# Subs now need their own workman's comp. ins.



## Brian Young (Aug 13, 2005)

Where will it stop! I was just informed today that any and all of our subs need their own workman's comp. insurance, or we can buy it for them....WTF! I hate govt, I hate insurance companies. The two biggest organized crime outfits IMO!


----------



## hoskm01 (Oct 17, 2008)

Must be a state thing? Couldn't work here with out comp for your workmen.


----------



## Brian Young (Aug 13, 2005)

hoskm01;1103884 said:


> Must be a state thing? Couldn't work here with out comp for your workmen.


We have it for my employee's but even for any subs?


----------



## lilweeds (Aug 3, 2007)

It is NOT a state thing. MOST insurance companies will accept the state waiver for owners of inc's and sole props as the certificate. I have a couple of places that I do work for that required that I have it no matter what. I am still excluded from my policy, so I can't collect on it, but still have to pay the $700 a year for a tiny policy. IT SUCKS!!!


----------



## Brian Young (Aug 13, 2005)

Well I guess there is a waiver they can sign declining it, is this what your talking about?


----------



## mrsnowman (Sep 18, 2010)

Brian Young;1103858 said:


> Where will it stop! I was just informed today that any and all of our subs need their own workman's comp. insurance, or we can buy it for them....WTF! I hate govt, I hate insurance companies. The two biggest organized crime outfits IMO!


Looking at this another way, I would think this is a good thing for any reputable company. Maybe this will stop the 50000 trucks out there that pick up an account or two for half price just to make some extra money. If nothing else, it may make them work for the right wages and slow down the lowballing. 
Who am I kidding, they will just run without wc. Who is going to make them get it? Really? Our state can't even monitor pesticide licensing, how are they going to maintain or monitor wc? Your right, we are screwed!!!!!


----------



## Mark13 (Dec 3, 2006)

Brian Young;1103858 said:


> Where will it stop! I was just informed today that any and all of our subs need their own workman's comp. insurance, or we can buy it for them....WTF! I hate govt, I hate insurance companies. The two biggest organized crime outfits IMO!


I was told this also by the company I sub for. It doesn't make much sense to me but I didn't make the rules, I just want to play along and push some snow.


----------



## ERWbuilders (Oct 5, 2010)

If your a sub, with no employees, How can you actually get hurt plowing snow? i mean unless you pull a muscle steering the wheel or playin with ur joystick or doin 50mph in a parkinglot. Insurance is a scam thats for sure


----------



## buckwheat_la (Oct 11, 2009)

mrsnowman;1103905 said:


> Looking at this another way, I would think this is a good thing for any reputable company. Maybe this will stop the 50000 trucks out there that pick up an account or two for half price just to make some extra money. If nothing else, it may make them work for the right wages and slow down the lowballing.
> Who am I kidding, they will just run without wc. Who is going to make them get it? Really? Our state can't even monitor pesticide licensing, how are they going to maintain or monitor wc? Your right, we are screwed!!!!!


Actually, most companies well check to make sure your coverage is current before they issue a check, and it is the employers responsiblity to make sure its maintained. And if someone who works for u or under u let's there policy lapse, u can hold their check and/or pay it for them. (At least that is the way it happens in Canada)


----------



## qualitycut (Jan 13, 2008)

Its an insurance thing, the guy i plowed for had to pay a little extra in his insurance I believe because I dont have it on myself.


----------



## Brian Young (Aug 13, 2005)

qualitycut;1104094 said:


> Its an insurance thing, the guy i plowed for had to pay a little extra in his insurance I believe because I dont have it on myself.


1 or 2 wouldn't be that bad but 6 subs plus mine is a bit much. Not to mention sidewalk guys.


----------



## Silverstreak (Oct 25, 2007)

if youre the president or officer of the company then you do not need to get workmans comp, unless you have other employees which arent part of the company and collect paychecks the waiver excludes the officers and is what those guys are talking about


i guess you could get your employees to all be part of the company (pres vp treasurer, secretary, etc) and get around this....then youd have to divie out shares and everyone would have a piece of your pie though payup


----------



## buckwheat_la (Oct 11, 2009)

Silverstreak;1104345 said:


> if youre the president or officer of the company then you do not need to get workmans comp, unless you have other employees which arent part of the company and collect paychecks the waiver excludes the officers and is what those guys are talking about
> 
> i guess you could get your employees to all be part of the company (pres vp treasurer, secretary, etc) and get around this....then youd have to divie out shares and everyone would have a piece of your pie though payup


i don't think this would work, the last time i was asked submit workers comp information, i was asked if i was doing any of the work, if i had answered yes i would be required to have myself included in my workers comp policy


----------



## PLM-1 (Nov 29, 2004)

My insurance company requires my subs to carry it. Also, it is cheaper for me to add them as an employee than it is to carry a policy on a sub contractor. They then lease their truck to my company and therefore they can become a w-2 employee vs 10-99.


