More and more employers are banning cell phones in the workplace because they are distracting enough to be a serious safety issue for workers.

Most notably, General Motors has banned all employees, including its CEO, from walking around with their mobile phones while talking, texting or using other smartphone functions.
You already know the dangers of using your phone while behind the wheel, as vehicular deaths have spiked since the ubiquity of smartphones. But in many workplaces – think  warehouses, construction sites, factories and other worksites with equipment and inventory – the distraction of a smartphone can have deadly consequences. In busy workplaces, safety should be your primary concern. Consider the following:

Industrial machinery and phones don’t mix

OSHA bars the use of cell phones in construction regulations  pertaining to cranes and derricks, but the hazard exists across any dangerous equipment.
Some workers should absolutely not have their mobile phones on and within reach, such as powered industrial truck operators, forklift drivers and machinery users. If you have any of these among your workforce, you should strictly ban the use of mobile phones in any capacity during the use of industrial equipment.

You may consider extending the ban to include all of the other employees who regularly work around that equipment, particularly when they are walking or moving product to and from the warehouse. Also, if any staff from your office are in the work area, they too should refrain from using their phones while walking.

The biggest dangers

The best way to prevent workplace injuries is for employees to be aware of their surroundings. When people are using cell phones in an operational environment, it impedes their ability to recognize and react to hazards, particularly moving equipment like forklifts.
The biggest concern is people who are in the middle of writing long messages and engaging with others on social media or texting. Many of these apps have been shown to greatly reduce the user’s awareness of the real world around them.
There are many instances in which workers cause traumatic injuries or even death to themselves or others due to cell phone distractions that could have easily been prevented.

Potential property damage

Distracted cell phone usage is known to cause workers to accidentally misuse equipment or machinery, which can result in either small or serious damage to company property. Also, having a cell phone around hazardous chemicals or waste can pose a serious threat to the health and safety of all workers in the vicinity, in addition to property damage. Furthermore, the cost of replacing damaged property can have a major financial impact on your organization and possibly be at your expense.

WHAT YOU CAN DO

Create a policy that explicitly explains when and where  employees may use their mobile phones while on the job.  Some companies ban cell phones altogether, particularly call centers where employees’ devices are collected at the beginning of the day and kept in lockers until breaks. Consider the following for your rules:

• Mobile phones are barred for employees when performing on-site job-related tasks.
• Answering calls, texting, checking social media or using the Internet are all activities that fall under dangerous cell phone usage.
• Set parameters for when and where employees are allowed to use their phones.
• Consider restricting types of media and videos.
• Hold employees accountable to productivity levels. Note that time spent on the phone on personal matters is keeping them from focusing on their jobs.

As cyber scams and hacker attacks grow, the insurance industry has been frantically trying to keep up in providing appropriate coverage for these events.

Hacks, viruses, ransomware and exposure of sensitive personal information of your customers or employees, and any resulting regulatory implications, are often covered by cyber liability insurance. But what about the recent trend of criminals spoofing a company executive’s e-mail address, posing as them and ordering accounts payable to cut a check and send it to the fraudsters?

Well, two firms suffered similar incidents, but different federal appeals courts issued opposite opinions – one saying that a crime insurance policy covered the event, while the other court said it didn’t.

The fact that two courts came out with two different rulings illustrates how many traditional and even cyber policies are slow to keep up with evolving hi-tech threats to businesses. The devil is always in the details, so read your policies and discuss your concerns with us.

The number of business e-mail compromise scams quadrupled in 2017, and losses averaged $352,000 per business and topped out at $3 million, according to an analysis of insurer Beazley’s clients. The FBI says these schemes are one of the fastest-growing cyber crimes.

Court case one: Covered
Employees of Medidata, a clinical-trial software firm, wired $4.7 million for what they thought was for an acquisition by their employer. They were sent a series of fraudulent e-mails that they thought were from their company president and the firm’s outside lawyer.

The company didn’t have a cyber insurance policy, but it had an executive protection policy, which had a crime section that included coverage for computer fraud, funds-transfer fraud and forgery.

The insurer rejected the claim and the firm sued in federal court. The lower court ruled in favor of the insurer, but
upon appeal the federal appeals court ruled that the policy did in fact cover the loss.

The insurer argued the policy applies to only hacking-type intrusions. The appeals court found that while no hacking occurred, fraudsters inserted spoofing code into firm’s e-mail system, which the court said is part of the computer system. The court held that the insurer must pay under the computer fraud portion of its policy.

