2222222222

Risk Focus: Professional Liability

Incivility’s Growing Risk

Increasing levels of incivility in society are leaching into the workplace and bruising employers’ bottom lines.
By: | October 12, 2017 • 5 min read

Workplace incivility is on the rise.

Workplace violence — a frequent outcome of incivility — is reported to cost $4.2 billion dollars a year and claims 1,000 lives annually. The Journal of Nursing Administration reports incivility is often responsible for lost productivity, high turnover, low morale, reputational damage, workers’ compensation claims and lawsuits.

Advertisement




Toronto-based Bar-David Consulting, which helps firms create civil work environments, finds a direct connection from incivility to harassment and bullying and finally physical violence. That link constitutes “a big risk management worry,” said Lori Severson, health care loss control consultant, Lockton Companies.

In 1998, 49 percent of workers reported rude treatment at least once a month. In 2016, 62 percent said the same, according to research conducted by Christine Porath, associate professor, McDonough School of Business, Georgetown University, and Christine Pearson in the Harvard Business Review.

Michigan State University research found incivility is spreading, racking up an average annual impact of $14,000 per employee in lost production and work time.

Increasingly, Severson said, organizations are adopting strategies from the health care industry, generally considered the “gold standard of workplace safety.”

Some insurance products are adapting to a broader spectrum of risks. For example, some employment practice liability coverage will respond to bullying allegations, said Paul Marshall, managing director, McGowan Program Administrators. And some workplace violence policies added threat protections. “Now it will respond to just a threat,” he said.

Daniel Gugala, executive vice president and general counsel, Crisis Prevention Institute

All organizational change, including zero tolerance for uncivil behavior that can escalate into violence and lawsuits, begins at the top, wrote Valerie Keels, head of DC office services, Gavi, and member of the Society for Human Resources Management’s HR Disciplines Expertise Panel, in an e-mail interview.

“The CEO, president or other high-level authority figure in the organization must not only practice this behavior but also advocate for it publicly and often,” then follow up with organizational policies and procedures.

“Then the line managers and employees must be educated and trained about what civil behavior does and does not look like,” Keels wrote.

Uncivil behavior can often be subtle and unconscious. “Think of the manager who sends emails during a presentation … or the team leader who takes credit for good news but points a finger at team members when something goes wrong,” wrote Porath.

A Not-So-Hidden Liability Risk

Workers get on each other’s nerves, bringing personal habits into the workplace. They decorate their workspaces with photos of wives in bikinis, religious articles and political paraphernalia.

Most companies already have anti-harassment policies in place that define which personal items employees can and can’t have in the workplace, said Allison West, Esq., principal, Employment Practices Specialists, LLC, which might cover the issues of swimsuit photos and religious articles.

“You can reduce the risk with training, but you’ll never eradicate it. You can’t force people to be civil.” —Daniel Gugala, executive vice president and general counsel, Crisis Prevention Institute

A complete ban on personal items would be overkill, said West. But private employers have legal grounds to take that draconian step, since first amendment rights do not apply in the private workplace except for collective actions under labor laws, according to Katherine Stone, distinguished professor of law, UCLA School of Law.

Advertisement




Then there are snubs, unreturned emails and unacknowledged efforts.

If incivilities relate to gender, religion, race or any constitutionally protected groups, “that raises serious HR concerns and some liability exposure for the company,” said Stone.

Cases that “go beyond rolled eyes into marginalizing or excluding a co-worker because of race or gender can be a liability if the behavior is interfering with the person’s ability to do the job and succeed in the workplace.”

In those cases, she said, “there can be liability if the company knows about it and does nothing to stop it.”

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Task Force on the Study of Harassment in the Workplace recommends civility training and bystander intervention training as part of a holistic harassment prevention program.

Most large employers understand the importance of safety, said Sam Estreicher, professor of law, New York University School of Law and director of its Center for Labor and Employment.

Sam Estreicher, director, Center for Labor and Employment, New York University School of Law

“An organization that’s willing to commit resources to how people communicate — both how they deliver and receive messages — may keep in check those who don’t have the propensity to follow the right path,” said Daniel Gugala, executive vice president and general counsel, Crisis Prevention Institute, an international training organization specializing in the safe management of disruptive and assaultive behavior.

“You can reduce the risk with training,” he said, “but you’ll never eradicate it. You can’t force people to be civil.”

You’re Fired

Employers have a legal obligation to run a safe workplace. Social media lifted the veil of privacy from off-duty behaviors, and sometimes those behaviors result in termination.

For example, at least four white nationalists who demonstrated in Charlottesville, Va., lost their jobs after being identified through Twitter.

