Full Speed Ahead
Any further delays to widen the Panama Canal could have far-reaching cost implications for all parties involved in the construction project and the shipping companies and exporters who use the Canal, a marine risk expert warned.
The Panama Canal Authority (ACP) signed a deal this month to end a four-month dispute — and a two-week work stoppage — over $1.6 billion in cost overruns claimed by the Grupo Unido por el Canal consortium (GUPC) carrying out the work. The dispute had threatened to derail the whole project, which now is expected to cost nearly $7 billion.
Under the terms of the agreement, the Authority and the Spanish-led construction consortium will each invest an extra $100 million in the project.
Zurich North America, which holds $400 million surety bond on the project, “worked diligently with the ACP and GUPC to reach an agreement on the matter and fortunately the two sides have had a successful negotiation,” said Michael Bond, head of surety, Zurich North America. “We congratulate both of them on effectively reaching a favorable outcome. Zurich was glad to have played a role in a solution that brought the project forward.”
When the Canal expansion is completed in December 2015, the new third lock will house 12 giant lock gates designed to allow larger cargo ships through, and double the shipping lane’s capacity.
But Douglas Sakamoto, class underwriter, marine, Liberty Specialty Markets, warned that any further interruptions could result in shipping delays, increased costs and lost shipping tolls.
“The forecast for work to be completed has changed from 2014 to 2015, which is still not a massive delay when compared to the dimension of the work and the expectation in terms of international trade turnaround,” Sakamoto said.
“However, a longer delay could impact several international trade industries since there are lots of related ongoing investments, such as work on several international ports to adapt them to the new vessels, and orders placed for the new-Panamax vessels.
“If the work can’t be completed for any reason and costs still continue increasing, there are a number of serious implications such as the termination of the agreement with the current consortium, and the bond policy may be required in order to provide the extra amount needed to complete the work.”
When done, the Panama Canal Authority is expected to double the $1 billion in revenue it currently receives from shipping tolls.
With more than 13,000 ships passing through the Canal every year, Sakamoto said, construction delays could mean restrictions in the amount of goods producers can export as well as increasing the time it takes to ship the goods.
He noted that producers of commodities, such as LNG, which are exported from the U.S. Gulf Coast to target markets like Asia and the west coast of Latin America could be affected.
In addition, grain producers in the Brazilian ports of Itaqui, Suape and Pecém would also lose out on shorter shipping times, he said.
Shipping companies that have invested heavily in new-Panamax vessels orders several years ago would similarly miss out on vital revenue, Sakamoto said.
International port authorities that have poured vast amounts of money into developing their ports for larger vessels and cargo volumes would also be adversely affected, Sakamoto said.
Pressure to meet the new deadline for completion of 2015, he said, could also impact labor force costs and suppliers.
“The Panama Canal construction project has been highly debated,” said a spokesman for Allianz Global Corporate Specialty, “but it’s actually not unusual for a large construction project to run over/get delayed. In fact, that’s why with project cargo coverage, there is a particular element called ‘delay in start up’ protection to help mitigate that risk.”
Work on the Canal project is now 70 percent complete; however the delay has come at a considerable cost to Sacyr, the Spanish building company that is leading the consortium, which saw its share price drop 6.9 percent this month following a breakdown in initial talks.
6 Non-Cyber Risks for Technology Companies
The Risk List is presented by:
Advocacy: The Impact of Continuous Triage
In the world of workers’ compensation, timing is everything. Many studies have shown that the earlier a workplace incident or injury is acted upon, the more successful the results*. However, there is further evidence indicating there is even more of an impact seen when a claim is not only filed promptly, but also effective triage is conducted and management of the claim takes place consistently through closure.
Typically, every program incorporates a form of early intervention. But then what? While it is common knowledge that early claims reporting and medical treatment are the most critical parts of a claim, if left alone after management, an injured worker could – and often does – fall through the cracks.
All Claims Paths are Not Created Equal
Even with early intervention and the best intentions of the adjuster, things can still go wrong. What if we could follow one injury down two paths, resulting in two entirely different outcomes? This case study illustrates the difference between two claims management processes – one of proactive, continuous claims triage and one of inactivity after initial intervention – and the impact, or lack thereof, it can have on the outcome of a claim. By addressing all indicators, effective triage can drastically change the trajectory of a claim.
