Skip to main content
All Posts By

robintek

CHECK OUT SUBCONTRACTOR DEFAULT INSURANCE BEFORE HIRING

By Construction Insurance Bulletin

If you are a general contractor for a big-budget construction project, you know you’re going to have to hire a number of subcontractors to help bring the project to completion.

So how can you be sure these subcontractors you hire can perform the work? You can’t. When hiring in the past, general contractors shifted the performance risk they assumed themselves to a guarantee form, such as a Surety Bond. Now, there is another alternative for risk transference called Subcontractor Default Insurance (SDI).

There are three main differences between a Surety Bond and SDI:

  1. If the contractor uses surety bonds, each subcontractor provides their individual bond resulting in the general contractor having as many bonds as subcontractors, each with its own coverage terms. With SDI, one policy contracted between the purchaser and an insurance carrier covers all subcontractors. This ensures uniformity of coverage.
  2. Under SDI if a subcontractor defaults, the general contractor and the carrier can immediately take steps to cure the default. With a surety bond, since the contract is between the subcontractor and the surety company, the surety company must investigate the situation and then determine the appropriate remedy. In essence, the surety company acts as a mediator between the general contractor and the subcontractor. This can result in delaying completion and cause possible cost overruns.
  3. A surety bond is a fixed cost. SDI is an insurance product, which utilizes deductibles and co-payments. That means the purchaser assumes a portion of the risk. If there are no defaults, there is a retrospective rating component that allows for the return of a portion of the premium amount.

When you are weighing the pros and cons of a surety bond vs. SDI, it’s important to note that one of the most significant drawbacks of SDI is that there is no prequalification service provided by the insurance carrier as there is with a surety bond company. The responsibility of determining suitability to perform the work and of managing the completion of that work rests entirely with the named insured.

The policy itself has some coverage limitations and there may also be a 15 percent administrative cost for losses charged against the initial premium under certain conditions.

Finally, you may not be able to use SDI at all for certain projects. The Miller Act states that before a contract that exceeds $100,000 for the construction, alteration, or repair of any building or public work of the United States is awarded to any person, that person shall furnish the federal government with a performance bond in an amount that the contracting officer regards as adequate for the protection of the federal government and a separate payment bond for the protection of suppliers of labor and materials.

When you are considering using SDI, it’s best to consult with us, and your insurance carrier, to determine if it is right for your particular project.

CERTIFICATES OF INSURANCE ARE A SENSIBLE WAY TO AVOID COSTLY CLAIMS

By Construction Insurance Bulletin

More and more companies are hiring independent contractors to handle not only administrative matters, such as benefits and human resources, but also sales and distribution. With this delegation of authority to third-party suppliers comes less direct control over these operations, and greater becomes the need for clients to demand that vendors provide them with timely Certificates of Insurance (COI).

The COI proves that the insured (the third party) has purchased the insurance coverages as required by the outsourcing client. But, the COI also states that the holder of the certificate has no legal right to be covered by the insurance described in the COI, nor does it amend, extend or alter the represented coverage. The COI only shows that the outside contractor has the insurance coverage as explained on the certificate. This protects the business that has contracted with the third party against liability for negligence caused by the independent contractor up to the limits of the policy.

It is the responsibility of the independent contractor to provide the COI to the client that has hired the firm. Usually a COI is prepared by an agent/broker with a copy sent to the insurance company and the client for whom the third party has contracted to perform certain functions.

The COI contains the name of the insured, the name of the insurance companies issuing the policies as stated on the COI, what specific coverages are contained in the insurance policies issued to the insured, and various descriptions of normal policy terms, exclusions and conditions.

Most often COIs are obtained for commercial general liability to provide protection from liability arising out of the insured’s premises or operations, products and completed operations. Usually, a general form will provide broad, standardized coverage terms. In cases, where the coverage is more complex and of a higher risk, manuscript forms of a COI can be written specifically by or for an insurance company. These manuscript COIs should be reviewed carefully for the scope of coverage being provided.

