• Home
    • Workers Comp Audit Stress Reducer – Use It For Your Next Premium Audit
  • About Us
    • Cutting Workers Comp Costs – About Our Company
    • President – Expert James J Moore AIC MBA ChFC ARM
    • OSHA Risk Manager – Glen DuLac – Added To Fulfill Customer Service
  • Work Comp Consultants
  • Free Info
    • Definitions
    • Free Speech
  • Testimonials
  • FAQ
  • Free Manuals
  • Six Secrets
  • Blog
  • Contact Us

J&L Risk Management Consultants

Work Comp expert witness reserve reviews premium audits for employers

icons
Call us today! 1-800-813-1386
WORKERS' COMPENSATION PREMIUM REFUNDS POSSIBLE.
Home » Archives for April 2012

Archives for April 2012

Payroll and Premium Audit Urgent Question – $85,000 Audit Bill

April 26, 2012 By JL Risk Management Consultants

Urgent Question – Payroll and Premium Audit

I received this urgent question on payroll and premium audit at 2 AM. The sender must have been losing sleep over it.

Picture of Sand Time Urgent Question Inside

(c) 123rf.com

We are now with a new carrier. Our Workers Comp Payroll Auditor came into our business four months ago. She went through our books and said everything looked good except for a few things.

We just received a bill for $85,000 with an overdue notice. We received no other warning and had no idea the bill would be so much. Our original Workers Comp policy was $105,000.

Should we just pay the bill as we are so late? How do we find out the results of the audit? Can we dispute the $85,000 bill? Should we contact the Insurance Commissioner? Please answer ASAP.

The insurance carrier will usually send the audit bill to the contact information they receive during the premium audit or the address on the policy. I looked up your company address and it is a PO Box. If you have a PO Box and the carrier sent it to your physical address, the bill and the backup info from the audit was likely returned to the carrier.

Your letter may have gone into a pile of returned envelopes at the carrier or will sometimes get lost in the mail. The carrier sent you the final notice by FedEx so it was delivered directly to your physical address.

The best way to find out the results of your audit is to immediately write the billing office noted on the bill. Send the letter certified return receipt. Explain to the carrier what happened and ask for a copy of the audit results and the auditor’s workpapers. Make sure you note that you receive mail at a PO Box.

Picture of Business man Calculating Urgent Question Payroll and Premium Audit

123rf

This previous article on your choices when you receive an audit bill may help you. Judging from the name of your company, it is likely you have hired subcontractors. That could be the source of the additional premiums.

Quite often, a new carrier will view your workplace differently than the last carrier. Your business may have added in additional employees which will cause a spike in your payrolls resulting in an increase in premiums.

A cardinal sin is to dispute a bill without a basis. Another cardinal sin is to contact the Insurance Commissioner’s office until all other means have been exhausted. This will harm the relationship with your new carrier and your agent even before your first payroll and premium audit. 

©J&L Risk Management Inc Copyright Notice

Filed Under: Premium audit, Workers Comp Payroll Audits Tagged With: dispute, envelopes, workpapers

Emod Changes Article – Woops – I made a mistake earlier

April 25, 2012 By JL Risk Management Consultants

Emod Changes – A Correction To One Figure

The Emod Changes articles that  I wrote last week had a slight error. The E-Mod/X-Mod changes that I posted over the last two weeks had an error in them. I rarely ever go back and correct or change a post. This time I thought that I would go ahead and correct it.

Graphic Of Check Mark Emod Changes Icon

StockUnlimited

 

The link to the post is in the last paragraph. Unfortunately, the NCCI had the 2014 Primary Loss figure at $13,500. I originally calculated the Primary Loss at 13,000. The correction actually increased the Mod another .01.

 

If you are not self-insured, I would heavily recommend looking over the two posts on the 2013 and 2014 changes to the E-Mod. The NCCI has decided to build in an increase for the unsafe companies and to reward the safe companies by increasing the Primary Loss and reducing the Excess Loss.


The basic effect is that in a three-year time span the Primary Loss is going to increase from 5,000 to 15,000. The primary losses are basically where workers compensation insurance is charged at the highest rate.


The Excess Losses have a discount factor and figure into the E-mod at a much less severe rate. If your state has its own rating bureau, they are very likely going to follow the same model. I will post in the next few weeks whether or not any of the State Rating Bureaus are going to use the new model.


