HOME PAGE

   
GO to Injured Worker Forum
Navigation:


FORUMS > LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Replying to Thread: Ins Companies well healed
Created On Friday 4, February, 2005 6:03 AM by Hammer


New forums at: http://forums.workcompcentral.com
Username:
Password:

Remember my login



Forget your login information?





Hammer
Senior Member

Posts: 750
Joined: Apr 2004

Friday February 04, 2005 6:03 AM

User is offline View users profile View thread in raw text format

I see ins. companies are doing just fine under SB899.
Safeco is up 58%
Zenith's net more than doubles
Chubb sees high increase in bottom line
Allmerica (Ins Co.) sees 400% net growth.
Workplace homicides jump in 2003 - 81% of 631 victims were females.

SB 899 is doing a great job.
Good work Arnie.!!!!!

Joe-No.1

-------------------------
wcpilaw@yahoo.com -

Reply
Quote
Top
Bottom



p&i
Junior Member

Posts: 16
Joined: Sep 2003

Friday February 04, 2005 8:11 AM

User is offline View thread in raw text format

Just wondering, what does the increase in workplace homicides in 2003 have to do with Arnie?

Reply
Quote
Top
Bottom



Hammer
Senior Member

Posts: 750
Joined: Apr 2004

Friday February 04, 2005 1:10 PM

User is offline View users profile View thread in raw text format

Everything!!!

He doesn't care as long as IC profits are up........

-------------------------
wcpilaw@yahoo.com -

Reply
Quote
Top
Bottom



workcompmaven
Member

Posts: 81
Joined: Jun 2002

Friday February 04, 2005 3:55 PM

User is offline View users profile View thread in raw text format

I still think the well "healed" insurance companies are "kneeded".

Sorry, I couldn"t help myself.

Fred

Reply
Quote
Top
Bottom



mymarykay101@aol.com
Member

Posts: 98
Joined: Apr 2004

Friday February 04, 2005 4:17 PM

User is offline View thread in raw text format

Did p&i really ask that?

MK

Reply
Quote
Top
Bottom



Hammer
Senior Member

Posts: 750
Joined: Apr 2004

Friday February 11, 2005 6:27 AM

User is offline View users profile View thread in raw text format

Today I see that AIG has NET, I say NET, record increase of 11.05 billion.
Ohio Casualty doubles net income.

Absent is any mention of any reduction in WC premiums to CA Businesses.

JOe - No.1



02-15-05

I had to add this bit of info for those that think I am blowing hot air.
AIG was served with subpoenas by the NY atty general this week for questionable practices. ?????



-------------------------
wcpilaw@yahoo.com -

Edited: Tuesday February 15, 2005 at 9:16 PM by Hammer

Reply
Quote
Top
Bottom



gaiassoul1@yahoo.com
Senior Member

Posts: 1275
Joined: Feb 2004

Friday February 11, 2005 10:10 AM

User is offline View users profile View thread in raw text format

Just quoting insurance company profits out of context is so misleading. Everytime I see this kind of post my urge to cast spells on ignorance just bubbles over.

DID any CA book of business in a work comp company post an underwriting profit???? I only had time to look up three major insurance companies as to profit centers posting profit. Sorry but the numbers are not good enough to entice me to open up an insurance company doing solely CA work comp, the reward vs. effort is not adding up. Is anyone else interested in not seeing SCIF take over the whole state given the bulk of their claims handling procedures?

You are pointing at national multiline companies with a national base for business profit.

Yet as business people --- if you had a department that consistently posted losses on a income received basis, you would cut that department in a heartbeat, unless you saw a cyclical basis in which you could recover prior losses. So until that has occurred and someone posts the actual facts as to an underwriting profit for an insurance company's CA work comp business you all are DREAMING.

As to the studies on work place homicides -- again you all are lawyers, doctors and other very well educated people, OR are you all just PROPAGANDA machines? The number of work place homicides due to injuries is minimal. SO thanks for more out of context information. The actual fingerpointing for work place homicides goes to increased chemical dependancy, a perceived loss of value as an employee in a marketplace and the overall reduction of wages due to competition with a world marketplace that produces most things much more cheaply because the powers that be in the Federal government signed trade agreements with countries that do not have to live up to regulations the same Federal government foisted on the society here, etc. etc. etc.

When quoting statistics, do you not feel it necessary to read through the crap??? I see some fine minds posting here falling for Michael Moore style fear that is based on questionable information. Ok, I think I broke the soap box from stomping on it in frustration.

