So what approach would one use then to either the owner, or keeper of the door?
Why would an employer not offer
- Thread starter Labman
- Start date
So what approach would one use then to either the owner, or keeper of the door?
- Thread starter
- #22
Since I'm new I'm not sure what the correct approach is. How do you find someone's pain with voluntary products? Maybe we should talk more about benefit communications, or how our products fill the gaps in major medical?
I have cold called a few business owners and felt like I blew it because I talked more about how the products benefit the employees versus what we can do for the owner. While I have gotten a few appointments, I'm not at all comfortable with my approach. I know I need to change, just not sure how.
I have cold called a few business owners and felt like I blew it because I talked more about how the products benefit the employees versus what we can do for the owner. While I have gotten a few appointments, I'm not at all comfortable with my approach. I know I need to change, just not sure how.
The idea behind WSM products is it allows the employer to offer benefits at no cost to him(her).
There is some truth to that but . . . look at the facts.
The policies offered are generally not available in the personal market. The face amounts, and premiums, are so small carriers (and agents) cannot afford to sell 1 on 1.
The policies are typically overpriced and the health products especially have very low payouts. Targeted loss ratio's for many of the indemnity products are in the 40% range. The rest goes to overhead and profit.
For employers that have a payroll service, there is little or no direct cost. The premiums can be added to another slot and taken direct from their paychecks then sent to the carrier.
The indirect costs are more difficult to measure. Employees typically learn about the products on the clock. Questions may arise after the agent leaves and it is left to the employer to answer the questions. Employees may be given a toll free number but by the time the question comes up the phone number is lost.
If the enrollment involves larger employers the pitch is to buy now, pay later. Typically they sign up during open enrollment with coverage beginning immediately but no payments for several months.
WSM products have their place, but they have also saturated the market.
There is some truth to that but . . . look at the facts.
The policies offered are generally not available in the personal market. The face amounts, and premiums, are so small carriers (and agents) cannot afford to sell 1 on 1.
The policies are typically overpriced and the health products especially have very low payouts. Targeted loss ratio's for many of the indemnity products are in the 40% range. The rest goes to overhead and profit.
For employers that have a payroll service, there is little or no direct cost. The premiums can be added to another slot and taken direct from their paychecks then sent to the carrier.
The indirect costs are more difficult to measure. Employees typically learn about the products on the clock. Questions may arise after the agent leaves and it is left to the employer to answer the questions. Employees may be given a toll free number but by the time the question comes up the phone number is lost.
If the enrollment involves larger employers the pitch is to buy now, pay later. Typically they sign up during open enrollment with coverage beginning immediately but no payments for several months.
WSM products have their place, but they have also saturated the market.
- Thread starter
- #24
Somarco with all due respect I have to disagree with you on a few points. As the former human resources manager of a company with 35 employees,blue collar, we found the products from Colonial to be very affordable. Our experience with Colonial over a 10 year period was very positive. Very, very few claims issues, any questions asked by personnel were easily answered and took very little of my time.
Overall, with all the other insurance issues, along with payroll that I had to address on a day to day business I would say that the voluntary side, was a breeze! Matter of fact my experience with Colonial was so positive I went to work for them!
I would agree that market saturation is a issue I face a few times a week. But nothing that I can't overcome.
Overall, with all the other insurance issues, along with payroll that I had to address on a day to day business I would say that the voluntary side, was a breeze! Matter of fact my experience with Colonial was so positive I went to work for them!
I would agree that market saturation is a issue I face a few times a week. But nothing that I can't overcome.
- 4,096
Overall, with all the other insurance issues, along with payroll that I had to address on a day to day business I would say that the voluntary side, was a breeze! Matter of fact my experience with Colonial was so positive I went to work for them!
Interesting
That is a great sales pitch.
</IMG>
- Thread starter
- #26
You are right and I do use it when talking with owners.
The biggest obstacle I keep running into is owners telling me their eimployees cannot afford any more insurance. For instance,just yesterday I got that objection on a 52 person group. The objection is pure BS because at least twenty percent of the employees should be able to afford something. I've yet to come up with a way to handle the BS objection without sounding argumentive. But, I ain't giving up, because the excuse is just that.
The biggest obstacle I keep running into is owners telling me their eimployees cannot afford any more insurance. For instance,just yesterday I got that objection on a 52 person group. The objection is pure BS because at least twenty percent of the employees should be able to afford something. I've yet to come up with a way to handle the BS objection without sounding argumentive. But, I ain't giving up, because the excuse is just that.
Salary_Guard
Expert
- 88
I've started marketing a new supplemental unemployment, accidental disability, and accidental death product to businesses. The objections i'm getting from some places are that they don't want to make a coverage known to their employees that covers layoffs, because they don't want to appear that they may make cuts. I think this is a huge BS move on the HR and company owners part. They have the opportunity to give their employees a coverage that could really help them if they get laid off, but they want to save face instead.
I'm with you guys, and haven't found a way to tell them "wow, thats the most heartless and selfish thing i've ever heard". haha.
The kicker is, the coverage doesn't require a certain percentage of the company be involved, and is NO cost to the employer. All I'm asking them to do, is let me sit at the conference room table for a few hours, and talk to anyone that might be interested.