The NCCI and most other rating bureaus are going to increase the Primary Loss again in 2015 and then build in an inflation factor for 2016 and beyond. It is time to take control of your E-Mod now.  Your company should try to monitor any Emod changes to your rating bureau account.

 

©J&L Risk Management Inc Copyright Notice

Filed Under: E-Mod X-Mod Tagged With: Excess Losses, inflation factor

Australian Compo Paid To Woman Injured During Sex

April 19, 2012 By JL Risk Management Consultants

Australian Compo Benefits For  Woman Injured During Sex

Australian Compo is paid out on a very questionable claim.

Picture Of Businesswoman Australian Compo Pulls Male Coworker Towards Her With His Tie

StockUnlimited

 An Australian woman is injured during sex at a hotel. Believe it or not, the judge ruled that this is the same as watching TV or taking a shower. I am not sure of the whole story. It seems a lamp on the wall was the cause of the injury that involved what it looks to be disfigurement. Read the story here.

Australian Workers Comp benefits are called compo. The comments of her companion are interesting. I thought this was a joke when I first read it. It was not likely a joke to the government agency that was her employer. The claim was filed in 2007.

The woman was a government worker that is covered 24 hours a day according to the judge’s ruling.  There are many strange files where benefits have been awarded for what looks to be deniable claims.

The case is not over yet as it has been appealed to Australia’s highest court.   I will advise on any updates if the woman actually receives Australian Compo. 

Update – the Australian Supreme Court ruled against the claimant.  

©J&L Risk Management Inc Copyright Notice

Filed Under: Australia Compo Sex Tagged With: compo, lamp

Bid On Contracts With High X-Mod But To Smaller Market

April 19, 2012 By JL Risk Management Consultants

Difficult to Bid On Contracts With A High X-Mod

Should we still bid on contracts with a  high X-Mod? 

 I received this question two weeks ago and wanted to answer it. The rest of the question is – How do we reduce our X-Mod very quickly? We receive a large number of employer inquiries on reducing an E-Mod/X-Mod to 1.0 or below. In fact, I just received this question from a California employer yesterday.

Books And Gavel Bid On Contracts Concept

(c) 123rf.com

A few main contractors and governmental units will accept contracts from an employer with an E-Mod of higher than 1.0. The unofficial cut-off point is usually 1.2.

I am now seeing more contracting companies that will only accept a 1.0 or lower E-Mod. Some governmental units only require that you have Workers Comp insurance without an E-Mod requirement.

I had posted on the E-Mod/X-Mod being the same as a credit score, but much worse. One of the main concerns is that you can change a credit score much more quickly than an E-Mod. There are no overnight ways to change your E-Mod.

The Experience Modification system keeps an employer from feeling the direct brunt of a very large claim. The X-Mod system does not forgive a series of small lost time accidents.

The reason is 10 smaller claims are much more likely to have 2 or more of those claims turn out to be larger claims. Repetitive injuries will cost a company in the long run.

There are a few legal methods to change your E-Mod/X-Mod more quickly:

Picture of Form with Calculator Pen and Stethoscope Bid On Contracts Concept

(c) 123rf.com

  • Some PEO’s will allow you to take on their E-Mod/X-Mod. Understanding the PEO’s rules and current E-Mod is very critical. Your company will also need to analyze the complicated rules of coming out of a PEO arrangement.
  • When the economy recovers, if your company adds on a large amount of lower risk payroll such as adminassistants and salespeople, your X-Mod may naturally lower.
  • Make sure your insurance carrier understands that you have a safe workplace and that you are receiving your proper Scheduled Credits. This can save your company up to 25% of your policy.
  • Become a self-insured insured organization. You will switch from an X-Mod system to calculating your own LDF’s.
  • Make sure you know how your X-Mod was calculated and what claims are affecting your X-Mod.
  • Enter into a captive arrangement. Unless your company is large, you will need to likely fund a rent-a-captive, usually offshore.
Picture Of US Dollars Bid On Contracts Cash

StockUnlimited

There are more ways to lessen your E-Mod/X-Mod. The ones I mentioned are in no way an attempt to game the X-Mod system. There are companies that will attempt to assist you in gaming the system.

