COBRA Election After a Reduction in Hours
Elena works for a 120-employee professional services firm and is covered under its group health plan. In March her hours are cut from 40 to 22 per week, which the plan treats as a qualifying event (reduction in hours). She is told her coverage continues through the end of the month and that she will receive COBRA information. The plan's COBRA notice is mailed 45 days after the qualifying event. Elena elects COBRA 70 days after the notice is mailed and pays the first premium 10 days later. Separately, Elena's dependent son, who turned 26 in February, was dropped from the plan in February. Elena asks whether her COBRA election can also restore her son's coverage.
1. Was Elena's COBRA election timely, and what is the plan's obligation regarding the notice timing?
Read the worked answer
COBRA gives the qualified beneficiary 60 days to elect, measured from the later of the date coverage would otherwise end or the date the notice is provided. The plan mailed notice 45 days after the qualifying event. Elena elected 70 days after the mailing, which is 10 days beyond the 60-day election window measured from the notice date. On its face the election is late. However, the plan's notice was itself outside the 30-day period within which the plan administrator must notify the plan of the qualifying event and the plan must provide the election notice (the plan generally has 14 days after receiving notice of the event to send the election notice, and the employer must notify the plan within 30 days). Because the plan was late, Elena has a strong argument that the election period should be measured from when notice was actually given and that any prejudice from the delay should not fall on her. The practical, defensible course is to accept the election, document the late notice, and correct the notice process. Elena must also pay premiums within the 45-day grace period after electing, which she did.
2. Can Elena's COBRA election restore her son's coverage? Explain.
Read the worked answer
Generally no. The son's loss of coverage was a separate event: he aged out at 26 in February, before Elena's March reduction in hours. COBRA rights attach to qualified beneficiaries who lose coverage because of a qualifying event. The son's loss was due to reaching the dependent age limit, which is not a COBRA qualifying event for a group health plan (though the plan may offer its own extension). Elena's reduction in hours is a qualifying event for Elena and for dependents who lose coverage because of that event; the son was already off the plan and did not lose coverage because of the reduction in hours. The plan should confirm whether it offers a dependent-age-out extension and whether the son elected it. If the plan's documents permit adding dependents during a COBRA election, that would be a plan-specific feature, not a COBRA requirement, and the analyst should check the plan document before answering. The clean answer is that Elena's election covers Elena, not her son.