Posted on 01/21/2006 6:11:19 PM PST by BlueOneGolf
Just wait until Larry's boss decides that it's too "risky" to employ people who have firearms in their home.
Then he'll be scratching his head and asking "Doh... what happened?"
I stand corrected. It's not life insurance, it's motorcycle related injuries under their health insurance.
Again, very easily remedied. Increase your automotive policy limits as necessary.
Oooops... "employ" should be "insure"
but it still gets the basic idea across.
Insure, not employ. Gotta read the article and keep your terms straight, Willie. Hey, I corrected my own dyslexia-related boner in #42.
LOL! Gotta give you credit there, buddy!
Regardless of bunging jumping and sky-diving I am 99.9 percent sure that the decision resulted in substantial premium savings and is not the result of bigotry against motorcycle riders. I would consider owning a motorcycle in addition to automobiles to be a luxury that is an option for those with a good amount of disposable income. Who should bear the costs of the higher premiums? The lower wage workers who cannot afford motorcycle riding?"
Luxury? Actually my motorcycle was bought used for $1800 and I use it to commute back and forth to work. It's my primary form af transportation 9 months out of the year. And at 50MPG you can't beat it at todays gas prices! Riders absolutely SHOULD NOT be what you call "a protected class". But if the State views motorcycles equivalent to four-wheeled vehicles in terms af licensing, registering, mandatory insurance and other regulatory aspects then what the company is doing is discriminatory.
Say a worker drives to work in his car and is injured in a crash, then it's no problem to pay his benefits, but if he's struck while ridiing his motorcycle to work then he's screwed. Same instance, only in the second situation he's on two wheels not four. The State says he's operating a "motor vehicle" in either case so yeah there is something wrong with the company's decision.
It's BOTH, Larry. Employee health insurance AND life insurance.
I've always found it quite difficult to scuba-dive on a motorcycle.
Ummm.... I thought motorcycle-related injuries (just as automobile) were generally covered by the medical payment part of your insurance on said vehicle/bike.
Now, I could be wrong....
Either way, although this would appear to be unfair, it most certainly IS fair for those who pay higer premiums due to the costs of motorcycle injuries.
I believe some health insurance companies disallow claims resulting from "high-risk" "extreme sports" such as bungee jumping.
If somebody gets thrown from a horse everyone feels sorry. If someone gets in an accident on a motorcycle (saving gas) people say it serves them right. We're screwn.
Do you think if I somehow contracted dyslexia that it would compensate for these crappy bifocals I have?
Sheeeesh... it's been a long day and I gotta be in good shape to watch football tomorrow.
G'night, Larry!
Night, Willie!
I'm with you there- I bought a Yamaha Vino 125 scooter and the cost of ownership is less than commuting by public transit. As a bonus, this winter has been so mild that I've had it out at least twice a week since November.
That post came with its own rim shot!
You are really right. We only got major medical from my Dad's company when I was a kid. Now you have to use insurance for everything and it's all out of kilter.
OK..........I've read the article and all the ensuing comments........and this is a half full/half empty kind of thing.
The difference here is that this company is not going to pay claims for certain types of injuries, whereas Miracle-Gro and Weyco are firing employees, as opposed to just not paying certain claims. Of course if American Coal starts telling employees they can not ride motorcycles on their own time, it will fall into the same category.
The big difference in these cases is that employees are not being fired, and if they do not have company provided insurance it doesn't matter. That is not the case for Weyco and Miracle-Gro. One of the fired employees was not on the company incurance plan.
I don't like it.......but I don't want the government coming in and telling the company it can't do it.
You’d still be covered if you did almost anything else: bungee jumping, skydiving, scuba diving, skiing. Just not on your motorcycle. 16 posted on 01/21/2006 8:21:16 PM CST by Petronski
Not wierd - just tells me that they haven't had any medical insurance claims resulting from those other activities. It doesn't take many motorcycle injuries to add up to a very large sum of money.
I would imagine that a significant number of claims/large payouts for injuries related to those other listed activities would quickly result in future exclusions for those as well.
Nonsense. The diving part is easy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.