Insurers concerned over COVID-19 discrimination allegations as workers return to office



  • Compulsory vaccination seen as a matter of contention
  • Jab’s problems so far represent less than 5% of COVID-related legal claims in the United States
  • Insurers transfer more risk to employers
  • Premiums up to 75% in the last 18 months – brokers

LONDON, Aug.6 (Reuters) – Liability insurers on both sides of the Atlantic are cutting coverage they offer to businesses ahead of an expected wave of discrimination complaints as employers recall staff to their desks after 18 months of work from home induced by the pandemic.

There have been approximately 2,950 COVID-19 lawsuits in the United States since the start of the pandemic, ranging from remote work disputes to workplace safety and discrimination, according to law firm Fisher Phillips.

Now, industry sources say companies are starting to trigger policies that protect them against the cost of defending discrimination lawsuits and compensations, known as professional liability insurance (EPLI).

This makes policyholders nervous.

Adrian Cox, managing director of Beazley (BEZG.L), a major Lloyd’s of London insurer, calls it a “high exposure area”, especially in North America.

“How you don’t discriminate, how you handle vaccination and testing – these are all hard things for employers to overcome,” he told Reuters.

Karen Cargill, a management liability specialist at insurance broker Marsh in London, said a fifth of notifications by her insurer clients of possible EPLI claims in Britain were related to COVID in the past six months .


Insurers, employers and lawyers view mandatory vaccinations as a limited but growing point of contention.

Tech giants like Alphabet Inc’s Google (GOOGL.O) and Facebook Inc (FB.O) are among the companies that have told all U.S. employees to get vaccinated against COVID-19 before entering in offices or on campuses to help protect the health and safety of colleagues. Read more

Vaccination-related claims in the United States represent less than 5% of total COVID-19 combinations – or less than 150 – said Kevin Troutman, partner and co-chair of Fisher Phillips’ health industry team . But it should increase.

“The vaccine warrants conundrum is just the next version of the COVID claims that we’re going to see,” said Kelly Thoerig, who oversees Marsh’s US EPLI practice.

According to preliminary results of an ongoing survey of more than 200 U.S. employers launched on July 19 by Mercer consultants, 14% now require staff to be vaccinated to work at a corporate site.

A number of US employers with such policies have already faced court hearings. Workers at a hospital in Texas said the vaccinations were experimental and the staff were being used as “human guinea pigs.”

The case was dismissed in June and some lawyers say this type of case is unlikely to be viable. Read more

But workers could benefit from protection if they can’t get vaccinated for medical or religious reasons – unless it places “undue hardship” on the company, according to the US Insurance Information Institute. United.

Vulnerable workers could also sue employers because the lack of a mandatory vaccination policy puts them at risk.

However, even if the cases are dismissed, the defense costs would fall on employers – and their insurers.

Labor lawyers in Britain have so far seen fewer discrimination lawsuits.

In one case in Scotland, a leader won unfair dismissal after being dismissed without notice after raising concerns about the lack of personal protective equipment and the risk of passing the coronavirus on to his vulnerable father.

On vaccination, lawyers say ‘no jab, no work’ contracts – such as those offered by London-based Pimlico Plumbers – risk discriminating against younger staff, who may not yet have received her second vaccine, or pregnant women, who may prefer to be vaccinated after childbirth.

“If an employee decided to refuse the vaccine by personal choice … it would be possible to exclude him from the premises for health and safety reasons,” said Jo Keddie, lawyer at Winckworth Sherwood.

“(But) if an employee refuses to be vaccinated because of a health problem or religious belief, they could argue that a mandatory vaccination policy is a disability or religious discrimination.”


Many insurers are reducing their exposure by adding restrictions on new or renewed policies, forcing employers to bear more of the costs and increasing premium rates, according to Jason Binette, EPLI product manager at AmTrust Exec in Windsor, Connecticut. .

Lloyd’s of London (SOLYD.UL) insurers are among those removing EPLI coverage from the broader insurance packages they offer businesses, in order to keep price control. But specialty insurers in Bermuda, for example, still offer such coverage, brokers said.

Business is booming for those still selling EPLI, and premium rates are rising.

AmTrust has seen a 22% increase in requests for coverage since the start of the pandemic, in part thanks to new small business customers.

“I see companies that have been around for 40 years that haven’t had coverage… and want it now,” Binette said, adding that premium rates had jumped 10% to 20%.

Sam Vardy, managing partner of London-based insurance broker Howden, estimates the rate hike at 25-75% over the past 18 months.

Some employers are simply saying that the price of the EPLI is too high to risk bringing staff back to the offices, according to Julia Graham, CEO of the UK Insurance Buyers Association Airmic.

“They can’t get (insurance) for the price they’re willing to pay,” she said.

Additional reporting by Muvija M. in Bengaluru; Editing by Kirsten Donovan

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.


Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.