July 9, 2025 - The union is profoundly aware that State employees are very concerned about the increased costs of their health care premiums that hit on July 1, 2025. At the same time, the State of Ohio unilaterally eliminated coverage of GLP1s for weight loss. That’s why the union representatives on your Joint Health Care Committee (JHCC) have been working diligently on both issues and want to set the record straight on how we got to this point.

First, the union was not made aware of the premium increases before state employees were notified. What caused the spike in premiums? The State of Ohio and health care providers say a significant increase in insurance claims has resulted in a shortfall to the fund that pays for the claims. It is the union’s stance, however, that the State of Ohio did not fulfill its duties nor take appropriate steps to deal with the shortfall sooner.

“The concerns were not brought before our joint health care committee in a timely manner. That’s mismanagement and poor forecasting by the State of Ohio, plain and simple, and now employees are paying the price,” said OCSEA President Chris Mabe.

“A big reason public employees enter public service is for good pensions and good benefits. The State needs to step up their game, because the union certainly has,” said Mabe. For 20 years, since July 2005, the union has successfully kept the employees share of the premium to only 15%. And because of that, the member impact of this rate increase is not what it could have been for employees had the union not been tough at the bargaining table. Ultimately, this union-negotiated benefit is among the best in the country with low deductibles, copays, and out-of-pocket maxes, said Mabe. “The union has worked to protect and grow this benefit and minimize costs for decades despite increases nationally,” he said. 

When DAS announced the increase, which was emailed to employees and impacted unions concurrently, OCSEA immediately joined forces with other Ohio public employee unions to file Unfair Labor Practices (ULP) charges against the State. The seven unions also filed a "Demand for Impact Bargaining," which was immediately denied by the State. A second ULP charge has been filed regarding this denial to discuss the proposed health care hike. 

Additionally, President Mabe called on Marianne Steger, a longtime health care expert and former OCSEA JHCC labor co-chair, to lead the committee’s efforts on these issues. Steger worked for OCSEA from 1987 to 2007 and later became the director of health care for the Ohio Public Employees Retirement System (OPERS). She brings a wealth of health care experience, including a Certified Employee Benefit Specialist (CEBS) designation. 

Steger and the JHCC have been meeting nonstop since May to hold the State accountable for its financial obligations to its employees regarding their health care benefits. This also includes holding provider’s feet to the fire about rising costs and reporting. “Certainly, we understand that businesses and employers around the country are struggling with skyrocketing health care costs. But why weren’t these concerns brought up before May? It’s like they threw any obligation of transparency and good faith right out the window,” said Steger. 

The JHCC also continues to have open dialogues about coverage of GLP1s for weight loss, which ended July 1. While the State initially began covering them, it soon found that the employee benefits fund could not sustain the costs associated with them. The State continues to cover them for those with diabetes. 

May 15, 2025 - Last week we announced that OCSEA joined forces with a coalition of Ohio public employee unions to submit a "Demand for Impact Bargaining" regarding the State of Ohio’s unilateral decision to significantly increase health insurance premiums for state workers, effective July 1. The State of Ohio has since denied the demand by the seven unions, forcing OCSEA to file a second Unfair Labor Practices (ULP) charge against the state over the proposed health care hike.

In OCSEA’s ULP Statement of Fact, relief sought includes rescinding the unilaterally implemented premium increases, restoring status quo regarding contractually-negotiated health care premiums and benefits, and commencing in good faith impact bargaining. The union argues that the state’s refusal constitutes a violation of the Ohio Revised Code for the following reasons:

• It represents a failure and refusal to bargain in good faith over a mandatory subject of bargaining, namely the cost of healthcare premiums, which directly affects the economic terms and conditions of employment;
• The unilateral premium increase—without providing the unions an opportunity to bargain over its impact—violates established bargaining obligations under the statute;
• The State’s reliance on “past practice” and references to the Joint Health Care Committee (JHCC) as a substitute for formal bargaining does not satisfy its legal obligation to engage in impact bargaining when significant changes to terms and conditions of employment are made unilaterally;
• The State’s characterization of its conduct as consistent with previous practice does not absolve it of its duty to bargain when the change in cost is substantial and newly burdens employees.

Additionally, the coalition of unions has made a laundry list of information requests to the state including financial documents, communications, and analysis related to the state’s decision to increase health care premiums. The unions are asking that the requests, submitted to the Office of Collective Bargaining, be fulfilled by no later than May 20, 2025. The union coalition includes OCSEA, SEIU/1199, OSTA (Ohio State Troopers Association), OEA (Ohio Education Association), FOP (Fraternal Order of Police), FOP Unit 2 and CWA (Communication Workers of America).

Please stay tuned to these union newsletters and the OCSEA website for updates and member calls-to-action on this very important issue.  

May 8, 2025 - OCSEA has joined forces with other Ohio public employee unions to officially file Unfair Labor Practices (ULP) charges against the State of Ohio in response to the state’s unilateral decision to significantly increase health insurance premiums for state workers, effective July 1. The unions’ intents to file was announced last week. Read more here.

Additionally, OCSEA and six Ohio public employee unions submitted a "Demand for Impact Bargaining" regarding unilateral health insurance premiums to the Ohio Office of Collective Bargaining. The unions joining OCSEA in the demand to bargain request include SEIU/1199, OSTA (Ohio State Troopers Association), OEA (Ohio Education Association), FOP (Fraternal Order of Police), FOP Unit 2 and CWA (Communication Workers of America). 

The unions demand that the State of Ohio immediately rescind the unilaterally implemented premium increases, restore status quo regarding contractually-negotiated health care premiums and benefits, and commence good faith impact bargaining.

In both the filed ULP and demand for bargaining request, the unions assert that the action constitutes a direct violation of the State’s obligation under Ohio Revised Code § 4117.08 and § 4117.11 to bargain in good faith over mandatory subjects of bargaining—including employee healthcare costs.

"We assert that the State's decision to bypass the bargaining process and impose this substantial increase undermines the collective bargaining relationship, violates statutory duties, and erodes employee trust in the process," the unions write in the letter to OCB. "There is clear and long-standing precedent confirming that healthcare benefits, including cost-sharing arrangements, are not only negotiable but require bargaining prior to any material changes being implemented.

The sharp increase in premiums follows years of relatively modest adjustments. While the state attributes the rise to inflation and high-cost claims, recent federal data shows only a minimal increase in the cost of medical services over the past year.

Ohio operates a self-funded healthcare plan, requiring both the state and its employees to cover the full cost of claims. The Department of Administrative Services, which oversees the plan and retains consultants to help set premium rates, made the decision without consulting OCSEA or other affected unions.

Please stay tuned to these union newsletters and the OCSEA website for updates and member calls-to-action on this very important issue.  

May 2, 2025 - OCSEA is joining forces with other public employee unions to file an Unfair Labor Practice (ULP) charge against the State of Ohio in response to the state’s unilateral decision to significantly increase health insurance premiums for state workers, effective July 1.

“We are filing this ULP to push the state to come to the table and negotiate fair, reasonable healthcare costs,” said OCSEA President Chris Mabe. “Public employees should not bear the burden of the state’s failure to properly manage the health insurance program. If DAS and its consultants had done their jobs, we wouldn’t be in this situation.”

The sharp increase in premiums follows years of relatively modest adjustments. While the state attributes the rise to inflation and high-cost claims, recent federal data shows only a minimal increase in the cost of medical services over the past year.

Ohio operates a self-funded healthcare plan, requiring both the state and its employees to cover the full cost of claims. The Department of Administrative Services, which oversees the plan and retains consultants to help set premium rates, made the decision without consulting OCSEA or other affected unions.