UKTC Archive

Re: Time to think - INSURANCE

Subject: Re: Time to think - INSURANCE
From: Scott Cullen
Date: Dec 30 2003 22:30:14
Workers Compensation insurance works much that way in the US.  There is a 
"manual" rate (not the
rate paid on your Hispanic workforce, nor the rate paid on hand labor vs 
equipment operators), that
is the general rate in the manual for the class of worker... tree worker, 
auto mechanic, office
worker, etc.  That rate is set by the industry's loss experience.  Each 
individual employers gets an
"experience modification" which can be a discount or a penalty.  But the 
manual rate and the
modified rate both reflect the industry.  You may have fewer claims than the 
local Starbucks, or the
library.  You may never, ever have had a claim.  But you are still going top 
pay for the industry
average.  Way back when I actually had to know this stuff we were paying 
manual rate of 22.6% of
payroll (salaries before any benefit or burden) for tree workers.  So say you 
get a 20% discount for
good experience you'll still pay 18%.  The worst office operation 
(secretaries, clerks, etc.) is
going to pay something like 3%.

What kind of rates (% of wage) are you all paying for EL?  And GL?

SC

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Carter" <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.fsnet.co.uk>
To: "UK Tree Care" <uktc@xxxxxx.tree-care.info>
Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 5:12 PM
Subject: Re: Time to think - INSURANCE


I agree Ken, but the principle of insurance is that we all pay for a small
number of large claims generated from a minority of the industry.  This
minority may well deserve the claims made against them but we all end up
paying for them under the current set up, for this reason, I support the
principle of a pre renewal or insurance assessment of a company's H&S
performance and a tailoring of the premiums to suit the risk in the same way
a no claims bonus works with car insurance.  The bad risk companies
generating the claims would hopefully be priced out of existence.  However,
the cost of these assessments and who pays for them is a different matter.
I would resent paying a third party to come in and tell me everything was
OK.  Of course, everything may not be OK in which case it could be an
educational exercise worth paying for.  Do you think the insurers would
consider a sliding scale of shared assessment costs?  Companies with a clean
bill of health pay nothing and ones failing the assessment pay the full cost
with a variation of split for everyone in-between.

Mark.

----- Original Message -----
From: <Treecheck@xxxx.com>
To: "UK Tree Care" <uktc@xxxxxx.tree-care.info>
Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 8:48 PM
Subject: Re: Time to think - INSURANCE



Bill and Jim

Maybe a bit of jumping of at another tangent but the "Claims Culture" that
we
are supposed to live in starts with a claim by a person against a boss, a
firm or against the insurance.

Have the insurers done an assessment of the claims culture in relation to
the
employment culture. (I doubt it ...this is sociology not economics).  I am
not saying that if we looked after our staff better they wouldnt claim
against
us but I sometimes get the feeling that in a few cases the employer might
get
wot he deserved when a claim lands.

I will now did a deep trench and lay down in it


Ken


--
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info

The UKTC is supported by The Arbor Centre
http://www.arborcentre.co.uk/







--
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info

The UKTC is supported by The Arbor Centre
http://www.arborcentre.co.uk/






-- 
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info

The UKTC is supported by The Arbor Centre
http://www.arborcentre.co.uk/