There are two types of general liability forms: Claims-made and occurrence. The trigger that compels the policy to respond is the main difference between the two forms. In the occurrence policy, occurrences are covered that take place during the policy period, no matter when a claim is reported. A claims-made policy requires that the occurrence take place during the policy period and the claim be reported during the policy period. Most COIs use the occurrence form for all independent contractors as claims-made policies limit coverage.

But simply having a COI in hand does not always mean that the independent contractor has the insurance coverage. A prudent practice is to have a system to audit, review and correct the certificates to reflect the provisions in the contracts. Some clients establish an auditing program in house, while others have the insurance agent or broker manage the program as part of their fee arrangement. This cost depends greatly on the workload.

The consequences of not monitoring COIs of a third party can be costly for the firm that hired the contractor. Consider this sobering example. A business hired an independent contractor to provide distribution service for the company. An employee of the vendor had a serious car accident, and soon afterwards, the contractor ceased business. When the employee began submitting Workers Compensation claims, there was no coverage; the contractor had never maintained that insurance. Unfortunately, the company had not insisted on a COI from the independent contractor to verify this coverage. Casting about for payment of the claim, the court ruled that the vendor’s employee was a statutory employee of the company that hired the contractor. The workers’ compensation claims have totaled more than $100,000 with more to come.

This is just one of many chilling cases of companies that have been caught with unexpected losses that came from not requiring proper COIs from independent contractors and auditing them to make sure they remain current and reflect the actual coverages held by the insured. Contact us for a thorough review of your COI procurement procedures.

WHERE IS THE COVERAGE FOR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LIABILITY?

By Business Protection Bulletin

It seems as though virtually anything created can be patented, copyrighted, trademarked or otherwise protected. Oddly enough, even with patent protection there is danger. It is easy to believe that if you hold a patent, copyright or trademark you cannot possibly infringe on someone else’s intellectual property — but that’s not true. George Harrison certainly had a copyright on his song “My Sweet Lord” but that didn’t prevent highly publicized and successful litigation against him due to its similarity to the old Shirelle’s hit “He’s So Fine” in the 1970s.

With an average cost of $1.2 million to litigate, patent infringement trials weigh in as one of the most expensive types of litigation in the US today. What was once the realm of the individual like Ben Franklin or Thomas Edison, or the very nearly individual (think Wright Brothers), has now become big business. IBM, which annually tops the list of companies applying for and receiving patents, has received more than 22,000 patents from 1993 to 2002, with patents accounting for about $10 billion in royalties during that 10-year period according to the company’s Web site. Complicating matters is the relatively recent innovation in its own right of the “Business Method Patent.” Examples of these controversial patents are Amazon’s Internet shopping cart, or the “reverse auction” process that Priceline created and patented.

Contrary to popular belief, however, intellectual property is not the patent or copyright that one applies for, but rather the idea behind it. The registration process, be it copyright, patent, or other method, is merely a form of evidence or proof of the origin of the idea, and its timeline. The piece of paper that one might receive acknowledging a copyright is merely a statement that the Office of Copyrights has not received anything else prior to the submission of the material that resembles it enough to call into question the authenticity of the work. Conceivably, one may apply for and receive a copyright or patent for a piece of work and yet be sued. But where’s the coverage you say? Good question. The answer is, it depends.

Take the Recording Industry Association of America’s litigation against numerous individuals in the summer of 2003. Would your Homeowners policy apply if you were sued for negligent supervision of your teenager leading to the illegal uploading of music to the Internet? The answer is probably “no” because there is no bodily injury or property damage (theft of intellectual property is unlikely to be perceived as a form of property damage), and the policy is not designed to respond to pure financial loss claims. So in a personal sense, you are probably out of luck.

For businesses the news is not as grim. In a business scenario, the CGL has often been called upon for coverage in patent, copyright and trademark infringement cases. If there is coverage to be found, it is the Advertising Injury portion of the policy but the catch is that the offense must then occur in the course of advertising one’s product, and not, for example, in the delivery of the product. So although a computer-consulting firm might infringe on another firm’s copyright or patent (source code is patentable), it is probably not covered under the CGL because the offense did not occur while advertising the firm’s services.