Ginger who got an A in every statistics class in college

Reply
Quote
Top
Bottom



Hammer
Senior Member

Posts: 750
Joined: Apr 2004

Friday February 11, 2005 2:07 PM

User is offline View users profile View thread in raw text format

You read between the lines my dear.

You have an exposed nerve or what????
I am simply pointing out what the latest news is regarding how bad WC Ins. companies are doing.
If you get your shorts all in a bunch, that says something about where you are coming from.

It is no secret that you are an adjuster/def paralegal or whatever you call yourself today and have very strong feelings about what you do.

So do I.

Joe - No. 1

-------------------------
wcpilaw@yahoo.com -

Edited: Thursday February 17, 2005 at 2:53 PM by Hammer

Reply
Quote
Top
Bottom



fernrep
Senior Member

Posts: 301
Joined: Jan 2004

Friday February 11, 2005 2:43 PM

User is offline View thread in raw text format

Sorry, Hammer, but even I, who am on the applicant side, have to say that that comment regarding Ginger ("whatever you call yourself today") was uncalled for. If you ever look at the Injured Worker forum, you will see that she goes way beyond the call of duty to assist injured workers. I realize she works for a defense firm, but I just don't see her as one of those people who feels that her job is to trample on the rights of injured workers. I'm off my soapbox now.

Edited: Friday February 11, 2005 at 2:46 PM by fernrep

Reply
Quote
Top
Bottom



gaiassoul1@yahoo.com
Senior Member

Posts: 1275
Joined: Feb 2004

Friday February 11, 2005 3:13 PM

User is offline View users profile View thread in raw text format

Joe,

I have been totally honest and upfront with anyone who asks what my current position is. I have never misrepresented my position. You did not just point out how insurance companies were doing, your thread is inflammatory, your unhappy face is inflammatory and so are the comments about SB899 and Arnie, although I don't like either.

Are you afraid of someone pointing out that your post is baseless and lacks in substance despite your education? I was well aware I was delivering a rant, because misquoting statistics for fear based sensationalism is one of my pet peeves. This is equivalent to fear based ethics -- I wouldn't do that because I might go to hell? How about if you just don't do it because it is contrary to other humans?

I have been in this business for 15 years....just an FYI and full disclosure, I started as a medical only clerk, moved to a lien negotiator, did AOE/COE investigations, was an adjuster on and off, held a position as a hearing rep for Chubb for a number of years, did independent hearing work on both sides, and have never in the past two years either represented myself as anything either than a defense firm paralegal or unemployed because that is all I have done for the last two years. I also consult independently with employers as to managing work comp issues, I consult with multiple parties if there are no conflicts, since as we know no private defense firm will ever work for SCIF, I have no conflict consulting with an A/A on a case against SCIF. I do not consult against any other TPA or insurance company because that would be like shooting myself in the head and I have one of the best bosses and work for one of the best, well paying firms in the state.

I am going to get on my soapbox and you will get my panties in a knot if anyone EVER uses scare tactics based on incomplete facts. The reason there is a forum is that people can respectfully state opinions and then the right to disagree is available. SO yes, if you review 95% of my responses you will see balance for the most part, I am my own worst critic as to maintaining INTEGRITY which requires that I follow the law to the best of my ability and I convey that to everyone I come in contact with.

Thank all of the goddesses in the skies I am passionate about what I do, it makes me a worthy adversary. I don't know your last name, but I can almost guarantee if you practice in Southern CA, given the amount of time I have been an adjuster or hearing rep, you have had a case with me. You need to ask some people about me....there aren't that many Gingers in this business. Trust me I am well aware and grounded in my reputation in the work comp community,

My favorite quote goes jointly to Ron Feenberg and Marvin Sharpiro of RKM, Los Angeles, when a very green applicant attorney with a 100% header off the roof case went to them in the midst of negotiations to ask if my offer was fair. Both of them told the A/A that my negotiating style was fair, that "the injured worker would get every penny that the applicant was entitled to, but good luck squeezing out a penny more."

So before you stomp out the spirit of any forum....figure out who you are talking to.


Fern, not all applicant attorney's appreciate what I do on the WC injured workers forum -- in fact I have received private emails telling me to stop. My knowledge scares them, intimadates them and they think they will be out of work if I keep it up (I wish I had that much spare time). However Fern, thank you for pointing out that I believe I have helped not only injured workers, but I have stood up when you and other applicant attorney's were asking questions (today even to APPESQ) and said when I thought the defense attorney were leading them down the wrong path.