Those methods may work in the short term. They will cost your company dearly in the long-term. The tortoise and the hare fable fits well. The Experience Mod system is a three year corrective process.

The best way to reduce your X-Mod is to invest heavily in a safety program. The accident that never occurred will have a 0% effect on your X-Mod. There are many companies scaling back or eliminating their safety program. In the short term, the reduction looks great on paper. Three or four years from now, it will look like a disaster with your X-Mod.

Please note I used X-Mod and E-Mod interchangeably throughout this post. I have linked to any terms or articles that explain some of the ideas in this post. I did this to avoid a long boring article.  I wanted to point out how a High E-Mod or X-Mod made it difficult for companies to bid on contracts. 

©J&L Risk Management Inc Copyright Notice

Filed Under: E-Mod X-Mod Tagged With: direct brunt, tortoise

North Carolina Workers Compensation = 30,000 uninsured employers

April 18, 2012 By JL Risk Management Consultants

30,000 Uninsured Employers – NC Workers Comp

Uninsured employers have plagued the Workers Comp system for many years. Was anyone actually shocked there are 30,000 employers (with more than two employees) that have no policy to cover their workers if injured on the job? I was shocked when this number hit the Workers Comp blogosphere.

Graphic of uninsured employers Breaking News Concept

(c) 123rf.com

A very intelligent newspaper reporter for the Raleigh News and Observer compared the number of employers with three or more employees and compared the number to number of companies covered under a Workers Compensation policy. The result was a shocking 30,000 companies.

North Carolina should not feel alone. The same type of investigation was performed in New York finding that one of three companies in the state did not have a Workers Comp policy in place in case their employees sustained an on the job injury. These uninsured companies basically shortchanged the WC system out of $1 billion.

The North Carolina Rate Bureau (NCRB) is the Workers Comp rating organization for any companies that operate in NC. The NCRB reports to the North Carolina Industrial Commission (NCIC) when any company’s policy is non-renewed. There was nothing being done after the uninsured companies were reported to the NCIC.

Hand Holding Credit Card uninsured employers Black And White Picture

StockUnlimited

Governor Perdue wanted to get to the bottom of how 30,000 employers were not paying for Workers Compensation coverage. The Industrial Commission’s response was they would review their internal policies on handling uninsured employers. This means nothing will probably be accomplished without a push from the Legislature.

West Virginia’s Workers Compensation Commission has provided some great examples of how to make companies come into compliance. WV sent out personnel state-wide placing warning signs on all businesses informing the public of their non-compliance.

The North Carolina Department of Motor vehicles should be the best example for the NCIC to follow. If a resident of NC lets their automobile policy lapse one day, the NCDMV sends out a $50 fine letter. I actually received one for having one day of non-coverage when switching carriers a few years ago.

North Carolina has no uninsured employer fund that would function as a safety net when there is no policy to cover an injured employee’s benefits. This would likely be a great time to consider starting a fund of this type.

I am sure this story will resurface again due to the startling numbers that were discovered by the reporter. Hopefully, there will be a more positive report the next time.

©J&L Risk Management Inc Copyright Notice

Filed Under: North Carolina Tagged With: blogosphere, employers, NDCMV, uninsured

E-Mod Calculation Showing Formulas – More Changes Ahead

April 12, 2012 By JL Risk Management Consultants

More Changes Ahead – E-Mod Calculation

Last week, I discussed the upcoming changes to the E-Mod calculation and gave an example. One area I wanted to clarify is that the new E-Mod calculation going into effect for any polices that commence AFTER January 1, 2013.

Picture Of Man E-Mod Calculation With Papers On Table

StockUnlimited

For example, if a state publishes its ratings on 4/1/2013, then any polices starting AFTER 4/1/2013 will be affected due to the changes. I had planned on commenting on the 2014 changes later in the year. Due to the number of questions that I received, I will do it now.

There was quite a buzz generated on the two articles I wrote last week on the new E-Mod changes. There is actually much more to the rating increases for companies with higher E-Mods. On January 1, 2014, the Primary Loss split point (ceiling) increases to 13,500.

As I mentioned, in the prior two articles on the E-mod changes, I want to keep everything very basic. The basic E-Mod Formula is Actual Losses / Expected Losses.

