{"id":9622,"date":"2011-03-16T10:00:05","date_gmt":"2011-03-15T23:00:05","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/?p=9622"},"modified":"2021-01-13T06:35:16","modified_gmt":"2021-01-12T20:35:16","slug":"adviser-response-to-unisex-rates-if-its-not-broken-dont-fix-it","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/2011\/03\/16\/adviser-response-to-unisex-rates-if-its-not-broken-dont-fix-it\/","title":{"rendered":"Adviser Response to Unisex Rates – If it’s not Broken, Don’t Fix it"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Vote<\/a><\/p>\n

Advisers have delivered a clear message in response to our latest riskinfo poll.\u00a0 The question is:<\/p>\n

Should Australia follow Europe’s lead in banning Male\/Female insurance rates in favour of ‘unisex’ rates?<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

The overwhelming answer is:<\/p>\n

‘If it’s not broken, don’t fix it.’<\/p>\n

As we release this story, 90% of respondents to our poll agree that gender-specific rates should be retained.\u00a0 The\u00a0 main argument from advisers is\u00a0that male\/female premium rates are not subjectively developed, but rather based on \u00a0factual research and data that feed into gender-specific \u00a0life insurance tables:<\/p>\n

“… Our system of rating males and females is not discrimination but rather based on the assessment of risk which in turn is a function of differing morbidity and mortality from information gathered over a very long period. We must not change what is right.”<\/em><\/p>\n

Other adviser comments ask ‘what’s next’\u00a0if gender is removed as an insurance factor:<\/p>\n

‘Next thing you know we won’t be able to ask a client their height and weight, whether they smoke, what occupation they do etc – where will it end?’<\/em><\/p>\n

While the notion of gender equality is accepted and embraced by most, if not all,\u00a0in the financial services and broader community, the belief that this should extend to banning male\/female premium rates is a bridge too far for this adviser:<\/p>\n

‘My initial reaction to this is to say no, gender equality is OK and even important and fair in many areas of society but not for the risk rating of personal insurance. I can see where the European Court of Justice is coming from but I don’t think they understand the ramifications for personal insurance and haven’t thought it through sufficiently.’<\/em><\/p>\n

In terms of the ramifications, other comments suggest:<\/p>\n