PROTESTS EFFECTIVE

Otago Daily Times, Issue 27165, 22 August 1949, Page 4

PROTESTS EFFECTIVE

Employers’ Liability Insurance Premium Rates Reduced Special Correspondent The loud protests that were voiced by -the business community concerning the increases in premium rates in respect of Employers’ liability insurance consequent on the nationalisation of such insurance have evidently been noted in official cirlces. The fact that 1949 is election year might, or might not, account for the prompt action that has been taken by the Government to remove some, at least, of the grounds for complaint. Regulations containing details of the premium rates to be charged by the State Fire Office were gazetted in April last. Considerable interest was then evinced in sub-clause 4 of Clause 7 of the regulations, which provided that “ where an employer carries on in buildings or premises communicating internally with each other two or more occupations subject to different rates, the rate to be charged, unless otherwise specially provided in the said schedule, or unless otherwise decided by the general manager, shall be the rate of the highest rates of such occupation.” It was contended at the time that numerous anomalies would be disclosed, in that occupations carrying the minimum of risk would be classed with risky occupations, and that the same premiums—the highest—would be charged for both. Those fears were realised, but it is clear that urgent steps have been taken to rectify the position, and the business community have been gratified to learn that, in many instances, premium rates have been reduced in respect of the less risky occupations. The schedule of premium rates, contained in the original regulations (1949/20) has been revoked, and a new schedule has been substituted. Generally, the new schedule retains the highest rate in respect of occupations, but contains lower rates for less hazardous jobs coming under the same classification. Some examples are appended:

In some instances premiums have been reduced not because of any subdivision of occupations (e.g. on account of non-utilisation of motive power) but merely because the rate originally charged has been shown to be excessive. Some examples:

It is beyond question that the reductions, such as they are, have been welcomed, but it is doubtful whether the public is convinced that further reductions cannot be made. Most of the rates have been left unaltered, and it is still easy to show that further reductions are possible in numerous instances, where the rates charged by private enterprise were lower than those charged now. Obviously, judgment on this matter must be reserved till the results of the year’s operations of the State’s monopoly become available next year.

Original rate. New rate. s. d. s. d. Boxmaker, wood: With power .. .. 40 0 . 40 0 Without power 40 0 8 0 Brewer 25 0 25 0 Brewers, managing only 25 0 5 0 Butcher: With killing .. .. 50 0 50 0 Without killing .. Carpet manufacturer: 50 0 35 0 With power .. .. 14 0 14 0 Without power .. 14 0 9 0 Coachbuilder: With power .. .. 30 0 30 0 Without power .. 30 0 14 0

Original rate. New rata. s. d. s. d. Candle factory 30 0 20 0 Casual labour in or about private residences (excluding domestic workers and some others) .. 20 0 s f Cement maker and lime merchant, and cement and lime works, excluding quarrying ....... 90 0 60 A Chimney-stack building 70 0 46 0 Dance musicians b 0 3 0 Fire brigade, volunteer members 20 0 12 0 Stevedores 300 0 240 0