Adding in the Primary and Excess Loss variables –

(Actual Primary Losses + Actual Excess Losses) / Expected Losses

If we break that down further the formula would be

E-Mod = (Total Actual Primary Losses + (Total Actual Excess Losses * Discount Factor))/Total Expected Losses

 

This is the example table for pre-2013 polices. As in the last example, we are going to use a .3 discount factor for the excess losses. The Expected Losses are 57,750. The Expected Loss figure basically is calculated from payroll per classification code.

Claim NoLossPrimaryExcess
A10115,5005,00010,500
A10212,4305,0007,430
A1039,3505,0004,350
A1048,2005,0003,200
A1057,3005,0002,300
A10665,0005,00060,000
A1072,3502,3500
A1082,8002,8000
Total122,93035,15087,780

The E-Mod is calculated as:

Picture of Hand Writing E-Mod Calculation On White Board Payroll Concept

(c) 123rf.com

(35,150 + (87,780 *.3))/57,750 = 1.06

After 2014 the numbers would change dramatically

Claim NoLossPrimaryExcess
A10115,50013,5002,000
A10212,43012,4300
A1039,3509,3500
A1048,2008,2000
A1057,3007,3000
A10665,00013,50051,500
A1072,3502,3500
A1082,8002,8000
Total122,93069,43053,500

The E-Mod is calculated as:

(69,430 + (53,500 *.3))/57,750 = 1.48

 

This results in an E-Mod of:

  • 2012 – 1.06
  • 2013 – 1.41 (calculated in last example post)
  • 2014 – 1.48
Hand Presenting E-Mod Calculation Percentage Arrow Increase

StockUnlimited

The increase (5%) is not that large from 2013 to 2014. However there was a two year increase of 28%. This type of E-Mod increase can affect your company in two significant ways:

  • If your company is bidding on contracts, the main contracting company will usually only accept bids from a 1.0 E-Mod sub-contractor.
  • The increase can push a company into the risk pool where Workers Comp becomes prohibitively expensive in an already bad economy.

As mentioned in one of the previous articles, this example was taken from an actual policy and rating bureau/NCCI Experience Rating Sheets. I do realize there are scheduled debit/credits etc. that would figure into the final premium paid.

All of the examples I gave were for comparison purposes only. Employers with many accidents are going to see their E-Mod jump significantly even with no additional claims or reserve increases.

There are many techniques to reducing your company’s E-Mod. This blog has many recommendations on how to decrease your Mod for any company. The main concept to remember is the E-Mod (X-Mod in California) system is a delayed system. A company cannot wait a few months to start an E-Mod reduction program. The time is now.

©J&L Risk Management Inc Copyright Notice

Filed Under: E-Mod X-Mod Tagged With: buzz generated, clarify

Independent Contractor vs Employee – IRS Issues New Rulings

April 11, 2012 By JL Risk Management Consultants

Independent Contractor vs Employee

Independent contractor status for Workers Compensation is one of the most discussed topics I have come across lately. Have the rules changed that much over the last few years? Check these links for a few articles I had written in the past on subcontractors, ladder of insurance, IRS rules on independent contractors.

Picture Of Gavel Independent Contractor In The Court

StockUnlimited

The following two cases are tax rulings. These are not Workers Comp rulings. They are great discussion points. The IRS recently published the following info:

New Rulings Issued on Employee vs. Independent Contractor

The U.S. Tax Court has issued two new rulings on whether workers should be classified as employees or independent contractors.

The Law

In both rulings, the Tax Court said that whether an individual should be classified as an independent contractor or an employee is a question of fact. Common (case) law rules are applied to determine whether an individual is an employee or an independent contractor.

Picture Of Judge Independent Contractor Sitting On Court

StockUnlimited

In the new rulings, the Tax Court considered the following factors in determining whether workers were employees or independent contractors:

(1) the degree of control exercised by the employer;

(2) who invested in the work facilities used by the worker;

(3) the opportunity of the worker for profit or loss;

(4) whether the employer can discharge the worker;

(5) whether the work performed is an integral part of the employer’s regular business;

(6) the permanency of the relationship between the parties;

(7) the relationship the parties believed they were creating;

(8) whether employee benefits were provided to the worker [Reg. § 31.3121(d)-1(c)(2); Reg. § 31.3401(c)-1(b)].

