Honeywell retirees ask court to halt benefit cuts

May 10--SOUTH BEND -- Attorneys representing former Honeywell workers filed a motion Wednesday seeking to stop the company from stripping health benefits from its retirees, including hundreds of former South Bend-area employees.

The company, with a manufacturing plant on the city's west side, notified retirees in April that it would no longer provide medical and prescription drug coverage to former employees effective July 1.

Retirees negotiated the benefits during their years of employment with the company and assumed they were for life.

Many learned of the move during a packed meeting Wednesday at United Automobile Workers Local 9 on South Michigan Street.

A ruling on the motion, which is part of a lawsuit that seeks to permanently stop Honeywell from taking benefits away from retirees, or forcing them to contribute financially to their coverage, is expected before June 30.

Tom Zmyslo, retiree chairperson for the union, urged former members to pursue coverage on the private market in the meantime, though with an effective date not before July 1.

Zmyslo said Blue Cross, which currently handles insurance for Honeywell in the state, could not insure the retirees as a group, separate from the company, because they're not a corporation.

"Let's incorporate!" one man shouted.

The meeting lasted a couple of hours and threatened at times to veer out of control, though officials ultimately kept things on track.

"Why is it just two months?" one woman asked, referring to the amount of time given to retirees to buy insurance. "Why didn't (Honeywell) give us a little longer?"

"Because they don't care about you," one official said bluntly. "This corporation is not here to help anyone in this ... room."

The UAW initially sued Honeywell in in 2011 after the company notified former employees of its intent to impose premium costs on retirees effective Jan. 1, 2012.

But the case has been winding its way through the courts for nearly six years now, inviting skepticism among some about a swift ruling on Wednesday's motion.

"How can the court move so slow, like a turtle?" one man said.

Richard McCarty, 74, worked for Honeywell for 35 years, retiring in 2000.

Standing in the hallway outside the meeting, the Granger man said, "Let's say you buy a car and sign a contract and don't pay for it, they take you to jail. They sign a contract and violate it and nothing happens."

Louie Lampos, 69, was more blunt.

"They have not lived up to their side of the contract," the South Bend man said. "You work all those years under the assumption that you'll have (insurance) when you retire, and they up and take it away. That's bull--."

Honeywell, for its part, has explained the decision in terms of the market.

"The individual Medicare supplemental insurance market has matured, providing Medicare-eligible individuals access to affordable and comprehensive health insurance and prescription drug coverage," the company said in a letter to retirees in April.

It urged former workers to "compare the cost and benefits of your Honeywell-sponsored coverage against other offerings ... to identity the alternative health insurance options that best suit your needs from a cost and coverage standpoint."

[email protected]

574-235-6187

@ErinBlasko

___

(c)2017 the South Bend Tribune (South Bend, Ind.)

Visit the South Bend Tribune (South Bend, Ind.) at www.southbendtribune.com

Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.