If you have any sense of integrity you cannot be less than passionate with balance. So yes if you slam anyone and I think you are too hystrionic, not looking at all of the facts, I will respond. Last time I checked free speech remains my right and forums still are about opinions, I want to make people THINK issues all the way through. So curse the gods and goddesses, if you like, who granted me with way too much IQ and dropped me down on this planet and told me to stay out of trouble, knowing full well I could not. For as far back as I can recall, people either love me or hate me, it has never bothered me one way or the other because I answer to myself and myself alone. When you are your own worst critic, topping what other people do is of no consequence, topping yourself is a daily goal.

Ginger

Edited: Friday February 11, 2005 at 3:26 PM by gaiassoul1@yahoo.com

Reply
Quote
Top
Bottom



Hammer
Senior Member

Posts: 750
Joined: Apr 2004

Friday February 11, 2005 3:42 PM

User is offline View users profile View thread in raw text format

Paralegal, adjuster, injured worker yourself, and a few other things. I have heard it all before.
You have made the same statements more than once. I am not implying that you are not fair or give fair opinions, I was replying to your very biased comments to my posting of the news that was posted here on WCC.

If you have a problem with that then that is your problem.

I will look forward to meeting you in court, but to bad I will not have the opportunity to go to trial with you. I also have been in the WC field over 25 yrs and would love the opportunity to do a trial with you.

Joe


-------------------------
wcpilaw@yahoo.com -

Edited: Tuesday March 08, 2005 at 6:08 AM by Hammer

Reply
Quote
Top
Bottom



gfisher00@yahoo.com
Senior Member

Posts: 521
Joined: Jun 2003

Friday February 11, 2005 4:18 PM

User is offline View thread in raw text format

Hey, Joe, I kind of have to jump in here for Ginger (not that she needs my help, mind you), because I think she was just trying to say that the statistics you quoted don't necessarily mean the insurance companies are making a killing on their WC business. Nor is there a for-sure causal link between workplace suicides and SB899. I have to agree with that. What we need are direct statistics to show the profitability of WC alone, since implementation of the new law, before we accuse the ICs of failing to pass savings on to employers. This doesn't mean I, like you, am not skeptical of the ICs in this regard, just that I don't think those stats are complete.

And to Ginger, in private (so everyone else turn away), as an AA, I think it is great what you do for IWs in the IW forum. Keep it up!

Gilbert

Reply
Quote
Top
Bottom



gaiassoul1@yahoo.com
Senior Member

Posts: 1275
Joined: Feb 2004

Friday February 11, 2005 6:27 PM

User is offline View users profile View thread in raw text format

You are a brave man with a backbone Gilbert!

Thanks for interpreting my rant.

Ginger

Reply
Quote
Top
Bottom



CaMiz
Member

Posts: 76
Joined: Sep 2004

Friday February 11, 2005 8:59 PM

User is offline View thread in raw text format

There's an article at the East Bay Business Journal's 1/21/05 edition stating that WC premiums went down 17%. I am not familiar with this publication so it would be a very welcome piece of news if indeed this has merit. Here's the link for the 1/21/05 edition - http://eastbay.bizjournals.com/eastbay/stories/2005/01/24/story8.html

Interesting enough, there was an article at www.consumerwatchdog.org, which reprinted a 5/14/04 article from LA Times, about Garamendi's hopes on premium reduction. The article stated ... "Garamendi, though conceding that the bulk of the new bill's relief won't be felt until next year, said he was likely to recommend that insurers cut rates beginning this summer by at least 18%. The proposed reduction, he said, would reflect savings from this year's law and two other workers' comp bills passed by the Legislature in 2003." The news item also mentioned a Douglas Heller, director of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, a Santa Monica activist group, who said "......premiums should drop by at least the 14% estimated by the rating bureau." Here's the link to that article FROM A YEAR AGO - http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/insurance/nw/nw004269.php3

It seems to me that the reductions are almost on track with the reform intent (it is off 1% from what Garamendi hoped)..... but it is a wonderful start.

The statement that workplace homicides jumped in 2003 doesn't seem to have any significance in all this anti-SB899 rhetoric, as SB899 didn't get approved until 2004..... you think people started killing people at work because they don't want p.t. to be limited to 24 visits? I'm not sure THAT's worth any jailtime for murder.

