J_R

There seems to be an impression that AMA members are less prudent in the area of safety then they once were.

The following information leads one to believe that, while the dollar amount of claims has increased, the volume of claims has decreased. (The reports justify the dollar amounts in terms of changes in individual insurance policies and the coverage's that are available today.) Unfortunately, the numbers on property damage and bodily injury for the earlier period were not provided. In pdf form 530, property damage and bodily injury show a total of 44 such claims in 2003. Just how much could that number have increased to make safety a major issue?

If you look at the numbers for the 5 year period from '87-'91 vs. the 4 year period from '00-'03, you will quickly see the numbers for total dollars paid by the AMA are almost identical. That equates to an increase of 20% in the amounts paid, a substantial decrease from the amount of premiums paid by the AMA for insurance on a percentage basis. It would seem reasonable to assume that premiums have gone up for reasons other than claims payments, just as has been stated by the AMA. The numbers show a decrease in the average volume of claims in the earlier period from about 129 a year to about 71 per year in the latter period... a decrease of about 45%.
Either the actual dollar amount of claims is creating a large problem for the AMA or a few are trying to exploit the issue to some unknown reason. Is it possible those few are not aware of the actual facts? Are there other factors that are not apparent in the reports which are not apparent?

While it is a laudable goal... to approach zero insurance claims... the goal is certainly unattainable. Trying to approach this goal with a safety video may be worth more than the resources required, however trying to make safety appear to be a huge, growing concern is another issue which needs to be documented.

Why are there some that seem to think that safety infractions have reached some critical mass among AMA members? Why are apparently unnecessarily restrictive rules being put in place, some only to be repealed? Why are restrictions on technology being put in place with no documented justification? "What if"s and Safety Videos? Why has the safety of modelers become a political issue? Is there some voice of reason... somewhere?


These reports were taken from pdf form 511 on the AMA site and from page 158 of the October 2004 issue of Model Aviation magazine. Sorry for the formating. It was the best I could do.

AMA MEDICAL CLAIM HISTORY 1987 – 1991

Year------- Total Claims----------- Primary Payment----- AMA’s Insurance------------------- Highest Single Claim
-------------------------------------- (Employers)----------- Company Payment---------------- Paid by AMA

1987------- 113--------------------- $44,349.73------------------------- $41,678.71------------------------- $7500.00
1988------- 95---------------------- 25,509.39------------------------- 22,134.34 ------------------------- 3,551.00
1989------- 138--------------------- 97,202.36------------------------- 39,111.47------------------------- 2,072.48
1990------- 140--------------------- 174,948.11------------------------- 73,966.47------------------------- 6,559.10
1991------- 160--------------------- 167,508.60------------------------- 73,767,69------------------------- 7,449.53

Total------- 646--------------------- 509,518.19------------------------- 250,658.68

Average Payment--------------------- 788.73 ----------------------------- 388.02

AMA MEDICAL CLAIM HISTORY 2000 – 2003

Year------- Total Claims----------- Primary Payment----- AMA’s Insurance------ Highest Single Claim
-------------------------------------- (Employers)----------- Company Payment--- Paid by AMA

2000------- 66---------------------- $59,054.34------------------------- $40,863.14------------------------- $12,717.12
2001------- 75---------------------- $21,554.07------------------------- $58,298.21------------------------- $18,955.19
2002------- 73---------------------- $16,777.81------------------------- $69,217.17------------------------- $18,964.32
2003------- 69---------------------- $78,745.03------------------------- $32,443.98------------------------- $11,454.73

Total------283---------------------$509,518.19 ------------------------- $250,658.68

Average Payments-----------------$1,800.42-----------------------------$855.72


****** See post 3 for corrected info.

scottrc

Claims are down but the dollars higher? Well thats a no-brainer that everyone who has had to go to the doctor is struggling with. Thats because the costs to treat a cut finger have quadrupled in the last 12 months.

We have the same problem in industry, lost time Workman's comp claims and benefit insurance claims have dropped 51% this year, yet our insurance providers increased the premiums by 125% to cover the raising costs that heathcare providers are charging.

The problem isn't safety, its economics. Healthcare costs are going through the roof the the AMA, like everyone else, is feeling the impact. Trying to increase safety awareness and adding more rules won't solve this issue. It may be helping for the fact that more members are being safer (thus less claims) but for the cost of one sprained ankle today costs as much as three sprains three years ago.

I think I see your point, the EC needs to stop scaring us with safety videos and level with us and say that !QUOT!HEY!QUOT! watch what your doing or else your $52.00 a year membership will increase to $152.00 next year.

