contract climbing query

[KentuckySawyer]

A question for those of you who contract climb:

Do the companies you work for require/want you to carry a workman's compensation policy on yourself?

 

[treeseer]

My company (me) requires climbing subcontractors to be insured for liability and medical, but in NC, w/c is not required for subcontractors, or for companies wiht less than 4 employees. I think it's the same in most states.

 

[Ekka]

I found this excellent website and homed in on Kentucky, I think it will help you.

http://www.workerscompensation.com/reference/content.php?id=1090&states=kentucky&category=ER,EE

This is the origin site for all states http://www.workerscompensation.com/

Over here our rules are similar. If the contractor's supply is predominantly labour (which it is) the employer must insure them. For example if you arrive with significant machinery like a stump grinder to do a contract stump grind for us ... we do not have to insure you. But as a climber we do even if you supply your own gear as the beaurocrats don't see the saws and ropes as significant equipment.

So whether or not I hire contract climbers makes no difference to w/c, I have to pay that.

Which then opens a larger can of worms ... I then become responsible for your safety and PPE etc. If your gear is not up to speed etc I have to provide you mine, if you are unsafe, I have to pull you in line (no 2 attachment points etc).

 

[tophopper]

If you subcontract for other companies and DONT have a policy(whether it covers you or not) the other companies are subject to pay renumeration on money they paid you.
I will not hire a sub unless they carry a W/C policy so I dont get stuck paying comp on them.
Make sense?

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

In WI it depends on the underwriter. I've had companies tell me that the auditor will say that if I'm a leagal sub, then it's OK. Others have a clause writen into the policy that all subs must have a W/C cert.

 

[Kneejerk Bombas]

WC varies from state to state.
In KY, you don't need WC if'n yur married to yur sister.

 

[Tree Wizard]

Mike - I think one's father's sister is also included in that WC category.
We will not hire any sub for anything unless they carry both W.C. and liability insurance. If they don't carry one or both - we will get billed for it at audit time. If they don't have insurance and have a problem it goes against our rate. Thus, we require both for all subs - from stump grinders to crane companies.

 

[Jim1NZ]

In New Zealand you are considered a sub-contractor if you have your own gear, pay your own tax, have your own insurance and work less then a 40 hour week for any 1 certain employer.

But there is just about always holes in contract law, and its the 'dogey' contractors that don't act professionally or that are too cheep, that will sting the employer.

 

[Stumper]

Tree Wizard, So you would not hire a complete indepent like myself to do some stumps. I have liability insurance but as a solo operation I don't have WC. Not that it matters of course since I don't livenear you or have time to travel up there to work for you. I have occassionally ground stumps for the customers of local guys without stumping equipment but they generally didn't sub me- they called me to give a bid directly to their customer, A litle awkward for them I suppose since I'm a complete tree service(except pesticide application)and a direct competitor.

 

[Kneejerk Bombas]

Tree Wizard, So you would not hire a complete indepent like myself to do some stumps.

If you got hurt on the job, and didn't have WC, the liability would go to him. Then, I suspect after he was bankrupt (if damages were high enough), the remaining liability would go to the homeowner.

 

[Stumper]

I suppose that it could in Wisconsin except for the fact that I don't blame other people for my accidents and have health and accident insurance to take care of my health needs. As we have discussed before-WC is an exchange of limited benefit /liability waiver. It makes the employer non-liable while "guaranteeing" a minimum level of care. In Colorado-People who contract for tree service work are exempted from WC requirements.-Meaning the customers- The Service Company is not exempt butthe company owners are.After all, he isn't going to sue himself) The Company owner,Ceo or partner CAN be covered by workman's comp if certain hoops are jumped through but it is ridiculous to do so since better, insurance coverage can be purchased for less money. What you are saying is that(at least in some states) an independent, sole proprietor loses his independence if there is a prime contractor between him and the property owner. A very ridiculous premise. Whether I contract with Tom, Dick or Harry it does not make me an employee-I remain an independent.

 

[tophopper]

If you got hurt on the job, and didn't have WC, the liability would go to him. Then, I suspect after he was bankrupt (if damages were high enough), the remaining liability would go to the homeowner.

Exactly right!

 

[Kneejerk Bombas]

To replace WC, you'd need both medical insurance and disability, and because disability won't cover you while you working under or uninsured, there is no replacement for WC.
Trust me, if there was a loophole for avoiding WC, it wouldn't exsist.

 

[Mike Barcaskey]

It's my understanding, in PA at least, you cant have W/C on your self, or on the company owner, its only for employees. that's from my Insurance Agent

 

[Mike Barcaskey]

when I use a sub, I only require they have General Liability

 

[onionman]

Mike
That is what our agent told us..that wc only covered employees not the owners.
Onion

 

[tophopper]

yes, it does not normally cover owners. But by using subs without the W/C policy you are all but asking to pay the W/C fees on subcontract dollars you pay out.
If you have no employees and pay no payroll, the W/C policy (here anyway) only costs around 550-600 bucks per year. When you start paying payroll is when you remit based on your rate.
Aside from that, when clients ask about WC coverage, you have a policy. Looks and sounds much better than using the "I dont have employees, so I dont need it" line of crap.

If you are in the tree business with or without employees, you are asking for trouble by not carring a policy.

But, what do I know?

 

[Tree Wizard]

Even though WC is generally the same around the country, it can vary from state to state.

Our payroll gets audited every year, and it is our payroll that determines our WC and Liability premium. If we have a sub listed on our books that we don't have a current Certificate of Insurance showing WC & Liability coverage - whatever we paid that sub gets added to our payroll totals which raises our premium. If I'm paying a climber sub $30+/hr I don't want to be paying our WC rate on that.

If a sub does not have WC and gets injured - it goes against our experience modifier.

Stumper, I'm sure you are sincere when you say you will take care of yourself if injured. But what if you were seriously injured and your loved ones were taking care of you - who do you think their lawyer would go after?

 

[tophopper]

Even though WC is generally the same around the country, it can vary from state to state.

Our payroll gets audited every year, and it is our payroll that determines our WC and Liability premium. If we have a sub listed on our books that we don't have a current Certificate of Insurance showing WC & Liability coverage - whatever we paid that sub gets added to our payroll totals which raises our premium. If I'm paying a climber sub $30+/hr I don't want to be paying our WC rate on that.

If a sub does not have WC and gets injured - it goes against our experience modifier.

Well put! Thats basically what Ive been trying to get accross... you have a better play on the words!!

 

[Stumper]

Stumper, I'm sure you are sincere when you say you will take care of yourself if injured. But what if you were seriously injured and your loved ones were taking care of you - who do you think their lawyer would go after?

Wizard, I am sincere and In my case my family would not sue either-very strong convictions on the matter. The only way they might sue would be if someone committed a deliberate act that resulted in an injury-not for an accident. Let me be clear-I'm not ragging on you for how you are running your business but I'm trying to point out that the buck passing , litigating, sue happy society we have is monstrous and the arbitrary change from ineligible for Comp to required to be covered is screwey. :angel: