Commercial insurance ranges from individual health coverage to automobile liability coverage. All commercial policies have similarities and differences, and there are critical areas to address in billing for each type.
Tasks:
Describe at least three commercial insurance programs.
Provide the major features of each program.
Discuss how these programs differ from each other.
Briefly describe how to bill for each program.
Commercial insurance programs are essential for business owners to protect their assets and employees. Three of the most popular commercial insurance programs are workers’ compensation, liability insurance, and property insurance.
Workers’ compensation is a type of coverage that provides financial protection for businesses in the event an employee is injured or contracts an illness on the job (Girard & Millar, 2011). This helps cover medical costs such as hospital bills, rehabilitation expenses and lost wages if they are unable to work due to their injury (Girard & Millar, 2011). Another key feature of this program is that it generally requires employers to carry it in order to comply with state laws (Litman et al., 2019).
Liability insurance covers legal fees incurred by a business for claims made against them related to personal injury or property damage caused by negligence or errors (Hollingsworth et al., 2015). It can also provide coverage for libel/slander cases as well as punitive damages which may be awarded when someone suffers emotional distress due to wrongful acts done by a company (Hollingsworth et al., 2015).
Property insurance protects businesses from losses resulting from fires, storms and other natural disasters as well as vandalism or theft (Weber et al., 2017). It usually covers physical items owned by the company such as buildings, equipment and inventory while also providing liability protection should any harm come to third parties on their premises (Weber et al., 2017).
Overall, these three commercial insurance programs offer important protection for businesses against unexpected events. By understanding the features associated with each one they can make more informed decisions regarding what types of coverage will best fit their needs.
ombatants. Combatants are people who are involved directly or indirectly with the war and it is lawful to kill ‘to shelter the innocent from harm…punish evildoers (Begby et al (2006b), Page 290).However, as mentioned above civilian cannot be harmed, showing combatants as the only legitimate targets, another condition of jus in bello, as ‘we may not use the sword against those who have not harmed us (Begby et al (2006b), Page 314).’ In addition, Frowe suggested combatants must be identified as combatants, to avoid the presence of guerrilla warfare which can end up in a higher death count, for example, the Vietnam War. Moreover, he argued they must be part of the army, bear arms and apply to the rules of jus in bello. (Frowe (2011), Page 101-3). This suggests Frowe seeks a fair, just war between two participants avoiding non-combatant deaths, but wouldn’t this lead to higher death rate for combatants, as both sides have relatively equal chance to win since both use similar tactics? Nevertheless, arguably Frowe will argue that combatant can lawfully kill each other, showing this is just, which is also supported by Vittola, who states: ‘it is lawful to draw the sword and use it against malefactors (Begby et al (2006b), Page 309).’
In addition, Vittola expresses the extent of military tactics used, but never reaches a conclusion whether it’s lawful or not to proceed these actions, as he constantly found a middle ground, where it can be lawful to do such things but never always (Begby et al (2006b), Page 326-31). This is supported by Frowe, who measures the legitimate tactics according to proportionality and military necessity. It depends on the magnitude of how much damage done to one another, in order to judge the actions after a war. For example, one cannot simply nuke the terrorist groups throughout the middle-east, because it is not only proportional, it will damage the whole population, an unintended consequence. More importantly, the soldiers must have the right intention in what they are going to achieve, sacrificing the costs to their actions. For example: if soldiers want to execute all prisoners of war, they must do it for the right intention and for a just cause, proportional to the harm done to them. This is supported by Vittola: ‘not always lawful to execute all combatants…we must take account… scale of the injury inflicted by the enemy.’ This is further supported by Frowe approach, which is a lot more moral than Vittola’s view but implies the same agendas: ‘can’t be punished simply for figh