Scott

J_R

Hi scottrc

In looking at the numbers just now, it made me realize that something was wrong. The totals, published in MA are wrong.

The total amount paid, in the most recent period, by primary companies, is $176,131.25 and the total amount paid in the period by the AMA is $200,822.50

This means the average for primairies is $622.37 and for the AMA it's $709.62

This paints a slightly different picture... a better one for the AMA.

I accurately reproduced the information from the AMA. It was just too much of a coincidence that the totals were exaclty the same as the earlier period.

It should probably also be noted that the AMA had more members during the latter period than the former period.

SoCal GliderGuider

These are just the medical claims. Where are the property damage claims? Where are the claims that the AMA did not pay because the flyer's personal insurance paid? Where are the claims that were never filed with the AMA?

How are these claims, known and unknown, distributed amongst the modeling categories?

You can not make a determination on the bare bones data the AMA chooses to make public. You can't get solid data out by directly asking either. It's like this dark hole in a fence around some really nice buildings where you throw your $58 through once a year. Now $58 is not a lot of money even for those of us forced to take an early retirement. It's not the money stupid! It's the accountability.


This is akin to how traffic accidents are reported. Any accident that is within a 100 yards of an intersection is keyed to that intersection. So you can not find out exactly what the primary and secondary causes are unless you pull the actual report and read it. In this case a GPS reading as part of the report would clear up a lot of investigation.

J_R

SoCal GliderGuider

Why do you care? Join the AMA if you are so concerned.

There are those on the EC that would publish the generic facts about all claims. Dave Mathewson, in particular, has stated such in his forum here on RCU.

As far as the National Flying site is concerned, about $3-5 of dues goes toward it. If you were to become a member, you would not have to grab at the scraps reproducded here and would have access to the Financial Statement in the Members Only Section on the AMA site.

SoCal GliderGuider

The AMA policys, especially the insurance, affect the entire model flying world (USA) AMA membership or not (other sources of personal liability insurance).

Now I can act as a foil and ask resonable questions (about your core question of the propossed AMA safety video) or I can turn on the afterburners and do a little scorching. Which do you want?

As to determining the need for the video you have to have all of the accident data at your disposal. This data has to be significantly cross indexed for developing statistical references. I've asked for over 12 years for this as a member and not as a member and got static. Somewhere someone with a lot of pull thinks there is a need. Find him.

DanSavage

My Feedback: (5)

How does it affect the flying at Redondo Beach or Fairview Park?

Sport_Pilot

Maybe you mean 25%? 125% would mean that your premiums would have more than doubled. Though expensive I don't think medical care has quadrupled nor gone up 125% in one year.

J_R

Sport_Pilot

Actually, the AMA medical premium for 2004 is about the same as it was for 2003, but... the deductible has increased to $750.

The premiums for liability have increased several fold over the last couple of years... since 9/11. The AMA attributes much of those increases to 9/11. Most of the last dues increase has been eaten up by the continued increases.

scottrc got the intent of my post correctly. From the numbers reported, the AMA membership is making less medical claims than 15 years ago... by 45%.

It's time for the facts and not for rhetoric.

scottrc

Nope, 125% total in increases for the 2003 - 2005 fiscal year. We had a 67% increase in premiums, 20% increase in the deductible, 15% increase in the co-pay, and 20% decrease in prescriptions and other planned benefits such as eye and dental.

The insurance company puts no bones about it, they blame it all on doctor, drug, lab, and clinical fees. However, if you have ever seen how inefficient claims processing is, it takes a doctor up to a year to get paid, so he must mark-up his fees in order to cover the cost of such a long delay in processing. So my personal feeling is that the soaring costs are due more to the poor claims processing and not to the health care profession as a whole.

SoCal GliderGuider

When you look at the claims for sailplanes you find almost nothing. This means that a safety program directed at sailplane flyers is a waste of effort. This also means that the liability levels are excessive for the sailplanes. A clear and detailed break down of the claims data would point out other inadequacies.

DanSavage

My Feedback: (5)

In the case of Redondo Beach, I'd have to agree. Any AMA safety policies directed at the pilots flying there were a waste of time.

But, in the end, the city solved the problem when the pilots themselves refused to do so

J_R

SoCal GliderGuider

I won't argue the situation with small foamie sailplanes with you. You are, however, taking advantage of the fact that many in this forum have never been around sailplanes. The image of the small foamie or the Gentle Lady on a high start is one thing. The fact is that those are not the only images that people have of sailplanes.

