Forums

Chuck, 

That's the point of my post. I agree with your answer, emphatically. My post concludes with a protest in the form of a rhetorical question against a system that by and large promotes field adjusters to positions requiring more skill, but less pay.

The consequence of a so called broken system is that you get a bunch of idgits reviewing files because the qualified adjusters with an inkling of horse-sense prefer to push claims in the manner you just described.

My post was long, because I wanted to make sure that my favorite examiners didn’t think I had something against them if they should come across my posts.  It is very refreshing for me to submit my work to someone who can observes the effort I took to secure the subtle details that will keep their files closed.  You and I have sat through enough depositions and done enough re-inspection work that we know how to keep a file closed.

For example, I've seen a few revision requests recently that required me to remove damages because it was obvious that the insured would not get that repair done and thereby was not entitled to it. 

Posted By Jud G. on 21 Jul 2011 09:13 PM

Chuck, 

That's the point of my post. I agree with your answer, emphatically. My post concludes with a protest in the form of a rhetorical question against a system that by and large promotes field adjusters to positions requiring more skill, but less pay.

The consequence of a so called broken system is that you get a bunch of idgits reviewing files because the qualified adjusters with an inkling of horse-sense prefer to push claims in the manner you just described.

My post was long, because I wanted to make sure that my favorite examiners didn’t think I had something against them if they should come across my posts.  It is very refreshing for me to submit my work to someone who can observes the effort I took to secure the subtle details that will keep their files closed.  You and I have sat through enough depositions and done enough re-inspection work that we know how to keep a file closed.

For example, I've seen a few revision requests recently that required me to remove damages because it was obvious that the insured would not get that repair done and thereby was not entitled to it. 

 

Nice point Jud G.

Whilst in general, being "promoted' to a position with more responsibility and liability and a pay..............cut doesn't make much sense.

However this is the norm in many companies within and outside of the adjusting industry.

In almost any company that sells either a specific product or a specific service, there is a heirachy from field staff (Sales) to sales manager and moves right on up the line.....and the highest paid employees of these companies in most cases are the field salesperson, the very same employees that are at the bottom of the totem pole. So when a salesperson does so well that they warrant a promotion, they move up in the company and down in income.

The reasoning is whilst the salesperson or in our case the field adjuster are the highest paid employees in the company, they are also the employees with the least stability and job security. They are the first to be laid off and the easiest to be fired and they have the highest rate of turnover. Rising from the ranks of the salesforce, most people willingly accept the drop in income for higher job security and stability

 Many years ago when membership in NACA got me a lot of work by networking I looked at all the other adjusters who were always called out and made good storms out of all storms and found a common thread. It was education and dedication and most had a nest egg back home and a lot of support from home.Some of the best storm adjusters I have ever met were ex-staff adjusters who got into storm work late in life for the extra income and all realized the value of $1,00 earned and $1,00 spent.

Many posters on this site know how to play the grame from the little league to the major league world series. Just hone each adjusting skill you have each day and your time may come that you are able to be a true" IA and pick and choose.

Posted By Jud G. on 22 Jul 2011 09:08 AM
Robby, I agree with your point and have seen that come true in a couple of other industries recently. Your remark about less income for better stability is what should be the case. Yet I've seen too many fortune 500 companies have their own layoffs (I had personal experience with this when I worked staff for AIG and Liberty Mutual). State Farm seems to be laying off several branches every year. There's always some corporate guru who seems to think he has the best idea for customer service or saving the company money. It's odd because none of their ideas are ever new.

When their layoffs come around, you really have no control at that point. Your career is now at the mercy of someone who is layers above you in upper management. That person is only concerned for the good of the company, not your bills, retirement, or college education. Robby, our jobs now reflect the purest of a capitalist framework where it is the survival of the fittest. Our income is now dependent on our ability to hustle, develop our credentials, and network. We don't get awards or promotions, but we are happy with that because we know that a piece of acrylic or a fancy title doesn't pay the bills, or finance our retirement and college funds.

I close with this question because I really don't have the answer at this point: are we more stable as 1099's where our income is dependent on our choices or working in an office at the mercy of someone else's decisions further up the ladder that we don't even know?

Jud G,
 

I think "stability" means different things to different people but the end result is what makes a person be able to sleep comfortable at night. For many, working for a faceless "corporation" and little money is a sacrifice they are willing to take in order to maintain the "stability" that is intrinsic to health care, 401k ,other benefits for themselves and their families.

Another person looks to the faceless corporation for stability not only for the health benefits but because they don't have to make ANY decisions other than to show up on time to work everyday/ There are many people who can't be their own boss "operate as a small business" because they are just not self-motivated and NEED someone to TELL them what to do.

A different breed of person finds stability in the freedom of the corporate grind, to make their own way and to make significantly more money than their mindless automaton counterpart.These people are self motivated and don't need someone to tell them what when and where to do something. These folks are willing to forego the comforts of benefits to again make significantly more money and maintain the freedom that only the 1099'd ,self employed folks can have.

The successful IA  operates under the small business owner doctrine to take advantage of the tax deductions, tax credits, the ability to write off a portion of their own homes, their vehicles that the typical employee cannot.

In our world, even those with experience and a great income can be wiped out entirely if they or anyone in their family falls ill or experiences an accident due to lack of healthcare (which we have just seen happen). The premiums to maintain healthcare for the self employed and their families are astronomical. Add in the fact of no salary to fall back on when work is lean, the IA must either choose pay the healthcare premium or pay his/her mortgage.

Robby