Met Council Proposal – ATU Plan C HRA/VEBA (8/14/2026)

The second proposal concerns the optional Plan C HRA/VEBA plan. The proposal would preserve the plan’s total value for the duration of the agreement while allowing some plan-design features to change.

The Proposal

Article 35. Group Insurance – Active Employees, Plan C – HRA/VEBA Trust – Active Employees

This is an optional plan made available to employees of the Metropolitan Council. The Employer will preserve the total value of the optional HRA plan for the duration of this Agreement, unless changes are negotiated by the parties.

Attached to this contract are the current plan provisions of Plan C. These benefits will remain unchanged for the duration of this contract. Should the Council, following discussions with all unions, choose to make changes to the plan which the union finds unacceptable, the union may opt out of Plan C.

Note: The proposal focuses specifically on the Empower HRA health insurance plan, allowing for the employer to make plan designs so long as the value of the plan remains the same.

Why Total Value Matters More Than Plan Design

People often focus on specific copays or deductibles.

But total value answers the real question: “How much of a benefit am I actually getting?”

If total value stays the same, the plan remains just as generous – even if individual pieces shift.

Note: Employees often worry about individual copays or deductibles, but actuarial value tells us the real story. It measures how much the plan pays overall versus how much members pay. If actuarial value stays the same, the total generosity of the plan doesn’t go down—even if individual pieces change slightly.

If I handed you two different toolboxes, they might have different brands of tools, different colors, or even be organized differently. But if they can both do the exact same jobs equally well, then neither toolbox is really better or worse.

Health insurance works the same way.

The plan may look different from year to year, but if the actuarial value stays the same, the overall value of what the plan pays versus what members pay doesn't go down.

Graphic illustrating how two insurance plans can have the same overall value yet have a different cost mix

What is “Total Value”?

Total value isn't about one doctor's visit or one prescription.

It answers one question: On average, how much of members' healthcare costs does the plan pay, and how much do members pay?

For example, if a plan has a 90% total value, that means that across thousands of people using the plan –

  • The plan pays roughly 90% of covered healthcare costs
  • Members pay roughly 10%.

Note: Actuarial value isn't about one doctor's visit or one prescription.

It's a measurement made by actuaries—the people whose job is to calculate insurance risk.

It answers one question:

On average, how much of members' healthcare costs does the plan pay, and how much do members pay?

For example:

If a plan has a 90% actuarial value, that means that across thousands of people using the plan, the plan pays roughly 90% of covered healthcare costs, members pay roughly 10%.

Some people will pay less.

Some people will pay more.

But across everyone, the value stays the same.

Changes in Total Value

What Would Reduce “Total Value”?

These are the kinds of changes that actually make the coverage less valuable:

  • Making employees pay substantially more overall.
  • Eliminating major covered benefits.
  • Increasing deductibles without providing anything to offset them.
  • Raising out-of-pocket costs across the board.
  • Shifting a much larger share of medical costs onto employees.

Those changes reduce the overall value of the insurance.

Under a guarantee that total value cannot decrease, those types of changes wouldn't be allowed.

Note: What Would Reduce Actuarial Value?

These are the kinds of changes that actually make the coverage less valuable:

  • Making employees pay substantially more overall.
  • Eliminating major covered benefits.
  • Increasing deductibles without providing anything to offset them.
  • Raising out-of-pocket costs across the board.
  • Shifting a much larger share of medical costs onto employees.

Those changes reduce the overall value of the insurance.

Under a guarantee that actuarial value cannot decrease, those types of changes wouldn't be allowed unless they were offset somewhere else in the plan.

The Proposal & What it Does

Article 35. Group Insurance – Active Employees, Plan C – HRA/VEBA Trust – Active Employees

This is an optional plan made available to employees of the Metropolitan Council. The Employer will preserve the total value of the optional HRA plan for the duration of this Agreement, unless changes are negotiated by the parties.

Attached to this contract are the current plan provisions of Plan C. These benefits will remain unchanged for the duration of this contract. Should the Council, following discussions with all unions, choose to make changes to the plan which the union finds unacceptable, the union may opt out of Plan C.

Note: The important question isn't: "Did my copay change?"

The important question is: "Am I getting less health insurance overall?"

A guarantee that actuarial value cannot decrease protects against that.

It doesn't promise that every copay, deductible, or benefit will stay exactly the same. It promises something more meaningful: that the overall value of your health insurance won't be watered down.

That's why many benefits experts view an actuarial value (total value) guarantee as stronger protection than freezing a handful of individual plan features. It protects what matters most—the overall generosity of the plan—while still allowing the plan to adapt as healthcare changes over time.

The Proposals Changed Through Bargaining

Original Proposal

  • Allowed flexibility to make changes across all employer-sponsored health plans.

Concerns Raised During Bargaining

  • Maintain health insurance benefits and find ways to address costs.

Current Proposal

  • The Open Access plan remains outlined in the contract.

Bargaining made a difference – The bargaining process resulted in a meaningful change to the proposal by preserving the Open Access plan as currently designed while maintaining flexibility to respond to future changes in healthcare.

Note: The bottom line is simple: employees want to preserve strong benefits while keeping premiums affordable. This proposal delivers on both.

Transitioning future retirees avoids unnecessary costs, aligns them with richer and less expensive coverage, and helps sustain the health plan for everyone. And the actuarial value guarantee ensures that even when design details change over time, the total value of the plan remains just as strong.

Management’s initial goal was to have broad flexibility to make changes across all employer‑sponsored health plans. During bargaining, the union raised concerns—they emphasized the need to maintain strong insurance benefits and find practical ways to address rising healthcare costs.

That feedback mattered.

As a result of the bargaining process, the proposal was meaningfully changed: the Open Access plan is preserved. We were able to maintain flexibility to adapt to future changes in healthcare, but without eliminating the plan many ATU members participate in today.

So, the key question isn’t whether a single copay might change—it’s whether your insurance remains just as generous overall. With this updated proposal, and with the actuarial value guarantee, the answer is yes.

Bargaining made a difference, and it helped shape a proposal that protects what employees value most while keeping the plan sustainable.

Posted in

Metropolitan Council

The Metropolitan Council is the regional policy-making body, planning agency, and provider of essential services for the Twin Cities metropolitan region.

© Metropolitan Council