How many people have you seen cut with winch lines or retrievers? How many times have you seen an 8 pound thermal ship shed a wing and turn into a 6 pound lawn dart on launch? I have seen a fuse penetrate a car door. Now move on to extreme soaring where some of the planes are over 10 pounds and approaching 250 miles an hour, with timers protected by boiler plates so they are not in harms way. Those too are images of sailplanes.

Stating that there are few claims can be made for any venue in modeling. If one of those lawn darts hits a person, $1,000,000 may very well not be enough coverage. As with all the venues, we are fortunate that accidents do not happen more often. Suppose it's 'cause we all try to fly in a safe manner, regardless of the venue? Most of us try... at least the AMA members apparently do. Last year .08% of AMA members were involved with claims of any type where the AMA was providing the coverage.

The cost of the coverage is cheap, and... apparently with reason.

Live Wire

What good is all this BS when some small group puts you out to pasture. What good does AMA do for you then. The old fart might work at the field pay dues and Pay AMA. not any more.
Seem like people would wake up, Something has gone wrong and we better find out what.
As they say at the site It can't be me I am the greatest, I do nothing wrong, just watch the other fellow over 50!!

mongo

My Feedback: (15)

well jr, that .08 sounds good, but to truely understand how safe we are, as a whole, we need to know how many were involved in accidents that didn't involve the ama coverage as well.

otherwise we are looking at the night sky through a pinhole in a piece of cardboard.

that number may be insignificant. but without data, who knows?

rw Guinn

Even if you have all the data, what then?
Cower in fear that you might be involved and get sued? Or just fly the best you can?
Tell the world "Hey, the chances are so slim, it'll never happen to me"? And then go fly anyway?
Proclaim that the Lawyers have won, and fly only on BLM land, 50 miles from the nearest town?
or, Give Up?
I vote lets just fly the best we can, cover our assets with insurance, and educate where and when we can.

J_R

mongo

You are absolutely correct. The only conclusion that is probably fair is that the number of claims is down... consistently down. That leads to the issue of just how much value a safety video has. What is your opinion as to whether it should be produced, who it should be sent to, and how much should be spent on it if it is to be produced?

mongo

My Feedback: (15)

yes, make it.
send it to the .08 who have had claims, and anyone else that has an accident, ifn ya can find out who they are.
no idea on reasonable cost.

rw, what i would do with the data, is, most probably, make a case for droping the individual ins from ama covverages, as it is too much spent for too few folks.

Jim Branaum

My Feedback: (3)

Dropping the individual coverage might be a good idea. However, I am not sure how comfortable I am being a club officer if the AMA was not going to cover my actions as provided for in the club by-laws. That might be a consideration to look at.

As for a Safety Video, why don't we (AMA) make it and send it to ALL clubs in addition to any non-club members involved in an incident we paid for. How much to pay for it is an open question. How far would 50 or 100 grand go?

How can anyone possibly quote facts about ANY statistics that involve your hated enemy the AMA they don't even belong to?

excaliber

Jim B, that is a brilliant idea sending it to all the clubs.

J_R

Either it is worth informing every member about safety, or it is not worth doing at all. If it is, spending about $100,000 to reach every single members makes a lot more sense to me than spending $15,000, plus postage, to reach about 7.5% of the membership.

Either safety is a problem, or it is not.

If DVD were to be used as the media, the proposed safety message could have other information about the AMA piggy-backed on it. It would cost a little more, but, members are more likely to watch a video than to read.

Hossfly

Mongo: sometimes you have a good idea however IMO most are pretty much less than good.

To drop individual insurance coverage is the most lame-brain idea yet as far as I can recall off-hand of your ideas.

Just what does AMA have to offer, other than the insurance, that will keep AMA in business? Definitely not their overly-priced gift-shop merchandise or even their so-called assistance in obtaining flying-fields.

"Too much spent for too few folks."????? That is about as far from smart as one can get. 'ell, man, the magazine MA costs each member as much as the insurance does. With Joe Smart-***** out there zooming around the sky, the magazine ain't gonna' offer me any financial relief if J. ***** rips off a wing and the missile breaks my leg or more.

Get REAL!![sm=pirate.gif]

Jim Branaum

My Feedback: (3)

Excaliber,
Too bad it was not my idea first.

mongo

My Feedback: (15)

well hoss:

it is like this.

.08% of ama members have had a claim that the AMA ins wound up paying on.

that means that all the other claims went through some one's primary ins.

paying evven a dollar a member for the secondary individual covverage is not a good investment, just from the looks of the numbers posted.

8178

My Feedback: (17)

I asked the AMA that question yesterday but they said that they do not keep the accident information categorized by modeling group.