× Expand Isabel Marshall

A new school year is about to start in St. Paul, and Nick Faber, president of the St. Paul Federation of Educators, believes that the 4,200 union members who work for the St. Paul Public Schools would prefer to be touching up lesson plans, tidying classrooms, and otherwise preparing for the rush of students that will take place starting September 3.

Instead, the union is knee-deep in a battle with the St. Paul Public Schools regarding access to affordable health insurance. This, of course, puts the St. Paul union in line with the national debate surrounding the cost of health insurance and its impact on nearly everyone, including teachers and other public employees.

A key piece of agitation surrounding the series of wildcat and authorized teachers’ strikes that began in West Virginia in 2018 and spread to Oklahoma, Puerto Rico, and beyond, has in fact been the rising, almost untenable, cost of health insurance and the major dent that puts in teachers salaries.

But the unfolding fight in St. Paul offers broader lessons in how union members across public sectors can effectively assert and exercise their right to affordable health insurance.

Alvin Chang, writing for Vox in 2018, noted that the “dramatically” increasing cost of health insurance and other benefits was a central reason West Virginia teachers walked off the job that year. “Compared to ten years ago, teachers are on average contributing nearly $1,500 more per year toward premiums, adjusted for inflation,” he pointed out.

The situation in St. Paul is no different, according to the St. Paul Federation of Educators. An advisory notice for union members intended to guide them through the decision-making process on health insurance stated that a 7 percent annual increase in premiums is the “industry average,” leading to rate jumps that eat up more and more of employees’ paychecks.

That’s why, Faber says, a majority of St. Paul Federation of Educators members voted in March to move their health insurance coverage from Health Partners—a private health care and health insurance provider—to the Public Employees Insurance Program. This option was created by the Minnesota state legislature in 1987 as a way to provide public employees across the state, including teachers, with access to affordable health care.

The public employees option serves a large pool of approximately 40,000 state employees, leading to less fluctuation in coverage costs as well as an average annual premium increase rate of around 2.5 percent—far lower than the above-mentioned industry standard for private insurance providers.

That adds up to a big difference, Faber argues, especially for the district’s lowest-paid employees, including the non-licensed support staff who also work directly with students. St. Paul Federation of Educators even put together a color-coded chart in order to highlight the cost advantage for members that could come from switching to the public health insurance option.

The federation’s strategy for encouraging the switch and putting major pressure on the school district offers a compelling roadmap for other unions seeking to push for better and more affordable health care.

First, Faber notes, the union took the lead on engaging and informing members about their health care coverage options. Instead of allowing administrators from the St. Paul Public Schools to promote one option over another, St. Paul Federation of Educators held multiple listening sessions for their members earlier this year.

The unfolding fight in St. Paul offers broader lessons in how union members across public sectors can effectively assert and exercise their right to affordable health insurance.

As a result, Faber says, “well over half of [our] members voted on their health insurance options, and two-thirds of those selected the Public Employees Insurance Program plan rather than Health Partners.” Along the way, Faber insists that the union kept the district informed of both their education campaign for members and the ultimate vote that was cast, to join the public employee pool.

The Teamsters Local 320, which represents community service professionals who work for the St. Paul Public Schools, also voted to switch to the plan, beginning in 2020.

Now the hard work begins. Minnesota state law allows public sector unions to “opt out of their employer’s health plan,” as noted by Josh Verges of the St. Paul Pioneer Press, but such votes come with consequences. Joe Gothard, superintendent of the St. Paul Public Schools, maintains that the union’s decision to move away from Health Partners will cost the already cash-strapped district $4 million, thanks to a stipulation of their current contract.

Union representatives dispute the idea that this multimillion dollar fee is mandatory, and Faber has pointed out that Health Partners raked in billions in earnings last year while paying zero property taxes due to the company’s nonprofit status.

School officials also contend that the 1,500 district employees currently covered by the Health Partners contract will be forced to absorb the cost—to the tune of a double-digit premium increase—of having the union switch to the Public Employees Insurance Program option now.

The district is instead advising the union to pull back on its intent to drop Health Partners, and wait to do so until the current contract expires in 2021. But Faber isn’t buying into this “wait and see” approach. He maintains that the union’s most marginalized members, including district support staffers who are largely low-income people of color, need a more cost-effective health insurance plan now.

And, with the first day of school just around the corner, Faber insists, “we have hours—not days—to get this resolved.”