By Mark Stodghill

Mar. 24, 2008 (McClatchy-Tribune Regional News delivered by Newstex) --
A Duluth lawyer, who won a case in which the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled that his client's right to the payment of health insurance premiums vested at the time she retired could not be terminated by her former employer, has brought a similar lawsuit against the Chisholm school district.

Frank Urbia, a 34-year Chisholm teacher, and his wife, Sharon, have sued Independent School District No. 695, alleging that the district breached its contractual obligations regarding its payment of retiree group health and hospitalization insurance set forth in the collective bargaining agreement in effect when Frank Urbia retired.

Duluth lawyer Tom Andrew filed the lawsuit last week in St. Louis County District Court in Hibbing as a proposed class action. Andrew said the proposed class contains about 100 Chisholm teachers and spouses.

Frank Urbia was employed by Chisholm schools as a teacher and coach from 1966 until he retired at age 57 in June 2000. He continues to coach the Chisholm High School girls and boys cross country teams. Sharon Urbia is a plaintiff as a dependent spouse.

The plaintiffs say the action is being brought to enforce the Chisholm school district's contractual obligations to the plaintiffs that were set forth in the collective bargaining agreement between the school district and the teachers' union, Chisholm Local 1276.

The plaintiffs allege that the school district violated its contractual obligations starting on July 1, 2003, by reducing its contribution towards premiums for Frank Urbia's single coverage and its contribution towards his wife's family coverage to the levels set forth in a July 1, 2003, to June 30, 2005, collective bargaining agreement, instead of the contribution levels in effect at the time Urbia retired.

The lawsuit seeks enforcement of the contractual promises the plaintiffs relied upon.

According to the suit, since July 1, 2003, in order to avoid cancellation of their retiree health insurance benefits, about 100 retirees have had to pay the school district monthly payments in varying amounts, dependent upon whether they elected single or dependency coverage and whether or not they or their dependents were eligible for Part A or B of Medicare in excess of amounts they would have to pay if the school district honored its contract.

The Urbias referred questions to Andrew.

"One of the most important decisions that each worker must some day make is whether they should or should not retire,'' Andrew said Sunday from his home, where he is recovering from back surgery. "An important factor in making this decision is whether the worker can afford to retire. The cost the worker must pay for health insurance and the medical expenses that will not be covered by health insurance, including deductibles and co-pays, after the worker retires are important issues each worker must review to decide whether they can afford to retire.

"The Minnesota Supreme Court's unanimous decision in 'Norman vs. the Chisholm Housing and Redevelopment Authority' in 2005 held that a public employer's promise -- contained in a collective bargaining agreement in effect when the employee retired -- to pay health insurance premiums for the employee is an enforceable contractual promise.''

Andrew represented Carolee Norman in that case. Norman retired from the housing and redevelopment authority in 1995 under a collective bargaining agreement in effect that provided that all housing authority employees with at least 10 years of service would be covered under the existing medical, surgical, drug and dental programs and that the housing authority would pay all insurance premiums. In 2002, the housing authority notified Norman it would no longer pay her premiums "due to the continuing rising costs of health insurance and budget constraints.''

Andrew brought a lawsuit on Norman's behalf. The district court ruled in favor of Norman. The Minnesota Court of Appeals and state Supreme Court affirmed that ruling.

Chisholm schools Superintendent James Varichak declined to comment on the Urbia lawsuit. He said the matter had been turned over to the school district's insurance company and its legal counsel.

The school district has until April 1 to answer the complaint, 20 days from the date it was served.

Newstex ID: KRTB-0055-23987422