This poses the question: Are legal but unsavory activities with a controversial group outside the office grounds for dismissal?

For public sector employees, no, said Stone, because of first amendment protections. However, employment in the private sector is “at will,” giving employees fewer protections.

The law varies by jurisdiction, but in general, private employers do not monitor employees’ behavior outside the workplace, said Estreicher. “Policing behavior outside the workplace is generally counterproductive.” Overzealous employers, he said, “will be clobbered in litigation.”

Advertisement




Again, there are exceptions, Estreicher said, especially where employers perceive potential harm to their brand. Say an employee identified as attending a white supremacy rally is a supervisor, not “just a guy on the line,” the employer should bring him in for a talk. “You say, ‘You’re acting as my agent and you’re putting my company in a bad light.’ That would be consistent with a reasonable civility policy,” said Estreicher.

Civility, Stone said, “is in the eyes of the beholder” and some types of employee activities that might appear uncivil can trigger the protection of labor laws.

“The law allows employees to criticize their employer about working conditions, sometimes loudly and profanely. Some might consider those protests to be uncivil, disruptive or inappropriate.”

To merit legal protections, those kinds of behaviors would rise above “one disgruntled person griping, but trying to get colleagues to join the conduct as a protest,” Stone said. &

Susannah Levine writes about health care, education and technology. She can be reached at [email protected]

More from Risk & Insurance

More from Risk & Insurance

Insurtech

Kiss Your Annual Renewal Goodbye; On-Demand Insurance Challenges the Traditional Policy

Gig workers' unique insurance needs drive delivery of on-demand coverage.
By: | September 14, 2018 • 6 min read

The gig economy is growing. Nearly six million Americans, or 3.8 percent of the U.S. workforce, now have “contingent” work arrangements, with a further 10.6 million in categories such as independent contractors, on-call workers or temporary help agency staff and for-contract firms, often with well-known names such as Uber, Lyft and Airbnb.

Scott Walchek, founding chairman and CEO, Trōv

The number of Americans owning a drone is also increasing — one recent survey suggested as much as one in 12 of the population — sparking vigorous debate on how regulation should apply to where and when the devices operate.

Add to this other 21st century societal changes, such as consumers’ appetite for other electronic gadgets and the advent of autonomous vehicles. It’s clear that the cover offered by the annually renewable traditional insurance policy is often not fit for purpose. Helped by the sophistication of insurance technology, the response has been an expanding range of ‘on-demand’ covers.

The term ‘on-demand’ is open to various interpretations. For Scott Walchek, founding chairman and CEO of pioneering on-demand insurance platform Trōv, it’s about “giving people agency over the items they own and enabling them to turn on insurance cover whenever they want for whatever they want — often for just a single item.”

Advertisement




“On-demand represents a whole new behavior and attitude towards insurance, which for years has very much been a case of ‘get it and forget it,’ ” said Walchek.

Trōv’s mobile app enables users to insure just a single item, such as a laptop, whenever they wish and to also select the period of cover required. When ready to buy insurance, they then snap a picture of the sales receipt or product code of the item they want covered.

Welcoming Trōv: A New On-Demand Arrival

While Walchek, who set up Trōv in 2012, stressed it’s a technology company and not an insurance company, it has attracted industry giants such as AXA and Munich Re as partners. Trōv began the U.S. roll-out of its on-demand personal property products this summer by launching in Arizona, having already established itself in Australia and the United Kingdom.

“Australia and the UK were great testing grounds, thanks to their single regulatory authorities,” said Walchek. “Trōv is already approved in 45 states, and we expect to complete the process in all by November.

“On-demand products have a particular appeal to millennials who love the idea of having control via their smart devices and have embraced the concept of an unbundling of experiences: 75 percent of our users are in the 18 to 35 age group.” – Scott Walchek, founding chairman and CEO, Trōv

“On-demand products have a particular appeal to millennials who love the idea of having control via their smart devices and have embraced the concept of an unbundling of experiences: 75 percent of our users are in the 18 to 35 age group,” he added.

“But a mass of tectonic societal shifts is also impacting older generations — on-demand cover fits the new ways in which they work, particularly the ‘untethered’ who aren’t always in the same workplace or using the same device. So we see on-demand going into societal lifestyle changes.”

Wooing Baby Boomers

In addition to its backing for Trōv, across the Atlantic, AXA has partnered with Insurtech start-up By Miles, launching a pay-as-you-go car insurance policy in the UK. The product is promoted as low-cost car insurance for drivers who travel no more than 140 miles per week, or 7,000 miles annually.

