Insurers take a dim view of arming school employees

[Dittohead not!]

You don't know how insurance works, you've made assumptions as always based on whatever it is you read. I was in it, don't try to bull**** me.

Were you in it for profit, or simply for the pure joy of helping out fellow human beings?

 

[CRUE CAB]

This wouldn't be just an idea. It would be a blow for freedom. They would run an insurance company and use it to promote their beliefs. Just imagine the gun rights the NRA could promote if their members knew they could insure every gun action.

You still havent explained what they are covering that your homeowners insurance is not covering already.

 

[LaMidRighter]

Were you in it for profit, or simply for the pure joy of helping out fellow human beings?

I was in it to make a living, but I would not engage in any sale I thought was one sided, whether that was towards the client, company, or me. Insurance is the type of business where the honest and dishonest alike enter the market, there are opportunities to change contract in favor of the company and some will exploit that window to the fullest, and because it's a risk based industry that becomes an opportunity to do so, but it tends to be based on some kind of believable numbers.

This particular incident is ridiculous, there is no way that the numbers reconcile to a rate increase. I get that people are arguing that the damage and cost potential increases, but the risk nummbers don't bear it out.
Here's a quick for instance'
1) Risk averse situations tend to weight against premiums such as;
- Dangerous occupation
- Dangerous habits
- Conditions present which influence health, propery, life history.
2) Flip that for risk neutral or positive and it positively effects the premium.

I guess what I'm saying is the company is just making this up, and it could be either an executive playing politics or it could be a money grab. There is just no data backing up their assertion, in fact they could potentially be found to be gouging based on the numbers and that's the kind of thing that gets audits and inquiries started by state insurance commissioners.

 

[American]

Are you sure about that?

I think the school can be held liable for injury/death of a student regardless of whether a school employee had anything to do with it. Schools are already getting rid of swings and merry go rounds at the behest of their insurers even though injuries caused by that equipment is not the fault of school employees.

In other news, insurers have demanded that school desks be fitted with seat belts and airbags to reduce head injuries caused by sleeping students.