----------



## basher (Nov 13, 2004)

Brian Young;1103890 said:


> We have it for my employee's but even for any subs?


If the Subs don't have a workmans compensation policy then they will not fit the definition of sub-contractor as they are not fully insured.


----------



## shooterm (Feb 23, 2010)

I see this as a benefit. Hopefully this means legit business will once again plow parking lots and people plugging plowers in there blackberry go away. Seriously do we really think six acre sites need to be done with five plow trucks and five on call?


----------



## mrsnowman (Sep 18, 2010)

shooterm;1105291 said:


> I see this as a benefit. Hopefully this means legit business will once again plow parking lots and people plugging plowers in there blackberry go away. Seriously do we really think six acre sites need to be done with five plow trucks and five on call?


As I said, I agree 100 percent


----------



## dmontgomery (Oct 3, 2003)

I have never needed it on myself as a sub........I am getting it this year to cover my parttime driver.....but still not me..


----------



## Brian Young (Aug 13, 2005)

Yesterday I talked to another guy who said he actually called our State Representative and he said they dont need it. IDK, I may call this guy myself.


----------



## lbfmd (Dec 26, 2008)

We got smakced with it last year, it depends on your insurance company. Five years ago there were only a few, this year when we quoted our insurance out they all stated that our subs had to have minimum state requirements or we would be charged for there pay as if it were wages. That was a nice bill. its become more common place now and it doesn't matter what the state says its what the insurance company states, thats at least what our new agent told us.


----------



## lilweeds (Aug 3, 2007)

In PA if you are an officer or sole prop. you do not have to have it. You must exclude yourself by filling out a form with the dept of labor. Call them they will direct you to the right form. That being said the insurance company may not except that.


----------



## Reliable Snow and Ice (Dec 22, 2009)

insurance companies will be the death of this industry ... any one who plow's an insurance company's lot should not do it then let's see there little as$ out there with plastic shovels :yow!::yow!::yow!:

either that or plow the whole season pay the high price's then get hurt.... ooooohh pulled a leg mussel pushing on the brake... or my neck hurts from turning too much


----------



## Wayne Volz (Mar 1, 2002)

*This is nothing new*

You should collect insurance certs. on all your subs. Otherwise when you 1099 them and you have your work-comp audit the money you paid them will come back as your payroll.

It's been like that for as long as I can remember.


----------



## MidcoastMainiac (Aug 27, 2009)

I agree with who said that he requires his subs to be inc.ed. Presidents/owners of Companies are exempt from WCI unless who hires your company requires it. When I hire a sub that is incorperated, I am hiring the company, not the owner. 2 seperate entaties as far as the gov. is concerned.


----------



## elite1msmith (Sep 10, 2007)

not new here, i even had my insurance company tell me this year they will be conducting audits to maek sure all subs are fully insured. they have to be insured for at least the min that i have to provide coverage for our customer...anything less will cost me money


----------



## Wayne Volz (Mar 1, 2002)

*Right*



elite1msmith;1114447 said:


> not new here, i even had my insurance company tell me this year they will be conducting audits to maek sure all subs are fully insured. they have to be insured for at least the min that i have to provide coverage for our customer...anything less will cost me money


You are exactly right and I believe that is a National issue. If they are not insured, it come back to you as payroll. Check with your agent to make sure. Better yet, check with two people to make sure.


----------



## paponte (Oct 28, 2003)

It's always been that way, unless the sub is an individual and not a company.


----------



## goatboy1 (Nov 8, 2009)

buckwheat_la;1104086 said:


> Actually, most companies well check to make sure your coverage is current before they issue a check, and it is the employers responsiblity to make sure its maintained. And if someone who works for u or under u let's there policy lapse, u can hold their check and/or pay it for them. (At least that is the way it happens in Canada)


I don't know about the states or your province but in B.C. the employer pretty much has to be able to proof the sub has his own company , otherwise he/she is an employee. With other words insurance companies and government as well as the unions are all in on this and neither one of them want to loose tax dollars or union clout on labour standards.Years ago I got audited for passing employees as subs and was charged 30k.As you may know , the comp dues are calculated as a percentage of your annual salaries paid per year and it has to match the total on your tax return (in your case the T4 total)
WTF does this all have to do with subs having to fork over money for their comp you ask?

Lost tax revenue , large noncovered claims and the banking and insurance reform we witnessed after some of them collapsed and we all had to bail them out (and still are).


----------



## goatboy1 (Nov 8, 2009)

Wayne Volz;1115236 said:


> You are exactly right and I believe that is a National issue. If they are not insured, it come back to you as payroll. Check with your agent to make sure. Better yet, check with two people to make sure.


you got it right...they want you to put a definite stamp on that guy :SUB or EMPLOYEE so they can charge you accordingly...lest we want to be witness to more bank and insurance collapses.


----------

