Risk Insider: Warren Berey

The Importance of Duty of Care for International Employers

By: | March 6, 2017 • 2 min read
Warren Berey is SVP of Multinational Insurance at Generali Global Corporate & Commercial U.S.A., overseeing the development of international casualty and package insurance solutions for U.S. companies and U.S. subsidiaries of foreign companies. He can be reached at [email protected]

Among the more difficult tasks corporate risk managers face is identifying possible threats to employees that engage in business travel and international assignments.

While most firms ostensibly recognize that they have a moral obligation to ensure the safety of employees working in foreign areas, some do not understand the scope of these responsibilities and are ill prepared to deal with the possible fallout of disaster scenarios.

This may seem like a straightforward issue that any qualified risk management team should be able to handle on its own, but it’s not. Implementing a comprehensive program to ensure appropriate worldwide coverages and services that address potential scenarios is a complicated, detailed process.

Putting together the right solution often requires a tremendous amount of input from risk management experts inclusive of experienced global brokers and insurers that work on behalf of a given company on a case-by-case basis.

Advertisement




Quite simply, there is no one-size-fits-all risk management solution to ensure all duty of care obligations are met around the world. What qualifies as reasonable coverage in one country or for one organization’s needs may be entirely inadequate in another instance.

Therefore, risk managers must go the extra mile to ensure their international workforce is fully protected. If they don’t, the company could face long, drawn-out lawsuits capable of inflicting tremendous financial and reputational damage. While there are obvious risk management protections, lawsuits can arise from a wide range of occurrences – from everyday accidents to complex global threats.

In fact, there are countless instances where organizations failed to implement adequate risk management policies to address their duty of care and keep employees safe with respect to the potential hazards of each location. The fallout of such failures is severe, not only for families who have experienced devastating loss, but also for companies forced to deal with the legal, financial and reputational consequences.

This may seem like a straightforward issue that any qualified risk management team should be able to handle on its own, but it’s not.

Therefore, the importance of comprehensive international risk management policies to address adequate duty of care responsibilities should be abundantly clear. And in order to implement the best solutions, it is essential to partner with the right insurer.

Working with an experienced carrier with a global network that can coordinate local policies around the world ensures flexible, cost-effective solutions that optimize coverage and service. Unfortunately, companies often develop patchwork strategies that rely on fragmented programs put together by unrelated insurance brokers and carriers, which can lead to inefficiencies and dangerous gaps in coverage.

Advertisement




Experienced global insurers utilize a mature network of providers to ensure service, regulatory and legal compliance, risk engineering, and expert claims handling. Further, companies with a seasoned network have local operations that rely on established strategic relationships with thoroughly vetted legal, security, medical and other providers. This in turn allows carriers to offer flexible solutions, optimize the response to damages and threats, keep claim expenses in line and policy costs competitive.

Having the right resources in place can mean the difference between an expensive payout and walking away from a questionable lawsuit or fraudulent claim.

More from Risk & Insurance

More from Risk & Insurance

2017 RIMS

Cyber Threat Will Get More Difficult

Companies should focus on response, resiliency and recovery when it comes to cyber risks.
By: | April 19, 2017 • 2 min read
Topics: Cyber Risks | RIMS

“The sky is not falling” when it comes to cyber security, but the threat is a growing challenge for companies.

“I am not a cyber apocalyptic kind of guy,” said Gen. Michael Hayden, former head of the Central Intelligence Agency and National Security Agency, who currently is a principal at the Chertoff Group, a security consultancy.

Gen. Michael Hayden, former head of the CIA and NSA, and principal, The Chertoff Group

“There are lots of things to worry about in the cyber domain and you don’t have to be apocalyptic to be concerned,” said Hayden prior to his presentation at a Global Risk Forum sponsored by Lockton on Sunday afternoon on the geopolitical threats facing the United States.

“We have only begun to consider the threat as it currently exists in the cyber domain.”

Hayden said cyber risk is equal to the threat times your vulnerability to the threat, times the consequences of a successful attack.

At present, companies are focusing on the vulnerability aspect, and responding by building “high walls and deep moats” to keep attackers out, he said. If you do that successfully, it will prevent 80 percent of the attackers.

“It’s all about making yourself a tougher target than the next like target,” he said.

But that still leaves 20 percent vulnerability, so companies need to focus on the consequences: It’s about response, resiliency and recovery, he said.

The range of attackers is vast, including nations that have used cyber attacks to disrupt Sony (the North Koreans angry about a movie), the Sands Casino (Iranians angry about the owner’s comments about their country), and U.S. banks (Iranians seeking to disrupt iconic U.S. institutions after the Stuxnet attack on their nuclear program), he said.

“You don’t have to offend anybody to be a target,” he said. “It may be enough to be iconic.”

The world order that has existed for the past 75 years “is melting away” and the world is less stable.

And no matter how much private companies do, it may not be enough.

“The big questions in cyber now are law and policy,” Hayden said. “We have not yet decided as a people what we want or will allow our government to do to keep us safe in the cyber domain.”

The U.S. government defends the country’s land, sea and air, but when it comes to cyber, defenses have been mostly left to private enterprises, he said.

“I don’t know that we have quite decided the balance between the government’s role and the private sector’s role,” he said.

As for the government’s role in the geopolitical challenges facing it, Hayden said he has seen times that were more dangerous, but never more complicated.

The world order that has existed for the past 75 years “is melting away” and the world is less stable, he said.

Nations such as North Korea, Iran, Russia and Pakistan are “ambitious, brittle and nuclear.” The Islamic world is in a clash between secular and religious governance, and China, which he said is “competitive and occasionally confrontational” is facing its own demographic and economic challenges.

“It’s going to be a tough century,” Hayden said.

Anne Freedman is managing editor of Risk & Insurance. She can be reached at [email protected]