insurance

[growler]

I think most G.C.'s want you to carry it if you are working for them, because if something happens to you on there project they don't want you using it against them.

As an independent contractor workman's comp will not protect the GC because you are not an employee.

The real reason a GC will want you to have workman's comp is because when he fills out his audit forms he has to list any sub contracted work and provide copies of their workman's comp insurance or his carrier will make him pay for this insurance.

You have to be real carefull with your workman's comp because anything you sub out ( even if you hire a company to dig a ditch for you) will be subject to audit even casual labor. Even if you use a temp agency you still have to get copies of their insurance.

 

[GUNNING]

Aflac!

Aflac!

Insurance is a necessary evil. If you use it, you loose it. If you figure on the expense of changing the legal name and transfering your license and equipment to another entity its about the same as the cost of the insurance.

On the other hand, for 3% for workers comp, a full coverage disability policy, its a bargain.

Go figure.

 

[petersonra]

The disability and health care, will not protect the homeowner or company you are working for, by law since we are incorporated we have to pay both the state fund, and a private company, gets expensive, and we still pay for health insurances on top of everything else.

W/C does not protect the HO at all.

It does not protect a contractor who subs out work either.

It is strictly a protection for the employer. Essentially what happens is the employee gives up most rights to sue his employer over an injury and has to accept whatever WC pays instead.

WC does not prevent an injured employee from suing a third party such as a contractor or HO. And in fact, they often do. But, in many cases the fact that they accepted a WC settlement has the practical effect of protecting a third party since their losses have been made whole by WC.

 

[satcom]

W/C does not protect the HO at all.

It does not protect a contractor who subs out work either.

It is strictly a protection for the employer. Essentially what happens is the employee gives up most rights to sue his employer over an injury and has to accept whatever WC pays instead.

WC does not prevent an injured employee from suing a third party such as a contractor or HO. And in fact, they often do. But, in many cases the fact that they accepted a WC settlement has the practical effect of protecting a third party since their losses have been made whole by WC.

Bob, comp laws differ from state to state, the HO who hires a contractor without workers comp, takes on the entire burden of injury to the worker, and yes he sue everybody in line if he is injured, however if he, or his employer, has workers comp, there are limits to the HO libality in most states, that is the protection the homeowner, or company has in hiring a contractor with WC.

Out of the last 30 years of jury duty, every time we were seated it was for a comp case, and in case you haven't been on a comp jury, it is a real experience in both our court system and the fairness of a trial, the cases vary from someone injured shoveling snow, to
someone loosing a hand in a machine, but most of them are falls, and employee auto accidents.

 

[Split Bolt]

Whatever the laws say state to state and whether or not you are legally required to carry w/c, you WILL be required to provide a certificate if you want to work for a reputable GC! Bottom line! Who or what it covers is irrelevant! If you don't have it, you won't be getting the job!