Court case two: Not covered
A federal district court found no crime policy coverage after a Michigan tool and die firm wired $800,000 in funds to a fraudster’s account in the belief the account belonged to one of its vendors.

The insurer faulted the company for not verifying the bank account with the vendor. The district court agreed with the insurer that the loss was not a “direct loss” caused by the “use of a computer,” and thus the crime policy did not apply.

The takeaway
Computer fraud is evolving rapidly, so it’s important that you talk to us about the types of fraud that appear in the news. We will work with you to ensure that your coverage is forwardlooking and covering more than just threats from last year. We can also discuss with you how computer fraud  coverage interacts with other types of cyber crime policies.

One of the key tenets of effective management and happy employees is for managers to lead by example. And it’s  especially difficult for managers that do not exhibit to their  subordinates the traits they expect of their workers.

A recent study by Florida State University shines the light on what employees think of their managers by focusing on how guilty they are of the time-honored seven deadly sins.

Researchers, who polled 750 mid-level employees, said workplaces are seeing increased levels of hostility due in large part to a deterioration of trust between supervisors and the people they manage. Worse yet, the poll found that employees who feel their bosses are guilty of sins have impaired work productivity and poorer health.

The employees polled were asked to describe how often they personally experienced a direct supervisor’s sins of wrath (anger), greed, sloth (laziness), pride, lust, envy and  gluttony in the workplace.

The seven deadly sins are a classification of objectionable vices that have been used since early Christian times. The most common sins that were reported across genders, different industries and levels of responsibility were sloth, lust, pride and greed.

The poll found that:
• 41% of employees said their boss habitually pushes work on to others rather than doing it himself or herself (laziness);
• 33% said their boss tries to get others to stroke their ego (lust);
• 31% said their boss seeks undeserved admiration (pride);
• 27% said their boss pursues undeserved rewards (greed);
• 26% of employees said their boss frequently has trouble managing his or her anger;
• 23% of employees said their boss hoards resources that could be useful to others at work (gluttony);
• 19% said their boss regularly acts enviously toward others who experience good things.

The fallout

While this would seem to be bad in and of itself, the results of having a boss that is guilty of one or more of these sins are worse.

EFFECTS ON WORKERS
• Employees contributing less effort.
• Workers feeling overloaded by doing their supervisor’s work.
• Staff being less likely to make creative suggestions to bosses.
• Employees looking for new jobs.
• Physical and emotional problems and exhaustion among workers.
• Workers feeling anxious.

What to do

The above highlights the need for you to ensure that your
own supervisors exhibit behavior that is conducive to strong
employee productivity and maintaining a workplace that is
devoid of hostility.
The lesson from this study: lead by example. Work with
your supervisor

 

 

One by-product of a strong economy is more employment, but the increased activity usually results in more workplace injuries.
That’s because there are more inexperienced people on worksites and when a company is busy and there is more activity, the chances of an incident occurring also increase. This is especially the case in manual labor environments from production facilities, warehousing and logistics to construction and other trades.

The September USG + U.S. Chamber of Commerce Commercial Construction Index found that 80% of contractors said that the skilled labor shortage is affecting jobsite safety and it’s the number one factor  ncreasing safety risk on the jobsite.  As business activity grows and the job market tightens, many companies are forced to hire more inexperienced workers who are not skilled at understanding all safety hazards.
Experienced personnel have the know-how to identify workplace hazards and understand the safety protocols for all aspects of their work. While training can help new hires, nothing beats experience. Additionally, with many businesses working hard to fulfill orders, workplaces are busier. Amidst all that hustle and bustle and people moving quickly, the speed and activity can also contribute to accidents in the workplace.

Also, aggressive scheduling may cause employers to use workers with less experience or training, and can push employees to work longer hours. If employees are working overtime, they may also be tired and fatigued, which can contribute to poor judgment and workplace incidents.
One other issue that’s affecting workplace safety and is related to the tight job market is that employers are often having to settle for workers they may not normally hire in other times. As you know, the scourge of opioid addiction has been rampant and unfortunately if someone  who has an addiction is hired, they may be a serious liability for the employer. Not only that, but more states are legalizing recreational marijuana and nearly 40 states have medical marijuana laws on the books.