The Tax Court noted that the list of factors above is not exclusive, and other factors may be considered in this analysis.

First Ruling

Picture of Judge hand holding Gavel Independent Contractor First Ruling Concept

(c) 123rf.com

In Keller v. Commissioner, TC Memo 2012-62, 3/8/12, the Tax Court ruled that an auto body shop employer incorrectly classified three of its 10 workers as independent contractors.

Two of the three workers performed secretarial duties for the auto body shop (e.g., serving as a receptionist, answering the phones, and filing).

The other employee, Eric Mark, started out by cleaning the shop and assisting other workers at the auto body shop, and then moved up to writing estimates for repairs. Mark received on-the-job training from the owner of the company and other technicians at the auto body shop. The three employees were paid weekly by check.

The Tax Court said that the evidence appeared to show that the employer had the right to control the three workers’ work, and the employer did not prove that he did not control their work.

Accordingly, this factor weighs heavily in favor of employee status for these workers. Other factors that supported a finding of employee status included:

(i) the workers did not provide their own equipment;

(ii) there was no evidence that the workers had an opportunity for profit or loss; and

(iii) the employer could terminate the workers at will.

Section 530 of the Revenue Act of 1978, as amended, provides employers with protection from employment tax assessments even though they incorrectly classified a worker as an independent contractor if they meet the following three requirements:

(1) reasonable basis,

(2) substantive consistency, and

(3) reporting consistency.

The employer, however, did not qualify for Section 530 relief because it failed to meet the reporting consistency requirement, as it had not filed Forms 1099-MISC, Miscellaneous Income, for any of the workers in question, which is required under Code Sec. 6041(a) and Code Sec. 6041A(a). The employer needed to file something – either a W-2 or a 1099-Misc.

Employment Tax Penalties

Emoticons Tight on Big Red TAX Letter Independent Contractor Tax Penalties Concept

(c) 123rf.com

The Tax Court recommended that the employer be subject to employment tax penalties under Code Sec. 6651(a)(1) and Code Sec. 6656(a) for failing to make required employment tax deposits with respect to the three workers who were found to be employees, and to timely remit the tax and file employment tax returns with the IRS.

The Tax Court ruled that the other seven workers should be classified as independent contractors based on its review of the above eight factors. What I find odd here is the press release did not comment on the other seven workers and their statuses. This would have been very helpful.

Second Ruling

Man Independent Contractor Showing Tax Papers

StockUnlimited

In Dean Cibotti, et ux. v. Commissioner, TC Summary Opinion 2012-21, 3/6/12, the Tax Court ruled that a mortgage loan officer with Liberty Mortgage, who was also president of the company with a 33.3% ownership interest, should have been classified as an independent contractor, rather than as an employee.

The taxpayer, Dean Cibotti, did not perform any services as an officer of Liberty Mortgage, but was named president because he had the largest individual ownership share of the business. The Tax Court based its decision on the fact that:

(a) Liberty Mortgage did not have control over or dictate Cibotti’s hours of business, total hours, route, office location, or methods of obtaining clients;

(b) Cibotti maintained a home office (he didn’t have an office at Liberty Mortgage);

(c) Cibotti was paid a percentage of the proceeds from the mortgage loans he closed (he was not guaranteed any compensation);

(d) Cibotti was not provided any employee benefits, such as health insurance, life insurance, and retirement plans.

I do realize that tax status and Workers Compensation status are different in most states. However, I think these are good examples of what a court would examine when looking at the differences between an employee and an independent contractor.

©J&L Risk Management Inc Copyright Notice

Filed Under: IRS Tagged With: rulings, secretarial duties

NCCI Changes Experience Mod (E-Mod) Calculation – Analysis

April 5, 2012 By JL Risk Management Consultants

NCCI Changes the Experience Mod Calculation

In my last post, I discussed the upcoming changes to the E-Mod calculation. The NCCI changes may look simple, but the cost of operating an unsafe business will be substantial. Your Risk Manager and Safety Department will be 100% more valuable overnight.