“Due to the growing need for these products, companies such as Marmalade — cover for learner drivers — and Cuvva — cover for part-time drivers — have also increased in popularity, and we expect to see more enter the market in the near future,” said AXA UK’s head of telematics, Katy Simpson.

Simpson confirmed that the new products’ initial appeal is to younger motorists, who are more regular users of new technology, while older drivers are warier about sharing too much personal information. However, she expects this to change as on-demand products become more prevalent.

“Looking at mileage-based insurance, such as By Miles specifically, it’s actually older generations who are most likely to save money, as the use of their vehicles tends to decline. Our job is therefore to not only create more customer-centric products but also highlight their benefits to everyone.”

Another Insurtech ready to partner with long-established names is New York-based Slice Labs, which in the UK is working with Legal & General to enter the homeshare insurance market, recently announcing that XL Catlin will use its insurance cloud services platform to create the world’s first on-demand cyber insurance solution.

“For our cyber product, we were looking for a partner on the fintech side, which dovetailed perfectly with what Slice was trying to do,” said John Coletti, head of XL Catlin’s cyber insurance team.

“The premise of selling cyber insurance to small businesses needs a platform such as that provided by Slice — we can get to customers in a discrete, seamless manner, and the partnership offers potential to open up other products.”

Slice Labs’ CEO Tim Attia added: “You can roll up on-demand cover in many different areas, ranging from contract workers to vacation rentals.

“The next leap forward will be provided by the new economy, which will create a range of new risks for on-demand insurance to respond to. McKinsey forecasts that by 2025, ecosystems will account for 30 percent of global premium revenue.

Advertisement




“When you’re a start-up, you can innovate and question long-held assumptions, but you don’t have the scale that an insurer can provide,” said Attia. “Our platform works well in getting new products out to the market and is scalable.”

Slice Labs is now reviewing the emerging markets, which aren’t hampered by “old, outdated infrastructures,” and plans to test the water via a hackathon in southeast Asia.

Collaboration Vs Competition

Insurtech-insurer collaborations suggest that the industry noted the banking sector’s experience, which names the tech disruptors before deciding partnerships, made greater sense commercially.

“It’s an interesting correlation,” said Slice’s managing director for marketing, Emily Kosick.

“I believe the trend worth calling out is that the window for insurers to innovate is much shorter, thanks to the banking sector’s efforts to offer omni-channel banking, incorporating mobile devices and, more recently, intelligent assistants like Alexa for personal banking.

“Banks have bought into the value of these technology partnerships but had the benefit of consumer expectations changing slowly with them. This compares to insurers who are in an ever-increasing on-demand world where the risk is high for laggards to be left behind.”

As with fintechs in banking, Insurtechs initially focused on the retail segment, with 75 percent of business in personal lines and the remainder in the commercial segment.

“Banks have bought into the value of these technology partnerships but had the benefit of consumer expectations changing slowly with them. This compares to insurers who are in an ever-increasing on-demand world where the risk is high for laggards to be left behind.” — Emily Kosick, managing director, marketing, Slice

Those proportions may be set to change, with innovations such as digital commercial insurance brokerage Embroker’s recent launch of the first digital D&O liability insurance policy, designed for venture capital-backed tech start-ups and reinsured by Munich Re.

Embroker said coverage that formerly took weeks to obtain is now available instantly.

“We focus on three main issues in developing new digital business — what is the customer’s pain point, what is the expense ratio and does it lend itself to algorithmic underwriting?” said CEO Matt Miller. “Workers’ compensation is another obvious class of insurance that can benefit from this approach.”

Jason Griswold, co-founder and chief operating officer of Insurtech REIN, highlighted further opportunities: “I’d add a third category to personal and business lines and that’s business-to-business-to-consumer. It’s there we see the biggest opportunities for partnering with major ecosystems generating large numbers of insureds and also big volumes of data.”

For now, insurers are accommodating Insurtech disruption. Will that change?

Advertisement




“Insurtechs have focused on products that regulators can understand easily and for which there is clear existing legislation, with consumer protection and insurer solvency the two issues of paramount importance,” noted Shawn Hanson, litigation partner at law firm Akin Gump.

“In time, we could see the disruptors partner with reinsurers rather than primary carriers. Another possibility is the likes of Amazon, Alphabet, Facebook and Apple, with their massive balance sheets, deciding to link up with a reinsurer,” he said.

“You can imagine one of them finding a good Insurtech and buying it, much as Amazon’s purchase of Whole Foods gave it entry into the retail sector.” &

Graham Buck is a UK-based writer and has contributed to Risk & Insurance® since 1998. He can be reached at riskletters.com.