NFL union rejects long-term care proposal for players

Share this article:

The National Football League Players Association, the union representing NFL players, rejected a proposal for long-term care insurance because the policy's pre-existing conditions clause would exclude too many players.

Union officials have said the supplemental policy, underwritten by TransAmerica, would likely not cover former players between the ages of 50 and 75 because of pre-existing conditions acquired while playing football. Union members say former players often have health problems such as arthritis, concussion-related mental health issues, brain trauma and heart problems. Men in that age group are also more vulnerable to heart disease and prostate cancer, The Associated Press reported.

Other league members are disappointed by the union's stance, arguing that the policy would cover 80% or more of the eligible players.

League members who approve of the policy insist that non-qualified members have alternatives to the plan, such as The 88 Plan, which is funded by the league and the union to help players that have cognitive disorders such as dementia and ALS, according to the AP.

Share this article:

More in News

Expert says providers often wrongly threatened by PEPPER reports

Instead of fearing further scrutiny by federal authorities, providers should embrace the opportunity to get feedback in the form of PEPPER reports, legal experts said Monday at the LeadingAge annual meeting in Nashville.

Healthcare reform already driving diverse, dynamic long-term care models, LeadingAge leaders say

Healthcare reform already driving diverse, dynamic long-term care ...

One way to gauge the effects is healthcare reform is by looking at ongoing changes to the continuing care retirement community model, LeadingAge officials said Monday at the association's annual ...

Federal court: Nursing home can be sued for firing hairdresser who can ...

Is the ability to transport residents in their wheelchairs an essential function of a nursing home hairdresser? A federal appeals court says it's a valid question and is allowing a hairdresser to sue a facility that fired her.