And by the way, Gilbert.... I'm not turning around. I've known you to be fair in the mutual cases I used to adjust where you were the applicant attorney .... and that was before I joined the forum. Reading your posts only reinforces that belief. Thanks for being around.


-----------

EXCLUSIVE REPORTS

From the January 21, 2005 print edition


Workers' comp premiums drop by 17 percent

Chris Rauber


California's workers' compensation costs are finally coming down significantly, although not far or fast enough to satisfy many business owners.


Average annual premium rates from some of the state's top workers' comp insurers have declined by nearly 17 percent since January 2004, according to figures from the California Department of Insurance. And some clients are seeing cumulative declines of 24 percent or more.


At the State Compensation Insurance Fund, the quasi-public behemoth that insures about 53 percent of the state's comp market, rates have fallen by an average of nearly 15 percent since early last year.


While cautioning that State Fund "can't project or announce future rate filings," State Fund spokesman Jim Zelinski said, "We do believe the last two reform packages have the potential to realize really substantial cost savings. When those savings materialize, that will be reflected in future rates."


Without providing details, Zelinski said the state government is also starting to see rate reductions for its own employees as a result of the reforms passed by the state Legislature under former Gov. Gray Davis in late 2003 and under Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger last spring.


Meanwhile, cumulative rate cuts since January 2004 from leading comp insurers such as Zurich American Insurance and Republic Indemnity Co. of California exceeded 24 percent, and those at Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance topped out at an even 20 percent.


Employers Direct Insurance, which entered the market two years ago, has matched Insurance Commissioner John Garamendi's rate-reduction recommendations, said CEO Jim Little, filing for reductions totaling 24 percent over the last 12 months.


Douglas Helm, Employers Direct's vice president of corporate marketing and Northern California sales, said insurers "are competing harder for business in the Bay Area than anywhere else in California."


But the reductions are taking place on a broad canvas.


"Not only are employers' costs going down, but we've turned the tide on medical inflation and for the first time in a decade insurers are not losing money and running in the red," said Nicole Mahrt, a spokeswoman for the American Insurance Association's Sacramento-based western division. "That's going to bring more insurers back into the (California) market."


Indeed, several new entrants have joined the comp fray in California in the past year, and others have expanded their presence in the market, notably units of Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Inc.


Norman Williams, a spokesman for the Department of Insurance, confirmed that reductions of nearly 17 percent are along the lines of what the DOI and other sources are reporting. Those sources include the Workers Compensation Insurance Rating Bureau, an industry-backed nonprofit that collects data on rates.


Not everyone is satisfied by the recent declines, especially since a beleaguered comp system forced thousands of businesses to swallow huge increases from 2000 through 2003.


Small Business California, a San Francisco-based group representing small businesses, is demanding that insurers quickly align their rates to reflect their improved financial and actuarial results over the last year or so.


Scott Hauge, a San Francisco-based insurance broker and small-business activist who helped create the group, said the WCIRB study proves that insurers "could be passing on even greater savings to small businesses."


In addition, since rates were adjusted upward every six months by hard-pressed carriers in the lean years between 2000 and 2004, "now they should be adjusted down every six months," in the interest of fairness.


Employers Direct's Little said his company's reductions have probably plateaued for the year, barring major unexpected changes, but that other insurers are likely to reduce rates.


"A 24 percent rate reduction in 12 months is pretty dramatic," he said. "(But) other companies may not have been able to go to that level (yet), so we may see rates tend to trend down to the levels recommended by Garamendi by mid-year."


In addition, if the comp market stays stable, "unlike the tortuous volatility over the last eight years, we'll see more capital coming in and we'll see more competitors, which will drive prices down more."



Rauber is a reporter for the San Francisco Business Times, an affiliated publication.


ᄅ 2005 American City Business Journals Inc.
----





Edited: Friday February 11, 2005 at 9:05 PM by CaMiz

Reply
Quote
Top
Bottom



Hammer
Senior Member

Posts: 750
Joined: Apr 2004

Friday February 11, 2005 9:50 PM

User is offline View users profile View thread in raw text format

Very informative CaMiz:

However, homicides do not = murders.
Homicide is the death of a human being.
Murder is the killing of one human being by another human being.
[Law School first year crim pro..]
You are right murder has no place or reference to the WC situatuion.
However work related deaths = homicides due to unsafe work conditions or serious injuries do.

