File written by Adobe Photoshop¨ 5.2

 

Omni Risk Mgmt E‑Newsletter

November/ December, 2005

 

Happy Holidays to all!                                                                                                       Volume 1, Number 1

In This Issue

á   Commercial Lines

á   Personal Lines

á   Surety Bonds

á   Life & Health

á   Construction News

Insurance Industry Links

Lines Of Business

Commercial Lines  

 

Tara Pattona

Tara@omni-risk.com

 

Christine Schuller Chris@omni-risk.com        

 

Adam Stone  

Adam@omni-risk.com

 

Gina Di Paoloa

Gina@omni-risk.com

 

Tom Weigand

Tom@omni-risk.com

 

Teressa Richardson

Teressa@omni-risk.com

 

Personal Lines                    

 

Patricia Micari

Pat@omni-risk.com

 

Joe Schepis

Joe@omni-risk.com

 

Mechelle Diaz

Mechelled@omni-risk.com

 

Surety                                  

Jennifer Spadaro Jen@omni-risk.com

 

Lori Fay

Lori@omni-risk.com

 

Life & Health                       

 

Joe Schepis

Joe@omni-risk.com

 

 

 

Claims                                   

Debbie Oggeri        

Debbie@omni-risk.com

 

Accounting              

Maria Salvo

Maria@omni-risk.com

 

Administration

Natalie Perry 

Natalie@omni-risk.com

 

Candace Strasser

Candace@omni-risk.com

 

 

 

 

 

Commercial Lines

 

Every employer, large or small, faces the reality that it will be the target of legal action from past, present, and prospective employees.

Consider the Following Facts:

From October 1, 1993 through September 30, 1994, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and related state and local agencies received 156 discrimination complaints. As of May 1, 2003, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission had a backlog of over 100,000 complaints and the average complaint took more than a year to handle.

In 2002 over 13,000 complaints of sexual harassment were filed with the EEOC. Settlements for cases in 2003 exceeded 50 million. Defense costs were several times this number.

A recent telephone poll found that almost 31% of all female workers claimed to have been the object of sexual harassment at work. Seven percent of all male workers also claimed to have been sexually harassed.

Through legislation like the Americans With Disabilities Act and the Family Medical Leave Act, Congress has created new grounds for employers to be sued.

Not only are the numbers of employment-related claims increasing, but so is the potential financial risk to your business. Defending a wrongful termination or discrimination claim -- whether you are innocent or guilty, or even if the claim is groundless or fraudulent -- can be expensive. The potential exposure for a money damages award threatens your company's financial resources.

In the face of this increased risk to your business, it is also increasingly likely that your current insurance excludes coverage for employment-related claims. Most comprehensive general liability policies specifically exclude employment-related claims. For the small for-profit business, a directors and officers policy may offer a limited form of insurance coverage, but will probably not extend coverage to the business entity. Other forms of insurance, such as fiduciary liability coverage, are unlikely to cover these types of claims.

á       Sexual harassment

á       Negligent Promotion

á       Invasion of Privacy

á       Wrongful Termination

á       Negligent Retention

á       Drug Testing

á       Discrimination

á       Disablilities

á       Mental Anguish

á       Statue Violation

á       Breach of Contract

á       Libel

á       Negligent Hiring

á       Loss of Consortium

á       Slander

In response to the escalation in employment-related litigation and the financial risk to small businesses for employment-related claims, we offer our clients the service of shopping for Employment Practices Liability.

 

Flood Insurance

 

You donÕt have to own waterfront property to need flood insurance.

High water can happen where you least expect it.

 

Not every flood comes from a tidal surge or raging river.  Increased development, clogged or insufficient storm drains, and excessive rain, ice or snow, contribute to unexpected flooding.  In fact, about 25% of all flood claims are paid on buildings in low- to moderate-risk areas.

 

The Preferred Risk Policy is designed to provide affordable coverage for those properties located in the low- to moderate-risk flood zones that meet certain underwriting eligibility criteria.  A Preferred Risk Policy is available for Combined Building and Contents package for little as $112 a year, and Contents-Only for as little as $39 a year.

 

You can qualify for a Preferred Risk Policy, if...

 

    You own a one- to four-family dwelling (Combined Building and Contents), or you are a tenant or owner in a one- to four-family dwelling or other residential (apartment, co-op, etc.) building and do not need building coverage (Contents-Only).