Here’s what’s concerning construction employers on the worker addiction front, according to the USG + U.S.
Chamber of Commerce Commercial Construction Index:
• 39% were concerned about the safety impacts of opioids.
• 27% were concerned about the safety impacts of alcohol.
• 22% were concerned about the safety impacts of cannabis.

The report showed that while nearly two-thirds of contractors had strategies in place to reduce the safety risks presented by alcohol (62%) and marijuana (61%), only half had strategies to address their top substance of concern: opioids, which is a growing issue.

What you can do
In this environment of labor shortages and high competition for workers, employers need to put a premium on safety.

EVERY YEAR comes with new laws and regulations that affect employers. It pays to stay on top of all the few requirements, so we are here to help you understand those that are most likely to affect your business. The following are the top 10 laws, regulations and trends that you need to know about going into 2019.

 

1. Sexual harassment training
Existing state law requires employers with 50 or more workers to provide at least two hours of sexual harassment training to supervisors every two years. SB 1343 changes this by requiring employers with five or more employees to provide all employees with at least one hour by Jan. 1, 2020. Training must be held every two years. Also, employers with five or more workers must provide (or continue to provide) two hours of the biennial supervisory training.

2. Data privacy
Companies that collect data on their customers online should start gearing up in 2019 for the Jan. 1, 2020 implementation of the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018, which is the state’s version of the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation.

The law applies to businesses that:
• Have annual gross revenues in excess of $25 million,
• Annually buy, receive for their own commercial purposes, or sell or share for commercial purposes, the personal  information of 50,000 or more consumers,  households or devices, and/or
• Derive 50% or more of their annual revenues from selling consumers’ personal information.

3. Independent contractors
While this legal development happened in 2018, now is a good time to go over it. In May 2018, the California Supreme Court handed down a decision that rewrites the state’s independent contractor law.  In its decision in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. vs. Superior Court, the court rejected a test that’s been used for more than a decade in favor of a more rigid three-factor approach, often called the “ABC” test.

Employers now must be able to answer ‘yes’ to the following if they want to classify someone as an independent contractor:

• The worker is free from the control and direction of the hirer in relation to the performance of the work, both under the contract and in fact;
• The worker performs work that is outside the usual course of the hirer’s business; and
• The worker is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation or business of the same nature as the work performed for the hirer.

The second prong of the test is the sentence that really changes the game. Now, if you hire a worker to do anything that is central to your business’s offerings, you must classify them as an employee.

4. Electronic submission of Form 300A
In November 2018, Cal/OSHA issued an emergency regulation that required California employers with more than 250 workers to submit Form 300A data covering calendar year 2017 by Dec. 31, 2018. The new regulation was designed to put California’s regulations in line with those of Federal OSHA.

This year, affected employers will be required to submit their prior year Form 300A data by March 2. The law applies to:

• Employers with 250 or more employees, and
• Employers with 20 to 249 employees in high-risk sectors.

5. Harassment non-disclosure
This law, which took effect Jan. 1, 2019, bars California employers from entering into settlement agreements that prevent the disclosure of information regarding:

• Acts of sexual assault;
• Acts of sexual harassment;
• Acts of workplace sexual harassment;
• Acts of workplace sex discrimination;
• The failure to prevent acts of workplace sexual harassment or sex discrimination; and
• Retaliation against a person for reporting sexual harassment or sex discrimination

6. New tiered minimum wage
On Jan. 1, 2019, the state minimum wage increased, depending on employer size, to:

• $11 per hour for employers with 25 or fewer workers.
• $12 an hour for employers with 26 or more workers.

7. Overtime laws

The U.S. Department of Labor plans to propose new regulations governing overtime exemptions from the Fair Labor Standards Act in March 2019.

The DOL is aiming to update FLSA regulations that set a salary threshold below which employees must be paid overtime.  Today, it remains at $23,660, after the Obama administration unsuccessfully attempted to raise it to $47,476. President Trump’s DOL is expected to propose a threshold somewhere between $32,000 and $35,000.

8. Accommodating lactating mothers
A new law for 2019 brings California statute into conformity with federal law that requires employers to provide a location other than a bathroom for a lactating mother to express milk.

9. New bar for harassment liability
A California Appeals Court ruling in 2018 set a new standard for what constitutes harassment in the workplace in a case that concerned a correctional officer at a prison who was mocked about his speech impediment on numerous occasions by co-workers.