Picture of Empty book With Handwritten NCCI Changes Formula Graphics

(c) 123rf.com

I thought I would analyze the calculation on a very basic level and put everything in layperson terms so the difference between the two calculations shows the financial impact to a company. A safe company will also see a marked difference in their E-Mod in a positive direction.

The basic E-Mod Formula is Actual Losses / Expected Losses. See the bottom of this article for links to more info on some of the terms in this post.

Adding in the Primary and Excess Loss variables –

(Actual Primary Losses + Actual Excess Losses) / Expected Losses

If we break that down further the formula would be

E-Mod = (Total Actual Primary Losses + (Total Actual Excess Losses * Discount Factor))/Total Expected Losses

 

Let us look at a quick example. These are the numbers if a Mod is calculated before 2013. We are going to use a .3 discount factor for the excess losses. The Expected Losses are 57,750. The Expected Loss figure basically is calculated from payroll per classification code.

Claim NoLossPrimaryExcess
A10115,5005,00010,500
A10212,4305,0007,430
A1039,3505,0004,350
A1048,2005,0003,200
A1057,3005,0002,300
A10665,0005,00060,000
A1072,3502,3500
A1082,8002,8000
Total122,93035,15087,780

 

Picture Of Woman Hand NCCI changes Using Calculator

StockUnlimited

The E-Mod is calculated as:

(35,150 + (87,780 *.3))/57,750 = 1.06

After 2013 the numbers would change dramatically

Claim NoLossPrimaryExcess
A10115,50010,0005,500
A10212,43010,0002,430
A1039,3509,3500
A1048,2008,2000
A1057,3007,3000
A10665,00010,00055,000
A1072,3502,3500
A1082,8002,8000
Total122,93062,93060,930

The E-Mod is calculated as:

(62,930 + (60,930 *.3))/57,750 = 1.41

The numbers I had chosen for this example were from an actual policy and rating bureau/NCCI Experience Rating Sheets. The employer would have paid 25% more for the same Workers Compensation coverage.

There other parts of the premium calculation that will change the premium to a degree. I used this as more of an example. This is a stark example of what can happen if there is no E-Mod reduction plan by your company or organization.

For more information on the terms in this article, check out this post on calculating E-Mods and this one.

©J&L Risk Management Inc Copyright Notice

Filed Under: E-Mod X-Mod Tagged With: change dramatically, unsafe

NCCI Sends Wake Up Call to Unsafe Companies

April 5, 2012 By JL Risk Management Consultants

Unsafe Companies – NCCI Says Pay Your Fair Share

The NCCI (National Council on Compensation Insurance) has dramatically changed the way that companies will be rated for any polices that are effective after 1/1/2013. Unsafe companies are now going to have higher E-Mods. Companies with much better loss histories will see their E-Mods shrink on any 2013 renewals.

Emoticons Walking on Wood Ladder NCCI Unsafe Companies

(c) 123rf.com

I was one of the first Workers Comp advisers that warned about these upcoming changes to the E-Mod system. There is a 27 minute video here that explains the changes.

I will summarize them for those who do not want to watch the video. Nowhere in the video is there mention of a change to any type of classification codes. Classification codes have been changed in a systematic process since 2008.

The basic premise of the way NCCI calculates E-Mods is there are two facets to any claims. They are:

Primary Loss = the first $5,000 of any Workers Comp claim

Excess Loss = any part of the loss above $5,000

The new rating system doubles the Primary Loss:

  Primary Loss = the first $10,000 of any Workers Comp claim

  Excess Loss = any part of the loss above $10,000

Graphic Of Paper Folder Of Diagram NCCI Concept

(c) 123rf.com

Primary losses increase a company’s E-Mod much more dramatically than Excess Losses. Excess Losses are multiplied by a reduction factor. The reason is NCCI and all rating bureaus think that many smaller claims are much more risky than one or two large claims.

The rating bureaus do not penalize a company for one large loss. Even safe companies statistically cannot prevent one big loss. A batch of small losses is much more likely to produce a few or many large losses. This is one of the major underpinnings of the E-Mod system.

When your company renews its policy in 2013, you will likely be under this system. The most expensive part of the claim (Primary Loss) will be twice the size that it was in the past. This means unsafe companies with many losses could see their E-Mods jump dramatically.