    The property is located in one of the low-risk flood zones designated by FEMA (B, C or X) as of the effective date of the policy.

    The property has not experienced two flood claims or disaster assistance payments, each more than $1,000, or three flood claims or disaster assistance payments, regardless of amount.

 

DonÕt wait until the waters rise...

For information on how you can obtain a Preferred Risk Policy, or determine eligibility, call Joe x106, Pat x101 or Mechelle x 100.

Surety Bonds

Omni Risk Management is an independent surety agent located in Smithtown, NY. Our team of exceptionally talented surety professionals includes people who have come from the ranks of prominent surety companies.

In order for a surety broker to add value to a relationship in today's environment, the broker must do far more than simply deliver a bid, performance or payment bond when asked. We provide our surety clients with the following services:

Execute Bid, Performance and Payment Bonds

The primary function of the surety broker is to assure that the necessary bonds are executed and delivered as needed. In order to assure that this is completed as efficiently as possible, we possess powers of attorney with every surety market that we represent and will do whatever is necessary to exceed our clients service expectations.

Update Clients With Changes In the Surety Marketplace

Today's surety marketplace is one characterized by rapid and constant change. It seems as though every day there are new companies entering the marketplace and those already established are constantly changing their underwriting procedure.

We represent a diverse cross section of the construction community and have significant relationships with many of the primary surety companies. We regularly provide our clients with information regarding rate, indemnity, work program trends, carrier financial strength and commitment to the marketplace.

Strengthen the Surety Relationship

As a facilitator of dialogue between the contractor and the surety, we will work to assure that all lines of communication are open, that the expectations of all parties are clearly understood and that a mutual buy-in exists. Depending on the client's needs, we can also use our relationships with financial institutions, CPA's and other contractors to create partnerships that would be a benefit to the successful execution of your business plan.

Assist With the Prequalification Of Owners and Subcontractors

Given the competitiveness of the current construction marketplace, management of subcontractor/specialty contractor exposures has become the key component of every project manager's responsibilities. One easy way to transfer this risk is to require that certain subcontractor/specialty contractors be bonded. Unfortunately, many times the ultimate outcome of this request is the receipt of a bond written by a financially weak surety or a subcontractor simply not being capable of producing a bond. We can help assure that the bonds that you are accepting are being backed by responsible surety markets.

Life & Health

 

HSA or HRA? Why Employers Shop For HSAs and Buy HRA Plans

President Bush has aggressively promoted Health Savings Accounts, or HSAs, as one solution to the high cost of healthcare. However, more employers are discovering on their own that Health Reimbursement Arrangements, or HRAs, are a better solution. Why? The HSA will cost companies more than an HRA; it's simple economics. Interestingly the HRA has been kept from the spotlight by the current administration. Read on to learn why.

(PRWEB) June 15, 2005 - Last year the average annual cost for health insurance for an employer-sponsored plan reached $3,695 ($308 month) for single coverage and $9,950 ($829 month) for family coverage. Based on current increases, those average costs are expected to double in the next four years to $7,390 for single coverage ($616 month) and $19,900 ($1,658 month) for family coverage. Traditional forms of health insurance are becoming too expensive to be practical. As a result, the growth of HRA plans has been significant. By 2005, approximately 2.6 million individuals were covered by HRAs, far outnumbering those using HSAs, according to publisher Atlantic Information Services.    

Why have HRAs been kept from the public spotlight by the current administration? President Bush's agenda is to move the country toward an "ownership society," where individuals have more financial responsibility for their own retirement and healthcare decisions. HSA plans and personal retirement accounts fit the agenda, while the HRA does not. If you want an HRA, you have to learn about it on your own.

The media, in this case, has simply been parroting the President's agenda because they haven't recognized what employers by the thousands are learning everyday. HRAs are a better solution because of lower cost and design flexibility.

In the following summary of the HSA verses the HRA you'll discover why employers shop for HSA Plans and actually establish HRA Plans.

With the Health Savings Account or HSA the employer offers a qualifying health plan with a minimum $2,000 deductible for families and a maximum deductible of $10,200. If the employer wants to cushion the effect of this new high deductible to the employees they must do so by making comparable contributions to all employees' HSA bank accounts, either in a lump sum or in monthly installments. From the employer's prospective, that money is spent even if the employee does not incur any deductible expenses. Only 25% to 30% of employees will have a deductible or portion of a deductible, but because of the HSA comparable contribution rule, the employer is required to fund every HSA account with the same amount. So where is the savings to the employer? It all went into employee health savings accounts. In reality, most HSA bank accounts will be depleted when the employee is faced with the first unbudgeted expense such as a car repair. Employees who spend HSA funds for expenses other than healthcare will pay taxes and a 10% penalty. Employers are quickly realizing their healthcare dollars will be funding all types of expenditures.

