Originally Posted by Markw
HJO
I cant see your side of this discussion as valid from either the employee or the employer perpective. Maybe I'm looking through the wrong glasses and missing something. Do you actually own or manage a business that employs staff or are just saying this to bait me.
Firstly I don't give a damned about insurance companies profitability, personally I think the're the scum of the earth but in most cases they are unfortunately necessary. The organisation I work for is sufficiently large enough to be self insured but this doesnt eliminate underwriters etc.
Next your views of fines and receivership don't make sense, not from a business point of view. My company has a budget for next years projects in excess of $400M and about $2B over the next five years. Our protective clothing (trousers, shirts, overalls, jackets etc) expenditure for a year is about $1M. If we were fined $100K as a result of negligence or stupidity then there would be serious changes in the management even though $100K is not a significant amount compared to turnover. But that $100K still has to come out of profits and all business needs to profit to continue.
Fines are not part of business. They are an avoidable overhead that directly affects the company profit margin. Most fines are scaled, 1st offence small, next one larger, following one larger again. All coming out of profit. Can you afford it? Maybe you dont have shareholders/stakeholders/business owners.
Business need to profit to continue to employ staff, but your view is receivership is the norm. What a load of crap. You don't start a business with expectations of ending up bankrupt.
Lastly I watch either ACA or TT every night and swap between the most interesting stories. Generally companies go toes up through gross mis-management or through the dealings of others such as refusal to pay for goods or services etc. Gross mis-management like fines is avoidable, normally just takes a bit of common sense.