NAIC White Paper - Nav Vs Agent - A MUST Read

[Yagents]

Hope this link works. Very interesting and insightful paper....back and forth. (hits my username spot on: Yagents) All I can say is they are duplicating a structure that already exists...us, they can't beat my overhead, nor my relationships, and their creating a more confusing process for consumers.

They make it sound like a navigator will understand tax subsidies better than an agent, it sounds like navigators may not assist in enrolling into medicaid (who do you think are in those hard to reach places) huh?

Sounds like a new group called "networking with navigators" is in order to create that ongoing referral source. Ooops, there on top of that. So, hand off client for enrollment, but no favorites. Hello, I'm your ordertaker...with or without dental?

Navs pay grade is pressured down by the drive to lower exchange costs, which charges fees to insurance companies, who pass it along to the consumer/taxpayer.

All I read is education is key. If you're an educator, you'll do very well in the health biz. My head is spinning with ideas.....................I mean, everyone get out of the health biz now, we are doomed.


http://www.linkedin.com/news?viewAr...rlhash=d_aY&goback=.gde_66191_member_55452595

 

[CHUMPS FROM OXFORD]

Interesting. More red tape as usual.

 

[Dave020]

One thing I noted in this white paper is that it mentioned producers experiencing a potential conflict of interest in the exchange if selling "large group" on carrier commission outside of the exchange (i.e., carrier incentives to drive exchange business). Reading into that section, I come away with two thoughts:

1. Commissions to producers from carriers will only be available for non-exchange business (large group)

2. Exchanges will NOT be paying producers a commission (from the carrier) on IFP and Small Group business and may not compensate the producer at all or on a fee equal to what the navigator would receive.

 

[CHUMPS FROM OXFORD]

Interesting that they agree we should play a vital role but should not be compensated.

 

[Dave020]

Interesting that they agree we should play a vital role but should not be compensated.

Sadly, it appears that is exactly what they are saying.

 

[Crabcake Johnny]

It's as simple as it gets. They want groups just like ACORN to form. They'll go door-to-door with flyers and hold community outreach sessions.

Most of this will target "poor" communities...trust me. In my area, they'll sign up college kids in droves at $7.50 hr to hit inner city Baltimore.

"Facilitating enrollment" will get sticky. Per my contact at the DOI, a person must have an active license to "sell" insurance. That won't change after 2014. Now we have to separate "facilitate the sale of" and "sell."

If a navigator can grab a table at a community center, sit down with a prospect, go over the plan options and slide them an app and call it "facilitating the sale" - that's not good. It's also not good if they can "enroll" people door to door.

My opinion? If the states limit the activities of a navigator we should be ok. If the states allow them to actually enroll people and call it "facilitating the sale" it's gonna take quite a chunk out of our sales. Not everyone will hit the lower income areas. Teams will form under "area managers" that will hit the burbs.

It'll be much like Comcast going door to door.

Of course, it turns into a cluster if navigators will be rewarded "per enrollment" even if they're only supposed to facilitate. You can imagine a scenario where the navigator goes over the information then says "you'll have to fill out the application on your own sir, but make sure you put my navigator number 897745 in the box so I get credit.

And not unlike ACORN, it'll be a fraud nightmare. A very small percentage - less than 1% but enough to make some good headlines, will steal consumer data - forge signatures so they can hit their enrollment quota for the day.

 

[VolAgent]

But at least those greedy, blood sucking insurance agents won't get paid. Don't you know, we are the devil in disguise. Second only to the insurance companies in evilness. Problem is, the insurance companies have money that the government needs to spend.

 

[Crabcake Johnny]

The entire navigator angle is very anti-agent and IMHO, written into the bill by someone (people) who simply hate insurance agents.

Agents will be out there using their own money trying to find business. In the mean time, some navigator organization will be using gov't funds to plaster their "health care education event" ads, driving hoards of people to the local community center.

Not unlike selling MA plans, they could make the process extremely difficult for agents.

 

[VolAgent]

I'm all for driving out unnecessary middlemen to reduce costs. But anyone who thinks agents are unnecessary and don't contribute to the process of insurance really doesn't understand insurance very well. And that includes Mr. I hate auto agents.

 

[Crabcake Johnny]

They key here is mass enrollment. They don't want to leave enrollment numbers to agents. They want to offer grants for community outreach programs and make sure the maximum number of people sign up.