Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

11627Re: [infoguys-list] Re: Los Angeles, CA

Expand Messages
  • Bob Hrodey
    Dec 2, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      dts683 wrote:
      > Bob Hrodey wrote:
      >
      >> Then you're doing it wrong. Like Sue and Rick, when I see requests
      >> for "sub-contractors" at $25-$50/hour who are required to be
      >> licensed,insured, etc. I laugh. I also believe that in such a case,
      >> your argument about WC expense, employees, etc. have no place in the
      >> equation. If I conform to your needs with regard to licensing, etc.
      >> I am the one incurring the expense of WC, insurance, admin,
      >> mileage, etc. NOT you.
      >>
      >
      >
      > Bob,
      >
      > I agree with everything you said, with the exception of one minor
      > point. Having just gone through an insurance audit, I can tell you
      > that most PIs do not have workers' compensation insurance. If I
      > engage the services of either an individual PI or a PI agency and
      > they do not have workers' compensation coverage, I am on the hook for
      > paying that premium. Not one of the individual PIs that I engaged to
      > do work for me on a subcontract basis had workers' compensation
      > coverage; and only two of the PI agencies did. All of them had
      >

      IIRC, my firm was one of the ones that did, no?

      You point is well taken, just as it is, as you say, a minor point when
      taken in the context of my statement above, i.e. I was referring to
      those contractors who are looking to have their subs fully licensed and
      insured. If that's the case, my argument stands.

      Your argument is also valid in some cases and with regard to those
      contractors who don't have WC themselves, well, they better hope that
      the guy they hire at $30 an hour is playing heads up ball since
      insurance or no, they will likely find that they are still on the hook
      for injuries incurred by their uninsured sub contractor.

      > The bottom line is that the contractor is more than likely
      > left "holding the bag" to pay workers' compensation coverage on the
      > subcontractor. On the other hand, it is likely that the contractor
      > doesn't have workers' compensation coverage anyway. If the
      > contractor does happen to have workers' compensation coverage, the
      >

      Your argument is also valid in some cases and with regard to those
      contractors who don't have WC themselves, well, they better hope that
      the guy they hire at $30 an hour is playing heads up ball since
      insurance or no, they will likely find that they are still on the hook
      for injuries incurred by their uninsured sub contractor.


      --

      Enjoy,

      Bob
      ________________________________________________________________
      Hrodey & Associates Established 1977
      Post Office Box 366 Member of NALI, ASIS, FBINAA, NAPPS
      Woodstock, IL 60098-0366 NCISS, Assoc Det of IL & P.A.W.L.I.
      Licensed in IL & WI (815) 337-4636 Voice 337-4638 Fax
      email: inquiry@... or rth@...
      Illinois License 115-000783 Wisconsin 8045-063



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Show all 24 messages in this topic