The significance of the case for employers is that even teasing and sporadic verbal harassment can be enough to create a hostile work environment and, hence, liability. This year, reduce the chances of liability by having an antiharassment policy. Include training and make sure there are steps for reporting harassment, a mechanism for investigating it, and that the ramifications for harassers are clear.  Look for the Division of Occupational Safety and Health to release its proposed indoor heat illness regulations in the first quarter, with possible implementation by the summer.

Draft rules that have been floated so far would apply the  standard to indoor work areas where temperatures equal or exceed 82 degrees. All of the provisions would apply to  workplaces where it’s at least 92 degrees.

Under draft rules, those employers would have to:
• Provide cool-down areas at all times.
• Encourage and allow employees to take preventative cool- down rests when they feel the need to protect themselves.
• Implement control measures like:
– Engineering controls
– Isolating employees from heat
– Using air conditioning, cooling fans, cooling-mist fans, and natural ventilation

A NEW report highlights the risks to commercial real estate owners from natural catastrophes and climate-related disasters, which are happening with increasing frequency. The report by Heitman LLC, a global real estate company, in conjunction with the Urban Land Institute, found that the increasing risks from catastrophes are bringing new challenges to commercial property owners in terms of risk mitigation and securing appropriate property coverage, which may become more difficult in the future.

There are two main risks facing commercial property owners: physical and transitional risks associated with increasingly volatile weather.

Physical risks – This includes catastrophes, which can lead to:

• Increased insurance premiums
• Higher capital outlays
• Increased operational costs
• Decreased liquidity
• Falling value of buildings

Transitional risks – This includes economic, political and societal responses to climate change and more volatile weather that can make entire regions or metropolitan areas less appealing due to increasing weather events.

Fallout from extreme events

• Costs to repair or replace damaged or destroyed property.

• Property downtime and business disruption.

• Potential for increased insurance costs or reduced/no insurance availability

 

The report notes that commercial property owners in areas that have seen regular catastrophes have started seeing either higher premiums for their property policies or decreased coverage.

 

Main impacts facing property owners

First, there are catastrophic events, like extreme weather such as hurricanes and wildfires. Gradual changes in temperature and precipitation – such as higher temperatures, rising sea levels, increasing frequency of heavy rain and wind, and decreased rainfall – are likely to exaggerate the impact of catastrophic events.
This can affect commercial properties in the form of:

• Increased wear and tear on or damage to buildings, leading to higher maintenance costs.
• Increased operating costs due to the need for more, or alternative, resources (energy and/or water) to operate a building.
• Cost of investment in adaptation measures, such as elevating buildings or incorporating additional cooling methods.
• Potential for more damages from weather events.
• Higher insurance costs or lack of availability.

 

What owners are doing

Survey respondents said that they currently use insurance as their primary means of protection against extreme weather and climate events. But 70% of real estate and hospitality industry managers said they had seen an increase in rates in the year to the end of the third quarter of 2018, with an average rise of 9.1%.

While insurance will cover damages from catastrophic events, it will not cover loss in value if investors start shying away from an area due to vulnerability to natural catastrophes. Although insurance might provide short-term protection, more property owners and investors are looking for better tools and common standards to help the industry get better at pricing in climate risk in the future.

These include:
• Mapping risk for the properties they currently own.
• Reviewing climate risk and catastrophe susceptibility before purchasing new properties.
• Using mitigation measures around their properties.
• Working with local policymakers to support investment by cities in mitigating risk.

Despite widespread expectations, FedOSHA under the Trump administration has not backed off on enforcing workplace safety regulations.

In fact, the agency is as aggressive as ever and citations issued have also risen, after fines increased substantially three years ago. Based on
OSHA statistics, a company that’s inspected has only a 25%
chance of not receiving a single citation.

In other words, employers should keep up their safety regimens to not only avoid being cited but also to avoid workplace injuries.

WHAT’S GOING ON WITH OSHA

Enforcement emphasis still going strong – There are more than 150 local and regional enforcement emphasis programs as well as nine national programs in effect that were implemented at the end of the Obama administration. OSHA is dutifully enforcing them all.
Budget bucks the trend – Despite the budget-cutting at many federal agencies, OSHA saw a $5 million increase in its fiscal year 2019 budget from the year prior.
Most notably, that was the first budget increase since 2014. In addition, state-run OSHA programs also received a small budget enhancement of $2 million.

