Live data from Hacker News

Farmers Insurance Laying Off 11% of Workforce, Citing Industry Challenges

insurancejournal.com

191–200 of 241 posts

Re: Farmers Insurance Laying Off 11% of Workforce, Citing Industry Challenges

#191
post #97

> The layoffs come after Farmers has pulled back from Florida and California in recent months. Implies that these two things could be related. Would make sense that reducing/stopping business in two very populous states could impact their workforce.

Should definitely be highlighted. Property insurance is always in tension between actuarial statistics (estimates of ground risk) and politics (governments of various levels wanting insurance to be as cheap as possible). I'd be fascinated to take a peek at whether actuarial models have changed in California and Florida (I can't imagine they haven't), and it might not make sense to sell property insurance there from a…

For severe weather risks, traditional actuarial models are often insufficient to fully capture the risk. Most (if not all) insurance companies use catastrophe models to accurately price severe weather risk.

As someone that works closely with these things, I can confirm that the approved models in question haven't changed significantly in the past few years. I know for a fact that one of the major hurricane models in use in Florida hasn't seen major changes over the past few years (just updates to incorporate the next year's worth of hurricane data).

However, two major factors impact losses to insurance companies in these states. In Florida, litigation cnan inflate losses to an absurd degree. The state accounts for 9% of all claims in the US, but 79% of the legal cases. Laws are trying to improve this, but it's a significant deterrent to writing business in the state.

California, on the other hand, doesn't allow the use of catastrophe models outside of earthquake risk. Instead, they rely on claims from the past 20 years to set rates. For a peril like wildfire (which is infrequent enough that claims data won't give a full picture of the risk), this significantly impacts a company's ability to account for wildfire risk.

Re: Farmers Insurance Laying Off 11% of Workforce, Citing Industry Challenges

#192
post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This only works if you can stay profitable enough long enough for it to start to happen. The fewer customers you have, the riskier your pool, and the higher your prices have to be. Suddenly $100 becomes $125 becomes $150 for the same or less profit. It's safer to just get out of the market entirely. You can always go back in but if you stay in too long it could wipe you out entirely.

If all your customers are flocking to the undercharging competitor, you're out of the market anyway and your costs are effectively zero since you don't have anyone filing claims. There's no practical scenario where the competitor, which is losing money on each customer in aggregate, lasts longer than a company with no customers.

"costs are zero"

Payroll? Overhead? Marketing? Rent? This isn't a thought exercise, there are real costs associated with being in a certain business.

Re: Farmers Insurance Laying Off 11% of Workforce, Citing Industry Challenges

#193
post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assuming the structure of the current economic system follows some kind of inevitable (natural?) law is part of why you are unable to reason beyond the logic of the markets we contend with today. Markets have taken many different forms, have been entrusted with different sets of responsibilities to different degrees, over the course of economic history. Perhaps it makes more sense now to develop a fiscal institution…

Nothing in life is free. There must be balance. Regardless of whether an insurance company is public or private these bedrock issues of “can we remain in the black?” will remain. A “fiscal institution” that is losing money on claims will fail. Plain and simple.

Accounting is different when you're a government that issues its own currency. There is no such thing as losing "money" when such conditions exist. I didn't recognize the difference between fiscal and monetary policy until I appreciated this fact -- maybe it will help you too. The perspective then changes to losing domestic economic activity, which would surely occur if lives are ruined because their assets are destroyed before preparations have been made or eventualities prevented.

Re: Farmers Insurance Laying Off 11% of Workforce, Citing Industry Challenges

#194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the distant past, insurance companies used actuaries to price policies, so that the companies could make informed, rational decisions like "for people in this risk category, if we want to make X% profit, how much do we need to charge for that coverage?" Instead it became "insurance company M is charging $N for this type of policy, we have to charge something similar or else our customers would switch." Along comes…

I don't think that's a fair characterization of how pricing works in homeowners insurance. Every time you want to change prices, you need to justify the price change to the regulator using the actuarial math. The regulator's own actuaries review the actuarial math and, if they don't agree, will not change allow the rate change. One of the hardest things about insurance is figuring out the probabilities of very unlike…

This is right, there's a lot of regulatory capture and cronyism, so it's far from perfect, but the real story is that actuarial tables are not keeping up with 500 year events becoming 50 year events and 100 year becoming 2-5 year events. The pace of change and severity of events is unprecedented and no one can figure out how to keep profits rolling.

