Labor: Using EPL insurance effectively in mediation
Many companies purchase employment practices liability (EPL) insurance to cover the costs of defending a variety of claims and losses related to employment litigation.
June 10, 2013 at 07:01 AM
7 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Many companies purchase employment practices liability (EPL) insurance to cover the costs of defending a variety of claims and losses related to employment litigation. These may include negligent hiring, failure to promote, wrongful termination and a host of other claims brought under discrimination, contract or tort theories. There are, however, limitations on what an EPL policy may cover. For example, attorneys' fees may be covered, while losses are not. Potentially expensive claims arising under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) or state wage and hour law, WARN Act, ERISA or severance pay plans may be excluded. Coverage for defense costs may count towards the policy limits, eating into the amount available for a settlement. Insurers may also be allowed to make decisions as to choice of defense attorneys, whether to mediate, and whether to settle and for how much.
Since a great number of employment disputes today go to mediation and then settlement, it is important to know that the clock could be ticking on what a company can pay out for the process. There are, however, ways to build a smoother process.
It is important to have a clear understanding before mediation of what the EPL policy does and does not cover, who makes decisions, whether possible allocation issues exist and how the insurer values the insured portions of the claim.
A thorough reading of the policy will provide answers to many of the underlying questions about a company's relationship with the insurance carrier. Companies should pay attention to restrictions in the policy and the size of the deductible. If a company's business is large enough and important enough to the insurer, it might actually have more leeway in deciding on issues such as defense counsel, choice of mediator and settlement amounts than the policy language might suggest. If not, company representatives must be prepared to explain or advocate to the insurer what the company needs that may be beyond the literal language of the contract.
The next step involves the logistics of the mediation itself, and who will work with company representatives in terms of the insurer and defense counsel. Will there be an insurance representative at the mediation? If not, how accessible will he or she be? Do company representatives understand the respective roles, including decision-making, among company, the insurer and the defense counsel? How does the insurer value the case? If it is not the same as company's valuation, it is helpful to understand that. Are there special aspects that are important to the company, such as precedent or publicity? Can the company persuade the insurer to see things its way if needed, or to see value in settling on terms that company representatives think are necessary in this particular case? What does the company believe the costs of defense are likely to be? Does the insurer agree?
As company representatives work through an approach to the mediation and the insurer, another consideration is whether the case has multiple counts and, if so, whether the insurance policy covers only some counts. If there are allocation issues and the company will likely end up contributing to a settlement, is it better to sort that out before the mediation, or will it be up to the mediator to help with a mediation-within-a-mediation?
EPL insurance can help a company deal with claims and litigation. Being prepared and understanding the mediation process can ensure that a company gets the most out of what is available under the EPL policy.
Many companies purchase employment practices liability (EPL) insurance to cover the costs of defending a variety of claims and losses related to employment litigation. These may include negligent hiring, failure to promote, wrongful termination and a host of other claims brought under discrimination, contract or tort theories. There are, however, limitations on what an EPL policy may cover. For example, attorneys' fees may be covered, while losses are not. Potentially expensive claims arising under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) or state wage and hour law, WARN Act, ERISA or severance pay plans may be excluded. Coverage for defense costs may count towards the policy limits, eating into the amount available for a settlement. Insurers may also be allowed to make decisions as to choice of defense attorneys, whether to mediate, and whether to settle and for how much.
Since a great number of employment disputes today go to mediation and then settlement, it is important to know that the clock could be ticking on what a company can pay out for the process. There are, however, ways to build a smoother process.
It is important to have a clear understanding before mediation of what the EPL policy does and does not cover, who makes decisions, whether possible allocation issues exist and how the insurer values the insured portions of the claim.
A thorough reading of the policy will provide answers to many of the underlying questions about a company's relationship with the insurance carrier. Companies should pay attention to restrictions in the policy and the size of the deductible. If a company's business is large enough and important enough to the insurer, it might actually have more leeway in deciding on issues such as defense counsel, choice of mediator and settlement amounts than the policy language might suggest. If not, company representatives must be prepared to explain or advocate to the insurer what the company needs that may be beyond the literal language of the contract.
The next step involves the logistics of the mediation itself, and who will work with company representatives in terms of the insurer and defense counsel. Will there be an insurance representative at the mediation? If not, how accessible will he or she be? Do company representatives understand the respective roles, including decision-making, among company, the insurer and the defense counsel? How does the insurer value the case? If it is not the same as company's valuation, it is helpful to understand that. Are there special aspects that are important to the company, such as precedent or publicity? Can the company persuade the insurer to see things its way if needed, or to see value in settling on terms that company representatives think are necessary in this particular case? What does the company believe the costs of defense are likely to be? Does the insurer agree?
As company representatives work through an approach to the mediation and the insurer, another consideration is whether the case has multiple counts and, if so, whether the insurance policy covers only some counts. If there are allocation issues and the company will likely end up contributing to a settlement, is it better to sort that out before the mediation, or will it be up to the mediator to help with a mediation-within-a-mediation?
EPL insurance can help a company deal with claims and litigation. Being prepared and understanding the mediation process can ensure that a company gets the most out of what is available under the EPL policy.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllExits Leave American Airlines, SiriusXM, Spotify Searching for New Legal Chiefs
2 minute read'A Warning Shot to Board Rooms': DOJ Decision to Fight $14B Tech Merger May Be Bad Omen for Industry
'Incredibly Complicated'? Antitrust Litigators Identify Pros and Cons of Proposed One Agency Act
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1An Eye on ‘De-Risking’: Chewing on Hot Topics in Litigation Funding With Jeffery Lula of GLS Capital
- 2Arguing Class Actions: With Friends Like These...
- 3How Some Elite Law Firms Are Growing Equity Partner Ranks Faster Than Others
- 4Fried Frank Partner Leaves for Paul Hastings to Start Tech Transactions Practice
- 5Stradley Ronon Welcomes Insurance Team From Mintz
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250