I am really suppressed at the number of companies that are just plain fed up with "insurance agents", and close the door to everything because of it.
I was doing some quote comparisons for a new product that I will be marketing. Its accidental disability, and unemployment insurance. So I contacted my local Aflac agent.....and about 4 days later, I got a reply. He said that Aflac can't offer short term disability to an individual, just a payroll company with 3 or more people that will sign up.
Is that true everywhere? If so, then great...That gives me a great advantage for a lot of potential clients.
Do any of you sell for aflac or know if that is a legit statement that he made?
Thanks.
Nathan.
I'm with you guys, and haven't found a way to tell them "wow, thats the most heartless and selfish thing i've ever heard". haha.
The kicker is, the coverage doesn't require a certain percentage of the company be involved, and is NO cost to the employer. All I'm asking them to do, is let me sit at the conference room table for a few hours, and talk to anyone that might be interested.
I am really suppressed at the number of companies that are just plain fed up with "insurance agents", and close the door to everything because of it.
I was doing some quote comparisons for a new product that I will be marketing. Its accidental disability, and unemployment insurance. So I contacted my local Aflac agent.....and about 4 days later, I got a reply. He said that Aflac can't offer short term disability to an individual, just a payroll company with 3 or more people that will sign up.
Is that true everywhere? If so, then great...That gives me a great advantage for a lot of potential clients.
Do any of you sell for aflac or know if that is a legit statement that he made?
Thanks.
Nathan.
Last edited by a moderator:
- 3,384
It's a function of the current job market and economy. These kinds of products, since they are not employer-sponsored benefits, thrive or at least do better when employee retention is at issue. At one time in the last 10 years people were selling concierge service and personal shopper plans for employees. Employers allowed the agents in to make themselves look good in the eyes of the employees and promote retention.
FF to 2008 - employee retention is DOA. Most companies receive resumes every day from many highly qualified job seekers, some of whom have more experience than the current employee workforce. There is little need for companies to sweat retention in this market, they can replace within a day.
No need for retention, no need for anything but basic benefits (and many employers are dropping group health insurance right now). I am getting 2-3 a day right now getting kicked off COBRA with less than a month's notice as employer is terminating group health coverage. None of them have hit the 18-month mark.
Add to that employees trying to figure out how to keep their mortgage, put food on the table, pay for kids costs and keep gas in the Escalade, and you have a recipe for "sorry, Charlie".
On a side note, why are employers and business owners considered "heartless" if they don't "redistribute the wealth" down to the paycheck getters? Employees amaze me sometimes with their sense of entitlement. None of them put up one thin dime in start up costs. None of them put their financial portfolios at risk to start the company. Employers bear all of the risk, shouldn't they in turn get the reward?
FF to 2008 - employee retention is DOA. Most companies receive resumes every day from many highly qualified job seekers, some of whom have more experience than the current employee workforce. There is little need for companies to sweat retention in this market, they can replace within a day.
No need for retention, no need for anything but basic benefits (and many employers are dropping group health insurance right now). I am getting 2-3 a day right now getting kicked off COBRA with less than a month's notice as employer is terminating group health coverage. None of them have hit the 18-month mark.
Add to that employees trying to figure out how to keep their mortgage, put food on the table, pay for kids costs and keep gas in the Escalade, and you have a recipe for "sorry, Charlie".
On a side note, why are employers and business owners considered "heartless" if they don't "redistribute the wealth" down to the paycheck getters? Employees amaze me sometimes with their sense of entitlement. None of them put up one thin dime in start up costs. None of them put their financial portfolios at risk to start the company. Employers bear all of the risk, shouldn't they in turn get the reward?
Salary_Guard
Expert
- 88
the "heartless" quote was for one specific product that I offer, and that doesn't cost the employer anything. Its a supplemental unemployment protection plan, that pays a cash benefit to the member if they become unemployed. Why an employer wouldn't at least let people know that is available is what confused me.
I agree, employees have a very large "entitlement" problem in todays workforce.
Just wanted to clear up any confusion from the last post.
I agree, employees have a very large "entitlement" problem in todays workforce.
Just wanted to clear up any confusion from the last post.
- 3,384
One thing about forums and message boards is that the written word can be misinterpreted. I wasn't being critical, just pointing out that especially in this kind of economy rewarding the rank and file is a low priority for most employers (they are lucky they are getting a paycheck).
My point is to look at it 180 degrees and maybe rethink the market and products. While agents are sitting in HR offices trying to get a chance to sit in a conference room to sell an employee-based product, there is another agent, probably from a company like NML or NYL who is walking right past them into the CEO/CFOs office to discuss retooling the deferred comp/buy-sell/key-man products. That is the "reward". And it is happening every day.
One thing I learned early on in my NML career for businesses in a stable industry: employee benefits are sensitive to the economy, executive benefits are not.
My point is to look at it 180 degrees and maybe rethink the market and products. While agents are sitting in HR offices trying to get a chance to sit in a conference room to sell an employee-based product, there is another agent, probably from a company like NML or NYL who is walking right past them into the CEO/CFOs office to discuss retooling the deferred comp/buy-sell/key-man products. That is the "reward". And it is happening every day.
One thing I learned early on in my NML career for businesses in a stable industry: employee benefits are sensitive to the economy, executive benefits are not.
Similar threads
