Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeke
I don't think it is. First of all, it is an insurance entity, a non profit with no obligation to the public. I believe SF is licensed with the Dept of Ins as any other. Therefore, not a government agency.
It definitely was created by the state, but it is self supporting and not directly connected with any other state government agency.
What may be at issue here is the word "agency." In government, an agency is a function of the executive branch of government. Agencies create policy and regulation in order to carry out the laws of the state legislators. State Fund does not do that.
They are there to create balance and competition to other workers' comp insurers who operate for profit.
If you know more, please post.
|
State Fund is there to provide access to insurance, I agree. They are run as if a separate entity from the state, I agree with that too. They were created by the state legislature. However, they are really not a real private enterprise company. They are basically controlled by California, and therefore are run quasi-public.
But here's my logic/reasoning. I am scared of the Calif Dept of Labor Relations. That is the agency that enforces WC laws and levies penalties. Sometime huge ones that put you out of business. I would avoid them at all costs. I was thinking along the lines of a more calibrated response. A neutral third party like State Fund is created as a backstop against insurance market irregularities. They can and would be happy to look over an audit and provide their opinion. You can use that to go back to the insurance broker, rather than call in the jack-booted thugs over at Dept. Labor, which is totally a nuclear option. Nothing is worth that. I'd rather intentionally pay too much rather than call them in. They screw everything up, for a very long time.