Hallmark Reverses Plan to Limit Insurance Coverage

Sen. John A. Kissel (R-Enfield) on Friday welcomed the news that Hallmark is reversing its original stance to limit insurance coverage for the 570 employees who will be laid off in Enfield.

The company will now abide by Connecticut law rather than federal law. As a result, Hallmark employees will receive four months of free coverage.

“This is a big victory in an otherwise bad situation,” Kissel said. “Just two days ago, I urged the Connecticut Department of Labor to clarify this issue, so I am pleased to see the department has swiftly facilitated this desired outcome. I thank Labor Department Commissioner Sharon Palmer and her very responsive team for working on this, and I am glad that Hallmark has done the right thing.”

Kissel on Aug. 19 wrote to the state’s top labor official requesting clarification on future insurance coverage for employees in Enfield. On Aug. 17, Hallmark announced it would not offer workers both extended health care benefits and severance pay when the Enfield plant closes in June 2016, cutting 570 jobs.

In his Aug. 19 letter to Palmer, Kissel requested “a full review” of Hallmark’s decision in order “to ensure that my constituents are being treated as fairly as possible.” He noted that “there appears to be a difference of opinion on state law versus federal law. Hallmark has stated that while Connecticut law mandates continued coverage, federal law in the form of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act preempts the state mandate.”

“Hundreds of workers’ lives have been upended here in north-central Connecticut,” Sen. Kissel said Friday. “They will now be able to plan ahead for themselves and their families. Their benefits are no longer in question. They have some certainty now. If I played even a small role in making that happen, then I’m pleased to have been able to help.”