Re: Farmers Insurance Laying Off 11% of Workforce, Citing Industry Challenges

#195
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate to be that person, but this is the future. Because of climate change, more of our country is barreling towards "uninhabitable". It's not Farmers fault that we released too much CO2 and now wildfires and hurricanes are way worse and getting even more worse. If the people of California and Florida want insurance so they can build matchbox houses in high risk disaster zones, then they can start a public insurance…

RE: this is the future, what is the reasoning behind the sudden (post COVID it seems) squeezing of profit from everywhere? Seems like every business is pushing profit over employees or customers. Price gauging, layoffs, all of it without any reason besides "more profit". Why the sudden influx of greed?

Inflation has a lot to do with it - wasn't long ago huge tracks of houses in Florida could be had for $250K - now a lot of those places are selling for close to $1M - if a company has a lot of those, their risk has quadrupled.

Re: Farmers Insurance Laying Off 11% of Workforce, Citing Industry Challenges

#196
post #132
post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it is not super attractive to start subsidizing people who choose to live in increasingly disastrous zones At the risk of taking this down a political path, I'll take this a step further. States like FL who fall into this bucket are further aggravating as they are also the ones that espouse personal responsibility & small government. I'm not personally against subsidizing these things. But I am against people screa…

What does a small government ideology have to do with a private insurance company making a business decision? You're injecting politics because you don't like the politics of Florida as you see them, which is fine, but it doesn't really fit here.

When their insurance rates get to be unaffordable and/or their homes are destroyed without insurance the complaints tend to shift to being that the government should do something to help them out of the predicament.

I'm 100% fine with an individual choosing to not pay going insurance rates and choosing to live in a risky environment. I'm also 100% fine with that person eschewing the idea that government should be subsidizing anything. I'm 0% fine with such people coming back and complaining that the leopards ate their face.

Re: Farmers Insurance Laying Off 11% of Workforce, Citing Industry Challenges

#197
post #163

All I see in the article is the discussion of "profits". I would think the PR department could come up with something about "trying to keep costs competitive for our customers" or something like that. Instead they're telling California and Florida customers to take a hike ... along with 11% of their employees. When is the last time we heard a company enact a company-wide, 50% cut in officer's salaries and a freeze on…

Could be 11% of the workforce now or 100% of the workforce later.

CEO get's golden parachute either way.

Re: Farmers Insurance Laying Off 11% of Workforce, Citing Industry Challenges

#198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should be "easy" for the insurer to say "you get one more shingle replacement, then we dump you." At that point, the customer either buys a metal roof or moves. Market functioning correctly, no?

This is one thing I've never really understood about the market for insurance. Wouldn't the customer's best answer be, "OK, thanks for the new roof, I understand that you're dropping me, so I'll just switch to your competitor"? And then wouldn't it be in the interest of the insurers to maintain a shared list of "bad" (unprofitable) customers and freeze them out? Which is already a bit of what credit scores are for?

Insurance companies handle this today by either refusing polices on uninsured homes, or pricing those policies much higher.

"Your previous insurer dropped you, there must have been a reason."

And, yeah, when applying for a policy, the questionnaire should include "have you filed a claim for X, Y, Z in the last 2 years?" Auto insurance does this already.

Re: Farmers Insurance Laying Off 11% of Workforce, Citing Industry Challenges

#199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are people surprised when a company operates in its’ own best interest? Why should we expect anything else? Insurance companies are just about moving dollars around and hedging risk. Being perturbed about this is like being mad about your dog barking at the mailman. If someone said I’m going to start free climbing the tallest buildings in the world - but I need insurance - the company will tell you to get lost be…

Re: FL & CA becoming uninsurable-- I have almost zero knowledge in that area. I assume it's because of natural disasters such as Fires, Hurricanes, and sea level rise?

The issue in CA is idiosyncratic to the state. In 2020 the average price of homeowners insurance in CA was $1,241 and in Illinois was $1,144. It probably doesn't make sense for California to be only 8% more expensive than Illinois.

https://www.iii.org/fact-statistic/facts-statistics-homeowne...

Houses are more expensive in CA, building costs are more expensive in CA and the weather is more volatile (and becoming increasingly so) in CA.

The rate level in CA needs to increase. The regulator in CA makes it difficult to raise rates, so companies are responding by reducing their appetite.

Re: Farmers Insurance Laying Off 11% of Workforce, Citing Industry Challenges

#200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would you handle sales of the property? Some of these are desirable beachfront properties.

Any property bought by the government under these conditions would be condemned. Doesn't matter if it's beachfront - there shouldn't be a home on a beach that sees significant hurricane damage every year.

Yes, I am saying that it could be desirable for the owner to refuse a buyout and sell it to someone other than the government.
Post reply on HN