4 ms·

Perhaps a specific Zenefits example of employee incompetence is of use here. The lady in this example is clearly not competent, and should not be selling produ

Perhaps a specific Zenefits example of employee incompetence is of use here. The lady in this example is clearly not competent, and should not be selling products that people depend on for their health. Not sure why you feel having gone through the hoops to demonstrate competence, learn about the various products, and how to advise clients of their options is merely 'rent seeking'. --- "I made like $15,000 in the time I was there, just on commissions. And I never got my license," said an insurance salesperson who left Zenefits this summer. She estimated she had more than 100 conversations with different customers about insurance. "I took my test three times in a row, and I failed. They still let me work." Without her license, she had to improvise on calls with customers. When faced with a tricky question, "I would just google it,” she said. She would tell the customer, "Hold on one second, let me email the expert, he's on the line, hold on one second, I'll get back to you.” But in reality, “I would pick one of the first three links and I would just go off of that." http://www.buzzfeed.com/williamalden/zenefits-under-scrutiny-for-flouting-insurance-laws#.bhVQBA63G http://www.buzzfeed.com/williamalden/zenefits-under-scrutiny...

morgante 11y ago
I'm not disputing that she's incompetent. I deal with incompetence on a daily basis. Everyone from banks to airlines have incompetent employees, and we're not demanding that all customer support agents undergo licensing requirements. We live in a free market and the best way to deal with incompetence is the market. (Ex. I switched my bank after getting frustrated with incompetent tellers.) Once again: the worst that an insurance salesperson can do is sell you bad insurance. They're not actually involved in medical procedures, so any harm they can do is financial. And if that harm is due to fraud (misrepresenting a product to you), you have legal remedies. Bank customer support people have just as much potential to cause financial harm, but we don't require them to be licensed. Even more to the point: I can personally sign up for insurance directly on the internet, without talking to any licensed salesperson. If licenses salespeople are so essential to insurance, why can I buy insurance without interacting with one? As far as I'm concerned, the only professions which should require government licensing are those where tort is insufficient to correct wrongs. (ie. someone can die: doctors, civil engineers, etc.)
- jeffwass 11y ago
  "Once again: the worst that an insurance salesperson can do is sell you bad insurance. They're not actually involved in medical procedures, so any harm they can do is financial." Sorry, there are very clear knock-on health effects here you're sweeping under the rug. Eg, if you're expecting to be covered for an urgent emergency life-saving procedure. Maybe you personally have sufficient cash on hand to pay for any required emergency surgery, that doesn't mean it's just a 'financial' problem to everybody else. Do you really think it's appropriate to have someone be denied a medical procedure, and hope they survive so they can go through a legal challenge afterwards for 'fraud', and hope they can successfully provide proof of fraud over incompetence based on some phone conversation several years ago? Instead of the much simpler solution of requiring some minimum license for the insurance seller? I'm not sure about your online purchase example. Are you 100% sure these are the same insurance products requiring licenses as mentioned in the article, that no human sanity checks the product during the purchase process, or that the online algorithm itself didn't go through a sufficient license-compliant certification process?
  - morgante 11y ago
    > if you're expecting to be covered for an urgent emergency life-saving procedure You will never be refused emergency treatment just because your insurance doesn't cover it. That's the law in the United States. You will get a huge bill afterwards and there will absolutely be financial consequences, but not medical ones. It's illegal for a hospital ER to refuse you due to lack of sufficient insurance. The point is that you won't die, so you will be around to come back and sue the broker. (In fact, insurance lawsuits are super common.) Not to mention that we're dealing with a hypothetical case where you do actually have insurance but it's somehow insufficient (which, by the way, is unlikely under Obamacare). In that case, you would absolutely get treated, but your insurer would refuse to cover the bill and would pass it on to you. You could then sue Zenefits for misrepresenting the product and seek damages to cover the bill. > same insurance products requiring licenses as mentioned in the article They're not the same in that I'm talking about individual insurance and the article is group insurance, but that's irrelevant to the point. If there are serious medical consequences to buying insurance without licensed supervision, I shouldn't be able to buy my own insurance online.

morgante 11y ago

I'm not disputing that she's incompetent. I deal with incompetence on a daily basis. Everyone from banks to airlines have incompetent employees, and we're not demanding that all customer support agents undergo licensing requirements. We live in a free market and the best way to deal with incompetence is the market. (Ex. I switched my bank after getting frustrated with incompetent tellers.) Once again: the worst that an insurance salesperson can do is sell you bad insurance. They're not actually involved in medical procedures, so any harm they can do is financial. And if that harm is due to fraud (misrepresenting a product to you), you have legal remedies. Bank customer support people have just as much potential to cause financial harm, but we don't require them to be licensed. Even more to the point: I can personally sign up for insurance directly on the internet, without talking to any licensed salesperson. If licenses salespeople are so essential to insurance, why can I buy insurance without interacting with one? As far as I'm concerned, the only professions which should require government licensing are those where tort is insufficient to correct wrongs. (ie. someone can die: doctors, civil engineers, etc.)

jeffwass 11y ago
"Once again: the worst that an insurance salesperson can do is sell you bad insurance. They're not actually involved in medical procedures, so any harm they can do is financial." Sorry, there are very clear knock-on health effects here you're sweeping under the rug. Eg, if you're expecting to be covered for an urgent emergency life-saving procedure. Maybe you personally have sufficient cash on hand to pay for any required emergency surgery, that doesn't mean it's just a 'financial' problem to everybody else. Do you really think it's appropriate to have someone be denied a medical procedure, and hope they survive so they can go through a legal challenge afterwards for 'fraud', and hope they can successfully provide proof of fraud over incompetence based on some phone conversation several years ago? Instead of the much simpler solution of requiring some minimum license for the insurance seller? I'm not sure about your online purchase example. Are you 100% sure these are the same insurance products requiring licenses as mentioned in the article, that no human sanity checks the product during the purchase process, or that the online algorithm itself didn't go through a sufficient license-compliant certification process?
- morgante 11y ago
  > if you're expecting to be covered for an urgent emergency life-saving procedure You will never be refused emergency treatment just because your insurance doesn't cover it. That's the law in the United States. You will get a huge bill afterwards and there will absolutely be financial consequences, but not medical ones. It's illegal for a hospital ER to refuse you due to lack of sufficient insurance. The point is that you won't die, so you will be around to come back and sue the broker. (In fact, insurance lawsuits are super common.) Not to mention that we're dealing with a hypothetical case where you do actually have insurance but it's somehow insufficient (which, by the way, is unlikely under Obamacare). In that case, you would absolutely get treated, but your insurer would refuse to cover the bill and would pass it on to you. You could then sue Zenefits for misrepresenting the product and seek damages to cover the bill. > same insurance products requiring licenses as mentioned in the article They're not the same in that I'm talking about individual insurance and the article is group insurance, but that's irrelevant to the point. If there are serious medical consequences to buying insurance without licensed supervision, I shouldn't be able to buy my own insurance online.