Fines increasing – OSHA has not moved to reverse the maximum fines for safety violations after they were increased substantially in 2016. They increased by 2.5% for 2019 from 2018 as the law requires that they keep pace with inflation.

 

 

Inspections stable – The number of inspections remains unchanged.
Focus on repeat violators – A focus on repeat violations has continued, with 5.1% of all violations in this category. The percentage has been over 5% since FY2016.
General duty clause – There has been expansion of the general duty clause to cite employers for heat stress, ergonomics, workplace violence, and chemical  exposures below the permissible limit.

NEW EMPHASIS

And 2018 also saw a new effort by OSHA to fine-tune its work. It issued a memo in May that formalized the use of drones with the employer’s consent) to collect evidence.

This has been somewhat controversial because it could enhance its ability to find other violations it might not normally find.

According to the Fiscal Year 2019 Congressional Budget Justification for the Occupational Safety and Health  Administration, increased enforcement seems to be more likely than a decrease.

Also, although there have been no officially released statements, the new electronic injury and illness reporting information will be used by OSHA and state plans to increase enforcement.

The increased budget, according to the Congressional Budget Justification, will support additional compliance safety and health officers to provide a greater enforcement presence and provide enhanced technical assistance to employers who need help in understanding how to achieve compliance with OSHA standards.

Employers with on-call workers who have to phone in to check on a scheduled shift are now required to pay them reporting pay, a California appellate court has ruled. The court held in the precedent-setting case of Ward vs. Tilly’s, Inc. that an employee scheduled for an on-call shift may be entitled to partial wages for that shift despite never physically reporting to work. The case hinged on what’s known as “reporting pay.”

DEFINITION OF ‘REPORTING PAY’

California’s Industrial Welfare Commission (IWC) has wage orders that require employers to pay workers who show up for a shift and then are told they won’t be working the scheduled shift.
Under the wage orders, an employer has to pay an employee who is required to report for work and does report, but is not put to work or works less than half their usual or scheduled day’s work. Reporting pay is a minimum of two hours’ pay and a maximum of four hours.

THE CASE

In the Ward vs. Tilly’s, Inc. case, employees were required to phone in to see if they would be working that day. The plaintiff in the case said that he was owed reporting pay because calling in to see if he was scheduled was essentially the same as showing up at work and being told he didn’t have to work that day, as per the IWC’s wage orders.

The appellate court on Feb. 4, 2019, upheld a lower court’s ruling that had sided with the plaintiff. It’s unclear whether the defendant will appeal the case to the California Supreme Court, but until that time and up to any potential decision, the ruling stands.

WHAT IT MEANS FOR EMPLOYERS

Previously, reporting pay was limited to those employees who physically reported to work. Now, any employee that has to call in to check on a scheduled shift will be due half of the wages they would have earned by working the shift they were on call for. The amount of reporting pay is based on the number of hours the employee normally works.

EXAMPLE: Justin, an on-call worker, is usually scheduled for six-hour shifts. When he called in on Wednesday, he was told he did not need to come into work that day. Based on the appellate court ruling, Justin must receive up to one-half of his scheduled shift, or three hours’ pay.

WHAT YOU CAN DO

• Conduct a cost-benefit analysis of retaining or keeping on-call status for employees.
• If you have on-call workers, update your employee handbook to reflect the new policy.
• If any of your workers were on call and were told not to work a shift after the Feb. 4 court ruling, you should pay them for the reporting pay they are owed.

A new report highlights the risks to commercial real estate owners from natural catastrophes and climate-related disasters, which are happening with increasing
frequency.

The report by Heitman LLC, a global real estate company, in conjunction with the Urban Land Institute, found that the increasing risks from catastrophes are bringing new challenges to commercial property owners in terms of risk mitigation and securing appropriate property coverage, which may become more difficult in the future.

There are two main risks facing commercial property owners: physical and transitional risks associated with increasingly volatile weather.

Physical risks – This includes catastrophes, which can lead to:

• Increased insurance premiums
• Higher capital outlays
• Increased operational costs
• Decreased liquidity
• Falling value of buildingsTransitional risks – This includes economic, political and societal responses to climate change and more volatile weather that can make entire regions or metropolitan areas less appealing due to increasing weather events.

The report notes that commercial property owners in areas that have seen regular catastrophes have started seeing either higher premiums for their property policies or decreased coverage.

