🔒UConn Health, Aetna trade barbs with contract talks at a standstill

Negotiations between UConn Health and Aetna Inc. on a new multiyear contract appear to have reached an impasse just 10 days before the existing contract is set to expire. Last month, in a post on its website, Farmington-based UConn Health stated it was in talks with Hartford-based Aetna, which is owned by CVS Health, for a new contract. The current three-year deal expires at midnight Nov. 30. Wednesday, Aetna released a statement and additional information about the negotiations via email, stating in part that “UConn Health owes it to Connecticut patients to come back to the negotiating table with Aetna.” The statement claims that UConn Health “wants to be one of the most expensive health systems in New England,” and that every action UConn has taken in the negotiations “has demonstrated their myopic focus on the goal of being paid more for the same services. If they are successful, the high cost of health care will only go up.” The statement adds that Aetna has negotiated in good faith “to find a reasonable agreement with UConn Health to keep health care affordable for our employers and members.” Aetna concludes by stating that it is fighting for Connecticut businesses and “fixed-income retirees who simply can’t afford UConn Health’s price gouging.” Following a request from Hartford Business Journal, UConn Health responded with the same claim it made when the negotiations began — that Aetna reimburses UConn Health “at rates among the lowest in Connecticut.” Aetna’s assertion “that we seek to be one of the highest-paid health systems is patently false,” UConn Health’s statement adds. “In reality, given how far below market our current rates are, fair reimbursement from Aetna would simply bring us closer to the median — not anywhere near the top.” UConn Health also claims that by paying it the “lowest rates in the state” benefits Aetna “at the expense of Connecticut taxpayers.” “This means public dollars are subsidizing Aetna’s profits while we continue to deliver the highest level of quality and service — at managed care rates of payment lower than some rural hospitals.” UConn Health also states that while Aetna claims to be negotiating in good faith, it has not responded to the health system’s latest proposal, which was submitted on Nov. 3. It did not provide any details on the latest proposal. “This lack of engagement is unacceptable when patients’ access to care is at risk,” UConn Health states. “If no agreement is reached by Nov. 30, Aetna’s refusal to offer fair rates will jeopardize in-network access to UConn Health.” Aetna denied that, saying that after it received UConn Health’s Nov. 3 proposal, "which included rate increases that are not reasonable for our members," officials met with health system ;leadership on Nov. 10. "During that meeting," Aetna said in a statement, "we reiterated that UConn Health must provide an updated proposal that reflects fair, market-based rates. To date, we have not received a response." The health system countered by saying that Aetna reported hundreds of millions of dollars in profits in the third quarter. CVS Health said in its third-quarter earnings report, released in October, that Aetna posted total revenues in the quarter of nearly $35.99 billion, up from $32.996 billion a year earlier. Adjusted operating income improved to $314 million from a loss of $924 million in the same quarter last year. Aetna, UConn Health added, continues “to put profits before patients. We remain committed to negotiating in good faith so patients can continue receiving the care they deserve.” While the existing contract expires at midnight on Nov. 30, state law mandates a 60-day grace period that allows patients covered by an insurer to continue to see their physicians and receive services from a hospital or health system under in-network rates while a new contract is negotiated. The dispute with Aetna comes four months after UConn Health announced in June that it had reached a new multiyear agreement with ConnectiCare. That agreement was reached two months after the previous contract had expired. Editor's note: This article was updated with Aetna's response to UConn Health's claim that it had not responded to its Nov. 3 proposal.