The good news is that there are an increasing number of products that are available for intellectual property coverage in the course of business operations. Patent Infringement Liability insurance is available from a select few niche insurance markets, though premiums are usually high, and coinsurance and retentions can be steep too. Professional Liability for technology consultants and other companies with an intellectual property exposure can often be endorsed to cover copyright or trademark infringement, though usually not patents. Advertising agencies or media businesses might find Intellectual Property coverage available for their operations as well.

If you’re concerned about your intellectual property exposure, talk to us to see what coverages are available. Another good idea would be to speak to a lawyer who is well-versed in intellectual property law to learn what steps you should be taking to protect your intellectual property and minimize the risk of infringement.

WHAT AN EMPLOYER MUST KNOW TO MANAGE DIVERSITY

By Business Protection Bulletin

“Managing Diversity” is a critical human resources function for organizations large and small. All too often, executives and managers lose sight of what diversity means from a legal and moral perspective, and the message then gets lost in the translation when it comes to the rank and file employee.

In 1997 the Department of the Interior identified diversity for its workforce as a crucial issue and provided the following definition of diversity for its own management purposes:

“The term ‘diversity’ is used broadly to refer to many demographic variables, including, but not limited to, racial, religious, color, gender, national origin, disability, sexual orientation, age, education, geographic origin, and skill characteristics … Managing diversity is a comprehensive process for developing a workplace environment that is productive for all employees… The term ‘diversity’ is also used narrowly in employment recruiting and retention efforts to refer to race/national origin, gender, or disability … ”

The EEOC (US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) is the federal watchdog that oversees compliance for legislation such as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex and national origin. Discrimination complaints filed with the EEOC have been on the upswing during the past several years, going from 77,444 in 1999 up to 84,442 complaints in 2002. Small businesses with as few as 15 employees are subject to Title VII, but determining who qualifies as an employee for the purposes of Title VII and other federal legislation is a tricky proposition and should be determined through consultation with an attorney or by researching the legislation directly.

Title VII is not the only federal law that applies to employment discrimination cases. For example, the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, the law that created the I-9 requirements for employers, also furnishes protection against discrimination because of national origin or U.S. citizenship. It applies to any employer with at least four (4) employees. The Civil Rights Act of 1866 (42 U.S.C. 1981) forbids employment discrimination because of race or color and applies to any employer, even if there is only one employee.

State laws such as the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act of 1983 (Texas Labor Code, Chapter 21) also apply to employment matters, so it is important to be aware of the complex patchwork of laws that may or may not apply to any employment situation.

The national jury-award median for employment-practice liability cases, which includes discrimination and retaliation claims, rose 44% in one year — from $151,000 in 1999 to $218,000 in 2000 — according to Jury Verdict Research’s ® report, Employment Practice Liability: Jury Award Trends and Statistics, 2001 Edition.

Though these facts and statistics point to the growing need for employers of all sizes to carry Employment Practices Liability Insurance (EPLI), the news is not entirely negative. According to Risk and Insurance (online at www.riskandinsurance.com) there are more than 70 insurers providing EPLI coverage and companies with fewer than 50 employees can expect to pay as little as $5,000 to $10,000 annually for the coverage. Also, many EPLI policies come with pre-arranged legal services such as hot lines for attorneys versed in employment practices law, often at no additional charge. Contact us to explore your EPLI options and to find out more about managing diversity in your workplace.

REDUCE WORKERS COMPENSATION PREMIUMS BY MONITORING EXPERIENCE MODIFIERS

By Business Protection Bulletin

Employing a rigorous and consistent workplace safety program will bring many benefits to your company. Among these is the potential to reduce your company’s experience modifier and, in the process, substantially lowering Workers Compensation premiums. An experience modification (E Mod) rating is a comparative analysis of your company’s claims and loss reserves for Workers Compensation to other businesses within the same class code as your business.

E Mod is like making par in golf. The more birdies and eagles you make, the lower your score. But unlike your golf game, an E Mod rating requires a team effort. Everyone needs to be conscious of workplace safety. And you need to ensure the factors for figuring your E Mod number are accurate and computed correctly.