While working at a factory, David, a 40-year-old employee, experienced sudden shoulder pain while lifting a heavy box. He reported the incident to his supervisor, who contacted their 24/7 triage call center to report the incident. After speaking with a triage nurse, the nurse recommended he go to an occupational medicine clinic for further evaluation, based on his self-reported symptoms of significant swelling, a lack of range of motion and a pain level described as greater than “8.”
The physician diagnosed David with a shoulder sprain and prescribed two weeks of rest, ice and prescription strength ibuprofen. He restricted David from any lifting over his head.
By all accounts, early intervention was working. Utilizing 24/7 nurse triage, there was no lag time between the incident and care. David received timely medical attention and had a treatment plan in place within one day.
A critical factor in any program is a return to work date, yet David was not given a return to work date from the physician at the occupational medicine clinic; therefore, no date was entered in the system.
One small, crucial detail needs just as much attention as when an incident is initially reported. What happens the third week of a claim is just as important as what happens on the day the injury occurs. Involvement with a claim must take place through claim closure and not just at initial triage.
The Same Old Story
After three weeks of physical therapy, no further medical interventions and a lack of communication from his adjuster, David returned to his physician complaining of continued pain. The physician encouraged him to continue physical therapy to improve his mobility and added an opioid prescription to help with his pain.
At home, with no return to work in sight, David became depressed and continued to experience pain in his shoulder. He scheduled an appointment with the physician months later, stating physical therapy was not helping. Since David’s pain had not subsided, the physician ordered an MRI, which came back negative, and wrote David a prescription for medication to manage his depression. The physician referred him to an orthopedic specialist and wrote him a new prescription for additional opioids to address his pain…
Costly medical interventions continued to accrue for the employer and the surmounting risk of the claim continued to go unmanaged. His claim was much more severe than anyone knew.
What if his injury had been managed?
A Model Example
Using a claims system that incorporated a predictive modeling rules engine, the adjuster was immediately prompted to retrieve a return to work date from the physician. Therefore, David’s file was flagged and submitted for a further level of nurse triage intervention and validation. A nurse contacted the physician and verified that there was no return to work date listed on the medical file because the physician’s initial assessment restricted David to no lifting.
As a result of these triage validations, further interventions were needed and a telephonic case manager was assigned to help coordinate care and pursue a proactive return to work plan. Working with the physical therapist and treating physician resulted in a change in David’s medication and a modified physical therapy regimen.
After a few weeks, David reported an improvement in his mobility and his pain level was a “3,” thus prompting the case manager’s request for a re-evaluation. After his assessment, the physician lifted the restriction, allowing David to lift 10 pounds overhead. With this revision, David was able to return to work at modified duty right away. Within six weeks he returned to full duty.
With access to all of the David’s data and a rules engine to keep adjusters on top of the claim, the medical interventions that were needed for his recovery were validated, therefore effectively managing his recovery by continuing to triage his claim. By coordinating care plans with the physician and the physical therapist, and involving a case manager early on, the active management of David’s claim enabled him to remain engaged in his recovery. There was no lapse in communication, treatment or activity.
After 24/7 nurse triage is conducted and an injured worker receives initial care, CorVel’s claims system, CareMC, conducts continuous triage of all data points collected at claim inception and throughout the life of a claim utilizing its integrated rules engine. Predictive indicators send alerts to prompt the adjuster to take action when needed until the claim is closed – not just at the beginning of the claim.
This predictive modeling tool flags potentially complex claims with the risk for high exposure, marking claims that need intervention so that CorVel can assign appropriate resources to mitigate risk.
Claims triage is constant – that is the necessary model. Even on an adjuster’s best day, humans aren’t perfect. A rules engine helps flag things that people can miss. A combination of predictive systems and human intervention ensures claims management is never stagnant – that there is no lapse in communication, activity or treatment. With an advocacy team in the form of an adjuster empowered by a powerful rules engine and a case manager looking out for the best care, injured employees remain engaged in their recovery. By perpetuating patient advocacy, continuous triage reduces claim severity and improves claim outcomes, returning injured workers to the workforce and reducing payors’ risk.