Electrician Talk banner
1 - 6 of 6 Posts

· Premium Member
20,214 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·

I have a customer, property management company, that is insisting on us providing them a Waiver of Subrogation relating to Workman's Comp.
We normally see this as a requirement in general liability requests but never for Workman's Comp.

This means of course, if the customer, the third party, is responsible for injuring one of my employees, our insurance company cannot recover for the claim damages.
Do those here that handle insurance requests see this type of requirement very often?

· Moderator
Estwing magic
28,211 Posts
Around here it's called a Clearance Letter. It simply means that you carry your own worker's comp. Otherwise, your client might be on the hook if you or one of your employees is injured.

Standard stuff. Most of our GC's just ask for proof that we carry our own worker's comp.

I don't know if it relates to whose fault it is if there's an injury on the job. Maybe I'm wrong.

· Registered
2,503 Posts
We can't waive WC under state law, don't quite understand how some management company can trump this?

You are not waiving your WC. The waiver is a rider provided by your insurance carrier simply stating they will not attempt to recover their costs for an incident from a third party. It is common on liability I have not had a request on my WC.

· animal lover /rat bastard
13,504 Posts
the link below describes the conditions under which a waiver of subrogation is detrimental to your company. Since the waiver of subrogation could end up costing your company dearly, it might be something to consider NOT doing. In short, it goes against the laws of fairness. Why should you perform a job for someone under the condition that their company will be held harmless from the actions of their employees causing injury to your employees ? Does the benefit exceed the liability ? Probably not.

I have to list the State of Maryland, every county I work in, every general contractor, and other EC I sub from as "additional insured" already. Isn't that enough ? F these GC's that think they are teflon, and F their F-U contracts. I have no problem with GC's, just with these FU GC's.

1 - 6 of 6 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.