I do not think IW began to kill one anther on the job because they lost the ptp presumption.

What is totally unrelated here is any mention of murder.

Joe - No.1

-------------------------
wcpilaw@yahoo.com -

Reply
Quote
Top
Bottom



CaMiz
Member

Posts: 76
Joined: Sep 2004

Friday February 11, 2005 10:56 PM

User is offline View thread in raw text format



<< Murder is the killing of one human being by another human being.
[Law School first year crim pro..]
>>



Point taken, I think.
"All I understood about homicides, I learned from Law and Order". Unabashedly guilty.
And from the dictionary.
But I still don't understand how 2004 SB899 = increase in 2003 "workplace homicides"
Its like putting the horse before the cart.
Hm, it must be the Sudafed.



Edited: Friday February 11, 2005 at 11:52 PM by CaMiz

Reply
Quote
Top
Bottom



kenkrasne
Junior Member

Posts: 12
Joined: Dec 2003

Tuesday February 15, 2005 8:58 AM

User is offline View thread in raw text format

It really burns me that anyone would defend the IC's in this issue. I am a business owner and my rates have not been reduced despite the fact that I have NEVER had a claim. As a matter of fact, my rates have increased by 7% over last year. SCIF reduced their base rate but then reduced or eliminated their "experience" deductions and others. That is not a savings no matter how they classify it.

I would invite anyone who wants to know if w/c insurance in california is profitable to visit the Weiss ratings and look it up for yourself. I am not a huge proponent of rate control but something has to give.




Reply
Quote
Top
Bottom



gfisher00@yahoo.com
Senior Member

Posts: 521
Joined: Jun 2003

Tuesday February 15, 2005 4:29 PM

User is offline View thread in raw text format

Not to get technical here, but actually a homicide is the killing of one human being by another, not necessarily murder, but not simply the death of a human being either. More precisely, and per Black's Law Dictionary, homicide is "the killing of one human being by the act, procurement, or omission of another." Murder is therefore a homicide, as homicide would be a necessary element of murder, or manslaughter, but homicide is not necessarily a murder, as it may lack the intent required to be murder.

As to defending the insurance companies, I am not. They are a business, and entitled to make a profit, like any other business in a market system, and absent controls, to make whatever profit the market bears. That is why if employers wanted lower rates, they should probably have backed some form of rate control, rather than thinking that slimply slashing IW benefits would give them any savings. Perhaps the savings are on the way, perhaps not.


Edited: Tuesday February 15, 2005 at 4:30 PM by gfisher00@yahoo.com

Reply
Quote
Top
Bottom



postscript
Senior Member

Posts: 1053
Joined: Oct 2004

Tuesday February 15, 2005 6:09 PM

User is offline View thread in raw text format



For those that know me, I may regret this, but, the IC I work for is a Large National Firm who has reduced writing W/C business down to 15% in California, due to no profits. When reading numbers, be objective of the fact that IC's write multi-lines and W/C in CA has always been a loser (in my 15 years of experience). If they are making profits, they sure don't pass them down to their employees either. Bonus time rolled out for 3 years in a row, take nothing. Ever since I "fell into this business (as a clerk)", I have heard that W/C was included only as a tax write off because of non profiting. Then again, I got "A,s" in college for being objective.

My 5 cents worth.

LCS

Reply
Quote
Top
Bottom



Hammer
Senior Member

Posts: 750
Joined: Apr 2004

Tuesday February 15, 2005 9:05 PM

User is offline View users profile View thread in raw text format

Gilbert

Thanks for not getting techinical.
Murder is a homicide whenever there is the death of a human being.
The converse is not true.
A homicide is not always a murder. The killing (homicide) of one human being by another.
I believe that is what I stated.

Where is my BAR/BRI when I really need it???

Joe - No.1

P.S.

I do believe we just heard from the business comminity on this issue.
I am sure this business person's opinion is very biased.
Is anyone going to "go on the attack" against this business person.??????????????????

I for one welcome more comments fron the CA business community as they were the ones that were suppose to benefit from this new rate reducing SB 899.



-------------------------
wcpilaw@yahoo.com -

Edited: Tuesday February 15, 2005 at 9:12 PM by Hammer

Reply
Quote
Top
Bottom

You are in message post mode [ FORUMS : THREADS ]

FuseTalk 3.0 - Copyright © 1999-2002 e-Zone Media Inc. All rights reserved.
© 2013 WorkCompCentral Workers Compensation Forums