In contrast, the HRA offers the employer much more design flexibility. There are no rules about minimum and maximum deductible amounts; there are no comparability rules where the employer must give every employee the same amount of money; and the employer retains full control over the funds in the company's general asset account and only fund claims as they occur. For example, the employer wants to reduce premium cost by increasing the health insurance deductible from $500 to $1,500. The employer also wants to help cushion the effect of the new higher deductible to their employees. With the HRA the employer establishes the required Plan Document and distributes an SPD informing employees that the company has established an HRA that will reimburse deductible expenses in excess of $500 from $501 to $1,500, or up to $1,000 annually. The employer reduces the cost of health insurance and uses a portion of the savings to cushion the effect of the higher deductible to their employees. And, with the HRA, only those employees who actually incur a deductible expense in excess of $500 receive HRA funds. At the end of the plan year any unused funds revert back to the employer as those employees were not affected by the new high deductible plan. Although rollover of unused funds is allowed under an HRA most employers don't elect to do so with this type of Deductible Gap HRA.

The IRS requires employers who want to sponsor an HRA to have a formal plan document, and the Department of Labor requires every employee to receive a Summary Plan Description, or SPD, explaining the benefit in easy to understand language.

Construction News

 

Why Safety Pays
In principle, workers' compensation is a good and necessary requirement. An employee working in the private sector is entitled the security this coverage affords should he suffer harm as the result of an accident. Unfortunately, what is theoretically a good idea has become a disaster of immense proportion in its execution. What exists today is an institution which rivals only the welfare system in its inability to objectively provide benefits where the need truly exists.

 

Rather than enact needed reforms, state legislatures have instead broadened injury definitions to include such intangibles as "job stress". The inevitable result is a system overburdened by specious claims, and worse, massive abuse.

Meanwhile, private companies are expected to foot the bill via statutory rates increased regularly by the legislature. To illustrate just how exorbitant worker's compensation costs can be, consider the example of a typical company in the meat industry. Assuming average claims exposure, the yearly workers' comp premium for such a business is nearly 20% of its annual payroll. If its claims experience is higher, that premium could double, triple...in certain cases, even quadruple. Imagine having to pay as much as 80% of one's annual payroll for workers' compensation coverage. It's little wonder many insolvent companies attribute a major factor in their demise to the skyrocketing cost of workers' comp.

To make matters worse, the workers' compensation system has become a favored vehicle for the commission of fraud and misrepresentation, due primarily to the legislative changes mentioned earlier. Contributing to the problem have been the dozens of legal clinics created by enterprising lawyers "to protect worker's rights". They're more than aware most claims (particularly those relating to back pain and stress) are impossible to disprove . Quite simply, the way the system works is that if just one doctor verifies an alleged medical problem's existence, the employee is entitled to medical, disability and rehabilitation compensation. It's an atmosphere ripe for collusion. When a company disputes a claim, its carrier inevitably settles because of the enormous cost of fighting such an action. In fact, over 99% of those claims denied by companies are settled. Even in those rare instances where a claim's denial is upheld, the law nevertheless requires that all of the claimant's medical and certain other expenses be reimbursed.

Overall there has been little if anything the private sector has been able to do to stem the tide of rising claims. Any attempts to fight the problem have either been met with tighter legislative controls or created an atmosphere of hostility and distrust between management and its workers'. This was the dilemma facing the developer of Safety Pays five years ago. He realized the only solution was to create a means by which a company's employees would somehow become as vested in reducing claims as management. The result was the creation and implementation of what was to become the Safety Pays program. One year after its introduction into the company for which it was originally designed, a premium savings of over $60,000 was documented. To date over a million dollars has been saved at this business since the program's implementation. With this success, it's abundantly clear that Safety Pays provides a long sought after solution which thousands of businesses in virtually every working environment can now utilize.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

To add someone to this email list, send  newsletter@omni-risk.com and put in subject Line ÒAdd to NewsletterÓ

 

To be removed from this email, send  newsletter@omni-risk.com and put in subject Line ÒRemove from NewsletterÓ