Developed by the National Council on Compensation Insurance (NCCI), an E Mod gives employers some power over controlling the cost of their Workers Compensation programs. Each year, NCCI, or a separate rating bureau in some states, evaluates your company’s payroll and claims experience for the past three years and calculates your E Mod. The average factor is expressed as 1.00. A firm with a factor below 1.00 will pay lower premiums while a firm with a factor greater than 1.00 will pay more.

Experience modification is not optional. It is applied to all qualified firms, whether privately insured or by companies covered through state insurance pools. Understanding what the E Mod rating is and how it is calculated can be confusing, but mastering the procedure can deliver big premium savings for your company.

Usually, a company warrants an E Mod rating when it has paid at least $5,000 of Workers Compensation premiums in each of the last several years or has paid $10,000 or more in premiums in a single recent year. Typically, payroll and loss data going back four years is used to figure the rating in the first year. The most recent completed policy year is excluded from the computation. For example, an E Mod effective August 1, 2003, would use policy data from the policies in 1999, 2000 and 2001.

IS YOUR E MOD CORRECT?

Once your company receives its E Mod rating, you may question whether it was figured correctly, and what can be done to make it lower? Rating bureaus, including the NCCI, base their calculations for your rating on data that was reported to them by your insurer. If incorrect or incomplete data was reported, your rating will be inaccurate, and might end up costing you more. If possible, you should have the rating bureau explain how it determined your rating to ensure it was done in an accurate manner. If you discover an error, you must convince your insurer to resubmit its data to the rating bureau to correct the problem. In some states, errors can be corrected over multiple-policy years, and if the error generates a premium credit, your revised rating can bring big savings.

An area that is often overlooked by employers that can negatively affect their E Mod rating is open claim reserves. Loss claim reserves are treated the same as paid claims when an E Mod is calculated. A loss reserve that does not realistically reflect the potential claim can create an overcharge to the employer and raise your rating. Correcting this improbable loss reserve is difficult once the insurance company has reported it to the rating bureau. The best advice is to closely monitor each reserve for a Workers Compensation claim. Can appropriate reductions in reserves be negotiated? Can the case be closed? This review of loss reserves is especially imperative toward the end of the policy year.

Although making par for most golfers is an achievement more dreamed of than realized, implementing sound safety programs and closely monitoring the reporting and calculation process used to determine this factor can help obtain a lower E Mod rating. Need help determining your E Mod? Give our office a call; we can help!

THE COSTS OF DRINKING AND DRIVING ARE MORE THAN YOU MIGHT THINK

By Personal Perspective

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) recently released data showing that from 2001-2005, an average of 36 fatalities occurred per day on America’s roadways as a result of crashes involving an alcohol-impaired driver. It’s this kind of statistic that has spurred all 50 states and the District of Columbia to pass laws making it illegal to drive with a blood alcohol content of .08 or higher.

Although you might not be a fatality if you drive while under the influence, don’t think that means you’re home free. If you’re ticketed for a DUI, you’ll face a financial toll that you probably never considered. The following list is an example of some of the expenses you can expect:

  • Bail – It can cost anywhere from $250 to $2,500 for a first time DUI offender to be released from jail after an arrest depending on the jurisdiction.
  • Towing – When you’re arrested, your car is automatically towed. The cost starts at $100. In Chicago, for example, the typical charge is $1,200 for the first 24 hours and $50 for each additional day of storage. If you can’t afford to get your car after 30 days, the city auctions it. Other cities are beginning to follow Chicago’s lead.
  • Insurance premiums – If you are convicted, your insurance rates will increase substantially for the next three to five years. This could mean anywhere from two to four times more than you are currently paying. You could even face losing coverage all together. In that case, you would be forced to find a company specializing in higher risks that will insure you, or see whether your state has an assigned-risk pool for insurance. Either way, you’ll pay considerably more for coverage.
  • Legal fees – Expect anywhere from $2,500 to $25,000 depending on how much time an attorney has to invest in your case to defend you. In addition to what you pay your lawyer, you may also find yourself paying for an investigator to examine the arrest scene, and expert witnesses who can testify about the inaccuracy of field sobriety tests.
  • Fines – The fines and court fees for breaking the law vary from state to state, However, you can expect to pay anywhere from $300 to $1200.
  • Alcohol Evaluation – This is required of anyone sentenced by the court for drunk driving. The cost for these evaluations starts at about $100 depending on the jurisdiction.
  • Treatment/Education Program – A conviction means you will be required to undergo treatment or education in order to get your driver’s license re-issued. The extent of these programs differs greatly, and the costs can range from $300 to $2,000.

