Re:An Employee Dies, and the Company Collects the Insurance
by rqebmm on Monday June 23, 2014 @05:54PM
(#7934957)
> Employees aren't your assets, unless you're participating in indentured servitude.
Employees are most assuredly assets in that they provide value to the company.
Re:An Employee Dies, and the Company Collects the Insurance
by pessimizer on Monday June 23, 2014 @06:36PM
(#7935182)
Your employee's life does not provide value to the company, their work does, and they can end that work at any time that they (or you, in most states) choose. You do not own your employees, or their future labor.
Being allowed to take out insurance on your employee's life makes about as much sense as being able to take out insurance on a hotel that you're renting a room in.
edit: clarity
Re:An Employee Dies, and the Company Collects the Insurance
by thedufer on Monday June 23, 2014 @06:51PM
(#7935257)
How is a company to insure against a disaster wiping out an entire branch's worth of employees? That's certainly a low probability event, but many companies with single-digit locations would be in big trouble if they lost such a huge proportion of their workforce at once, which is pretty unlikely to happen naturally.
I get insuring your movie against the star dying. If someone wants to start a business insuring the internal projects of companies against people crucial to them either quitting or dying, that's fine with me. But with no asset at risk, there's no difference between your company buying life insurance on you and me buying life insurance on you.
Of course, CDSs are still legal to buy against companies who don't owe you anything, so I should really just give up the idea that financial regulation has an obligation to society in general rather than just in setting up a fair playing field between speculators.