07/21/1994 P&Z Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

6125917404 BERKLEY EBA F-155 T-056 P-004/006 OCT 14 '91 13:26 The expiration date of this coverage will be coordinated with the city's LMCIT workers compensation coverage. For cities that add this coverage mid-term, the initial premium will be pro -rated. Why would the city want this coverage? Aren't injuries to volunteers already covered under the city's liability coverage? An injury to a volunteer would be covered by the IMCIT liability coverage only if the city was legally liable for that injury; that is, if the injury was caused by some negligence by the city or a city officer or employee or another city volunteer. However, just as with any other tort claim, the city would not be liable for en injury to a volunteer if the volunteer him/herself were more at fault than the city, or if the injury were simply an accident that really wasn't an one's fault. A volunteer coach being hit in the heed by a batted baseball might be an example of the latter situation. The volunteer accident coverage protects the volunteer on a "no-fault" basis. The benefits are automatically payable if the injury occurs while the volunteer is performing cervices for the city, regardless of whose fault it was. Besides protecting the volunteer whose injury isn't caused by the city's negligence, having these no-fault benefits available could also help avoid . litigation in cases where the city (or a city officer, employee, or other volunteer) is or may be at fault. The injured volunteer can receive these benefits without getting into an adversary situation against the dity. Of course, if the volunteer's injuries exceeded the benefits paid under this coverage, he/she would still be able to make a tort claim against the city for those excess damages, if the injury was caused by the city's negligence. Why did LMCIT create a whole new _program? Why not just offer e "voluntary workers compensation endorsement" andprovide workers compensation benefits to volunteers? The LMCIT Board chose this approach for several reasons. First, this approach is substantially less expensive to the city 'than providing workers compensation benefits would be. The basic premiums are roughly a fifth of the cost of workers compensation benefits, reflecting the more limited scope of benefits provided. Second, administration iia simpler for the city, since the city doesn't have to keep records of how many hours were worked by how many volunteers, etc. Third, it eliminates the problem of determining what the appropriate indemnity rate is for an unpaid volunteer. (This is particularly problematic with volunteers who don't have other paying employment.)