ARBITRATION AGREEMENTS: AN OUNCE OF PREVENTION

By Your Employee Matters

In another case out of the Fourth Appellate District and the Superior Court of Orange County, Mitri v. Arnel Management Company, the plaintiff sued her former employer and owner and supervisors for sexual discrimination and harassment. The company tried to compel arbitration on the ground that each employee signed their employee handbook which stated “As a condition of employment, all employees are required to sign an arbitration agreement.”

Unfortunately for the company, it could not produce evidence of signed arbitration agreements. The court ruled that the handbook’s reference to arbitration was insufficient to force a plaintiff to arbitrate their claims “in large part because the handbook claimed that it was not a contract of employment and thus, unenforceable.”

Lesson learned: If you’re going to have arbitration agreements, provide them as stand-alone documents, make sure that counsel reviews them first, provide a consideration for signing them, and keep copies.

MOBILE TECHNOLOGY: ARE YOUR EMPLOYEES WORKING ON OR OFF THE CLOCK?

By Your Employee Matters

Today’s mobile technologies take us beyond the traditional workplace. How often have you seen parents playing with their BlackBerries while watching their kids’ activities? The fact that we’re constantly “on” might well have implications for wage and hour exposures in the workplace. Start with the understanding that if someone is truly an exempt employee there’s nothing you have to worry about. The challenge comes with non-exempt employees who are entitled to overtime.

An employee’s use of BlackBerry devices and cell phones can potentially violate requirements about accurate time keeping and overtime. As a general rule, the Fair Labor Standards Act does not require an employer to account for “de minimis” levels of activity. According to a Second Circuit opinion:

“[W]hen the matter in issue concerns only a few seconds or minutes of work beyond the scheduled working hours, such trifles may be disregarded. Split-second absurdities are not justified by the actualities of working conditions or by the policy of the Fair Labor Standards Act. It is only when an employee is required to give up a substantial measure of his time and effort that compensable working time is involved.

“Factors to consider in determining whether work done by an employee should be compensable include:

(1) the practical administrative difficulty of recording the additional time;
(2) the size of the claim in the aggregate, and;
(3) whether the claimants performed the work on a regular basis.

“It should be noted that according to a federal regulation, 10 minutes is not de minimis.”

The next big challenge is to define “on call” time. Where an employee is unable to use their time effectively for their own purposes, they’ll be considered to be “engaged to work” and thus on the clock. However, if they’re not required to remain on the premises, but simply have to leave a way for them to be contacted, they’re not considered to be working while on call. Of course, if an employee needs to be available on short notice, contacting them by their BlackBerry or cell phone only when they’re needed prevents them from being “on call.”

Savvy employers need to understand these definitions. If an employee violates the overtime or on call policy, you still have to pay them for their time, but you can discipline them accordingly. The bottom line: If non-exempt employees are working beyond de minimis amounts of time away from the worksite or if they’re “on call,” be prepared to pay up.

THE BROAD SCOPE OF THE PUBLIC POLICY EXCEPTION

By Your Employee Matters

In a case appealed from the Superior Court of Orange County, the Fourth Appellate District agreed with the broad standard set forth in the trial court in determining whether or not an employee’s termination violated public policy. In Casella v. Southwest Dealer Services, Casella claimed that his employment was terminated because he reported the company’s participation in its clients’ fraudulent business practices. Although there was no specific statute to criminalize these practices, the court relied on Penal Code section 487, which broadly proscribes theft by false pretense through fraudulent misrepresentations. In citing other cases they concluded that “when an employer discharges an employee who refuses to defraud a customer, the employer has violated a fundamental public policy and may be liable and charged with wrongful discharge.”

Lesson learned: Be very careful how you deal with any employee who claims employer wrongdoing. Be sure to get the advice of experienced employment law counsel immediately.