[IPAC-List] Indemnify and Hold Harmless Insurance Policies?
GCarmean at med-tox.com
Thu Oct 2 15:05:25 EDT 2014
At 10:35 PM 9/29/2014, you wrote:
The problem is that far too many HR departments turn the RFP process
over to the clerks in the purchasing department who don't know any
better. (I am sure that no one who subscribes to the list would make
the same kind of mistake as this!).
And this particular error is just one of long list of aggravations
that come from purchasing departments. Among the many others:
1. Charging consultants to read RFPs. Are you serious purchasing
departments? Yes you Arizona!
2. Title RFPs in such a way as to conceal the nature of the RFP. The
typical examples are Consultant Services, Professional Services,
Study, Training Services, Writing Services, Medical Services, and so forth.
Why would a purchasing department think anyone has the time to
determine what these terms could possibly mean?
3. Throw in some artificial barriers to ensure your pre-selected
friend is the only one who can qualify. Thus, a State issues an RFP
that can only be responded to by a Ph.D. psychologist who has years
of experience in job analysis and testing hearing-impaired persons in
jobs related to public safety work. Audiologists and university
experts need not apply.
Or, more typically, unless a person is a certified physical
therapist, they will not be considered qualified to validate a
physical ability test. Of course, physical therapists are uniquely
unqualified to perform this activity, but no matter.
4. Demanding that all the proprietary tools, methods and techniques
you utilize in performing the contract, become the property of the
organization for whom you have provided the service.
5. Turning over the writing of the RFP to a clerk who does not know
much about the service be asked for. Determining what the writer
means can sometimes be impossible.
These are some of my gripes about this process. Alas, there is
probably no solution. Grrrrr
>Indemnify and Hold Harmless Insurance Policies?
I'm just curious to find out if anyone knows of an insurance company
that has ever paid a government agency's legal bill when a
consultant's test was rented and used by the government agency, but
challenged by one or more candidates?
I've seen a few purchase orders lately that are actually purchase
contracts with fine print on the flip side which says that the
consultant agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the agency, it's
officers, etc., etc., and this apparently means that if a candidate
or group of candidates challenges the consultant's test, then the
consultant's insurance policy must pay for the legal defense and all
expert fees that result from the challenge. Is there such an
insurance policy available to testing consultants?
I've seen several of these purchase orders/purchase contracts but
have not been willing to do business under these
circumstances. Wasn't it Griggs v. Duke Power where the U.S. Supreme
Court told the Duke Power company that it was their responsibility
and they couldn't off-load the liability onto the Wonderlic
Corporation (who published the test in question, the Wonderlic Personnel Test)?
My attitude has been no way, I won't take that liability and I don't
think there is any insurance policy that will pay up. I had an
errors and omissions policy when I used to belong to A.P.A., but
after awhile, I thought it was probably useless in the employment
context, and I stopped paying for this policy, and later I quit
APA! I guess I'm just getting too old to see the benefits of trying
to please the Risk Manager crowd, but I would love to hear other
opinions, views, and any interesting experiences.
Richard Joines, President
Management & Personnel Systems, Inc.
MED-TOX Health Services
3350 Shelby Street, Ste. 200
Ontario, California 91764
909 944 3181 Tel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the IPAC-List