MAIN IMPACTS FACING PROPERTY OWNERS

First, there are catastrophic events, like extreme weather such as hurricanes and wildfires. Gradual changes in temperature and precipitation – such as higher temperatures, rising sea levels, increasing frequency of heavy rain and wind, and decreased rainfall – are likely to exaggerate the impact of catastrophic events.
This can affect commercial properties in the form of:

• Increased wear and tear on or damage to buildings, leading to higher maintenance costs.
• Increased operating costs due to the need for more, or alternative, resources (energy and/or water) to operate a building.
• Cost of investment in adaptation measures, such as elevating buildings or incorporating additional cooling methods.
• Potential for more damages from weather events.
• Higher insurance costs or lack of availability.

WHAT OWNERS ARE DOING

Survey respondents said that they currently use
insurance as their primary means of protection against
extreme weather and climate events.

But 70% of real estate and hospitality industry managers
said they had seen an increase in rates in the year to the
end of the third quarter of 2018, with an average rise of
9.1%.

While insurance will cover damages from catastrophic
events, it will not cover loss in value if investors start
shying away from an area due to vulnerability to natural
catastrophes.

Although insurance might provide short-term
protection, more property owners and investors are
looking for better tools and common standards to help the
industry get better at pricing in climate risk in the future.

These include:

•  Mapping risk for the properties they currently own.
• Reviewing climate risk and catastrophe susceptibility before purchasing new properties.
• Using mitigation measures around their properties.
• Working with local policymakers to support investment by cities in mitigating risk.

No company owner wants to undergo a workers’ compensation audit, but they are a fact of life if you run a business and have employees.

Unfortunately, many audits don’t go smoothly and sometimes your insurer may make mistakes. Missouri-based Workers’ Compensation Consultants, which helps employers through the audit process, recently listed the 10 most common audit mistakes insurers make.

The list highlights a common problem and how you can detect the mistakes. Insurance companies allow you to review the audit with your broker. If you have received an audit bill that is obviously overstated, you should contact us.

Here are the things to look for when reviewing an audit by your insurance company:

Wrong class code – Misapplication of job classifications occurs in many audits. With hundreds of job classes to choose from, mistakes can happen. Talk to us and review your old policies to see if any of your class codes have
changed.

X-Mod is changed – After your insurer finishes the audit, it will use the information to calculate your premium. When that happens, it has to include your X-Mod to get the right rate. But sometimes the insurer may use an incorrect X-Mod.

Subcontractors are counted – Sometimes insurers will include subcontractors as employees, which results in a new audit bill to account for the additional “employees.”

But if they are genuine subcontractors, they should not be counted. Often, uninsured contractors will be included as employees.  Make sure to use insured contractors only.

Disappearing credits – Most policies will have some sort of premium credits or other modifiers. Sometimes during audits, the insurer will remove them when recalculating the premium they think you owe. Watch out for missing credits and other modifiers if you get an audit bill, like:

• Premium discount
• Schedule credits
• Deductible credits
• State-specific credits

 

Audit worksheets missing – If the auditor fails to provide you with audit worksheets, which are used do compile your payroll and other audit information, you should ask to check their work.

They will provide you with the information you need to carry out such a check.

Your rates changed – The rates you are charged at the beginning of your policy period must remain the same for the entire period. If your base rates have changed, the insurer may have made a mistake.

Separation of payroll – Depending on your industry, you may or may not be able to split your employees’ payroll between job classifications (like cabinet installers and sheetrock hangers). This is a pinch point when errors can occur. If the auditor says you are not allowed to split job classifications even though you have in the past, your audit may be in error.

Unexpected large premium due – If you get a significant bill for your insurance company after your audit, the auditor may have made mistakes, particularly if you know that your employment has remained relatively stable and you’ve had no significant claims, if any. If it seems out of whack, call us.

Payroll data doesn’t match – If there is a discrepancy between your payroll data and what you see on the audit, a mistake may have been made. Try to match the payroll on the audit with that generated from your accountant. If the insurer made a mistake, you could end up paying for phantom payroll numbers.

No physical audit – There are three types of audits:

• Mail audit
•  Phone audit, and
• Physical auditThe mail and phone audits are prone to errors, since neither you nor your staff likely have any experience in premium auditing. If you have a big bill after a mail or phone audit, mistakes could have been made.