I am not saying that I totally agree with the E-Mod system. However, it is the system in place. We all have to deal with the system. Knowing how to best work within the framework will save $, time, and aggravation.

Your company’s safety program is now worth than in the past. Due to the present economic conditions, I have seen Safety/Risk Management departments significantly reduced or eliminated overall. Reviving or enhancing a safety department is a shrewd business move.

I will cover more on the upcoming changes in one of the next articles by comparing losses under the old system and the one upcoming in 2013. There is even a more shocking development with the NCCI for 2014.

©J&L Risk Management Inc Copyright Notice

Filed Under: NCCI Tagged With: advisers, aggravation, shrewd, underpinnings

Email Subscription

Search this website:

Work Comp Premium Audit Work Comp Mod Expert work comp expert witnessWork Comp Expert ReservesWork Comp Claim File Audit ExpertWork Comp Expert Witness

About Me

My Photo

James J Moore
Raleigh, NC, United States

James founded a Workers’ Compensation consulting firm, J&L Risk Mgmt Consultants, Inc. in 1996. J&L’s mission is to reduce our clients’ Workers Compensation premiums by using time-tested techniques. J&L’s claims, premium, reserve and Experience Mod reviews have saved employers over $9.8 million in earned premiums over the last three years. J&L has saved numerous companies from bankruptcy proceedings as a result of insurance overpayments.

James has over 27 years of experience in insurance claims, audit, and underwriting, specializing in Workers’ Compensation. He has supervised, and managed the administration of Workers’ Compensation claims, and underwriting in over 45 states. His professional experience includes being the Director of Risk Management for the North Carolina School Boards Association. He created a very successful Workers’ Compensation Injury Rehabilitation Unit for school personnel.

James’s educational background, which centered on computer technology, culminated in earning a Masters of Business Administration (MBA); an Associate in Claims designation (AIC); and an Associate in Risk Management designation (ARM). He is a Chartered Financial Consultant (ChFC) and a licensed financial advisor. The NC Department of Insurance has certified him as an insurance instructor. He also possesses a Bachelors’ Degree in Actuarial Science.

LexisNexis has twice recognized his blog as one of the Top 25 Blogs on Workers’ Compensation. J&L has been listed in AM Best’s Preferred Providers Directory for Insurance Experts – Workers Compensation for over eight years. He recently won the prestigious Baucom Shine Lifetime Achievement Award for his volunteer contributions to the area of risk management and safety. James was recently named as an instructor for the prestigious Insurance Academy.

James is on the Board of Directors and Treasurer of the North Carolina Mid-State Safety Council. He has published two manuals on Workers’ Compensation and three different claims processing manuals. He has also written and has been quoted in numerous articles on reducing Workers’ Compensation costs for public and private employers. James publishes a weekly newsletter with 7,000 readers.

He currently possess press credentials and am invited to various national Workers Compensation conferences as a reporter.

James’s articles or interviews on Workers’ Compensation have appeared in the following publications or websites:
• Risk and Insurance Management Society (RIMS)
• Entrepreneur Magazine
• Bloomberg Business News
• WorkCompCentral.com
• Claims Magazine
• Risk & Insurance Magazine
• Insurance Journal
• Workers Compensation.com
• LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook and other social media sites
• Various trade publications

 

Archives

  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007

Recent Posts

  • Home Ergonomics Advice Reduces Workers Comp Costs
  • Workers Comp Predictive Analytics Changed Loss Run Reviews Forever
  • Workers Comp COVID-19 Vaccinations – Part of Return To Work
  • Workers Comp Test Audits – Pain or Preventative Measure
  • WCIRB 8871 Webinar – What California Insureds Need To Know
  • Workers Comp Website – 10 Things To Know When Switching Providers
  • Workers Comp Zoom Presentation – Top Four Hard Lessons Learned
  • Experience Mod Increases While Loss Runs Show No Changes – WTR?
  • Workers Comp Allocated Expenses – Who Pays For Which Bills?
  • Workers Compensation Presentations Kawasaki Technique
J&L Risk Management Consultants Inc
14460 Falls of Neuse Road,
Suite 149305
Raleigh, NC 27614
(800) 813-1386
▲Return to top of page
Copyright © 2021 J&L Risk Management Consultants, Inc.

Website Design by Redwood [ Design - Print - Web ]