions relating to retiree medical benefits more than one hundred
times,Ó Requa wrote in an email to Retiree Group members. Most of the
older records are Òavailable only on microfiche,Ó which must be examined through
multiple appointments to visit UCÕs Office of the President Ð an impracticable
task, he said. Newer records are on line but are less relevant to the
retiree case.
ÒBy filing suit, we should be able to compel
UC to provide all of the relevant records as part of the ÔdiscoveryÕ process.Ó
That would not be the end of the legal action
or of costs, however, he advised retirees. The following step, if
retirees were willing to proceed, would be a trial or hearing in which
Òretirees are required to proveÉthat we are entitled to an injunction (or the
equivalent) returning us to the UC system, or alternatively, to an award of
monetary damages.Ó
He compared the situation to a poker game in
which Òthe hand looks favorable and we need to decide whether to fold or match
the current bid. If we match the current bid and get a poor hand we can fold.
If we get a good hand, we will have to decide if we can afford to stay in the
game, unless the opposition folds.
ÒThe amount we need to stay in the game for
the moment is probably in the $75,000 to $150,000 range.Ó
Longer term, Òif a lawsuit were successful,Ó he wrote in his email, Òa court could order the Regents to return LLNL retirees to the UC system. Alternatively, a court could order the Regents to pay monetary damages to LLNL retirees who have suffered losses as a result of the changes made by Extend Health, Inc. at the request of LLNS.Ó