My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-24-2007 Additions
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2007
>
01-24-2007 Additions
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/9/2011 1:11:09 PM
Creation date
11/9/2011 1:10:36 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
30
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Before selecting retro- rating, it's often helpful to do a "what if' calculation of what the city's <br />premiums would have been for each of the past few years if the city had had a retrospective <br />rating plan in place. This can be a useful tool for cities evaluating retro - rating options. <br />A city that's using a retro option should annually review that decision to make sure it still makes <br />sense for the city. A good time for that review is when you receive the annual adjustment bill or <br />refund, about six months after the city's expiration date The adjustment mailing includes the <br />relevant loss and premium data, so you'll have the information you need and plenty of time to . <br />review and make an informed decision for the upcoming renewal. Especially in your first year <br />under a retro, it's a good idea also to look at your current -year losses after nine or ten months to <br />see how you're doing and whether you want to continue with the retro at your renewal. A couple <br />questions to ask when reviewing the retro option: <br />• Are the funds available to cover the city's potential costs? Remember that even a single <br />serious injury could be expensive enough to push the city's cost to the maximum for the year. <br />Keep in mind too that claims from prior years sometimes re -open or increase in cost, which <br />means that the city can owe, addition amounts for prior years as well. To use a retro is to <br />retain risk, and when you retain risk it's critically important that that risk be funded — i.e., <br />have a plan for where the funds would come from to cover the city's potential obligations <br />under the retro. <br />• Does the retro- rating option still make sense for the city? Are you still comfortable trading <br />off certainty in costs for some potential savings? In light of your loss history and your safety <br />program, are you reasonably confident that you'll be able to keep employee injuries down <br />enough to save money in the coming year? <br />For more information about the retrospective rating options, refer to the "Workers' <br />Compensation Retrospective Rating Options" memo. <br />Retro close -out option <br />After five years, the city has the option to close out retro -rated coverage from previous years. If <br />a city closes out the retro, no further adjustments are then made to the city's premiums under the <br />retro -rated formula, regardless of what future changes there may be in the city's paid or incurred <br />losses. The charge for the close -out is a percentage of the city's incurred losses for the coverage <br />year in question. You may call Barb Meyer at 651 -215 -4173 to calculate your city's close -out <br />charges. For more information about the retro close -out option, refer to the "Workers' <br />Compensation Retro Close -Out Option" memo. <br />Deductible options <br />Under a deductible option, the city pays a lower premium in return for agreeing to reimburse <br />LMCIT for paid medical losses up to a set deductible. If the city selects a deductible option, the <br />deductible applies per occurrence to medical costs only. There are six deductible options <br />ranging from a $250 deductible with a 2.5% premium credit to a $10,000 deductible with an <br />19.5% premium credit. <br />- 5 - <br />- 2 8 - <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.