Posted On: July 8, 2008, 10:47 am CDT

Posted By: Joe

Agent, your ignorance regarding the issue at hand is nothing less than entertaining. This is not a debate about what type of coverage would have been more beneficial for the Amschwands, but rather the error on Spherion's end of not fully disclosing the terms of the insurer change, and what would be required for coverage to continue. They did not deny coverage because he was on disability, but rather, that he did not meet the work requirements for coverage to be in effect. Not sure what the laws are in your state, but any material change in insurance coverage or conditions of coverage that affect a policyholder must be made aware to the policyholder in writing. In addition, the fact that Spherion had waived the "one day of work" requirement for other employees, but not for an employee that was likely going to die of cancer in the near future, makes this case stink of corporate greed just a little bit more.