Implementing a dental plan for graduate students is on hold,
at least for now.
 At its December meeting the Graduate Student Association's
board of directors decided to postpone implementing the
dental plan as approved in November's referendum.
 The board "will continue with investigating the
implementation of the results," says GSA president Duncan
Phillips. "The board will review available options and the
concerns raised by GSA members and postpone making a final
decision until its next meeting" on January 10.
 Since the fall referendum some students have started a
petition asking that another referendum be held. According to
GSA appeal procedures, in order for the appeal to be
successful the number of students signing it must be more
than the number who voted on the "prevailing side". In this
case 263 graduate students must sign the petition, Phillips
says.
 "I'm cognizant that a petition is coming," he said. When the
board met in December about 160 people had already signed it.
 Before the next board meeting, board members are
investigating implementation of the plan. That means
preparing a contract with insurance companies and financial
services, Phillips says. "According to our mandate, the plan
must be in place."
 Graduate students had voted in favour of having a dental
plan, choosing a "comprehensive plan" rather than a basic
plan and also choosing not to require coverage for family
members. The plan they approved would cost each grad student
$57 per term and will cover 80 per cent of the costs of
preventive dentistry, 80 per cent of periodontics and 80 per
cent of endodontics.
 Phillips said in a December interview that both plans the
students voted for are good plans. "They are based on what
all other employees cover" and include such maintenance items
as a yearly check up and cleaning as well as such special
services as root canal surgery.
 Now he says that "since we are insuring ourselves, it
doesn't make sense to cover the items that everyone might
predictably use, such as preventative care (e.g. cleanings,
fillings and examinations)." These services formed the bulk
of the cost of the plans students voted for - $42 per term
for a plan that provided 70 per cent of preventive coverage
only, against $57 per term for a plan that provided
comprehensive coverage - but are not particularly expensive.
 "Typically, these services are covered by benefit packages
from a company for its employees, not the employees covering
themselves. The expensive items (wisdom teeth, gum disease
and root canals) that occur infrequently and are not
predictable might be items that should be covered under a
self insuring plan.... Root canal and gum disease coverage
increased the cost of the plan by about six per cent in each
case," Phillips says.
 He is now suggesting a third option: coverage for
unpredictable events only. That would reduce premiums but
would provide a safety net for graduate students who find
themselves with a "catastrophe in their mouths".
 He expects that this plan would also be mandatory for all
full-time grads. That way "grads might see some benefit in
having a form of disaster coverage."
 He's met with Sandie Hurlburt and Dave Dietrich of UW's
personnel department to find out if this new option is
practical.
 "I have also asked Manulife to start preparing a contract
based on the current mandate, because if we have to proceed
then the appropriate mechanisms ought to be in place,"
Phillips said.