The Conflict of an Insurance Broker competition, and a duty of confidentiality under the law in this area and support our views about what is morally right. For the most part, the language of rights and the obligations of different kinds of arguments for property rights, fair benefit of protecting trade secrets have been introduced. In the next chapter we examine another Agents have dominated our discussion, although utilitarian considerations about the harm and arguments are used to explain the concept of privacy and provide a foundation for it. Unlike right, namely, the right of employees and consumers to privacy. Utilitarian and Kantian trade secrets and conflict of interest, privacy is an area where the law has yet to develop very far, and so we can focus mainly on ethical issues as the public at large. Especially in the ch batik CASE 5.2 Explore the concept on mythinkinglab.com ally Nel ng 1 I work for an instance coverage for Ashton & Ashton (A&A), which is hired by alienation obtain the best insurance coverage for their needs. To do this, we evaluate a client's situation, ho the client for approval. Our compensation comes primarily from a commission that is paid by the client as part of the premium. The commission is a percentage of the premium amount, and of compensation is a contingency payment that is made annually by insurance providers, the amount of this payment is based on the volume of business during the past year. One of our clients, a world-class museum in a major American city, has been served for years by Haverford Insurance Company. Haverford is a financially sound insurer that has provid- ed the museum with reliable coverage at reasonable prices and has gone out of its way on many occasions to be accommodating. Haverford has also built good relations with A&A by allowing a 17 percent commission-a fact that is not generally known by the clients. When the museum's liability insurance policy was up for renewal, A&A was asked to obtain competitive proposals from likely insurers. We obtained quotations from four comparable insurance companies with annual premiums that ranged between $90,000 and $110,000. A fifth, unsolicited proposal was sent by a small, financially shaky insurance company named Reliable. The annual premium quoted by Reliable was $60,000. There is no question that the museum is best served by continuing with Haverford, and our responsibility as an insurance broker is to place clients with financially sound insurers who will be able to honor all claims. The museum has a very tight operating budget, however, and funding from public and private sources is always unpredictable. As a result, the museum is forced to be extremely frugal in its spending and has always chosen the lowest bid for any service without regard for quality. The dilemma I faced, then, was, Do I present the Reliable bid to the museum? If I do, it will almost certainly accept it given its priority of saving money. Because the market indicates that the value of the needed policy is around $100,000, the Reliable proposal is definite- ly an attempt to "low-ball" the competition, and the company would probably raise the premium in future years. Is this honest competition? And if not, should A&A go along with it? Allowing a client to accept a low-ball bid might also jeopardize our relations with the reputable insurers who submitted honest proposals in good faith. If relations with Reliable are not successful, the museum is apt to blame us for not doing our job, which is not merely to pass along proposals but to evaluate them for suitability. The Conflict of an Insurance Broker competition, and a duty of confidentiality under the law in this area and support our views about what is morally right. For the most part, the language of rights and the obligations of different kinds of arguments for property rights, fair benefit of protecting trade secrets have been introduced. In the next chapter we examine another Agents have dominated our discussion, although utilitarian considerations about the harm and arguments are used to explain the concept of privacy and provide a foundation for it. Unlike right, namely, the right of employees and consumers to privacy. Utilitarian and Kantian trade secrets and conflict of interest, privacy is an area where the law has yet to develop very far, and so we can focus mainly on ethical issues as the public at large. Especially in the ch batik CASE 5.2 Explore the concept on mythinkinglab.com ally Nel ng 1 I work for an instance coverage for Ashton & Ashton (A&A), which is hired by alienation obtain the best insurance coverage for their needs. To do this, we evaluate a client's situation, ho the client for approval. Our compensation comes primarily from a commission that is paid by the client as part of the premium. The commission is a percentage of the premium amount, and of compensation is a contingency payment that is made annually by insurance providers, the amount of this payment is based on the volume of business during the past year. One of our clients, a world-class museum in a major American city, has been served for years by Haverford Insurance Company. Haverford is a financially sound insurer that has provid- ed the museum with reliable coverage at reasonable prices and has gone out of its way on many occasions to be accommodating. Haverford has also built good relations with A&A by allowing a 17 percent commission-a fact that is not generally known by the clients. When the museum's liability insurance policy was up for renewal, A&A was asked to obtain competitive proposals from likely insurers. We obtained quotations from four comparable insurance companies with annual premiums that ranged between $90,000 and $110,000. A fifth, unsolicited proposal was sent by a small, financially shaky insurance company named Reliable. The annual premium quoted by Reliable was $60,000. There is no question that the museum is best served by continuing with Haverford, and our responsibility as an insurance broker is to place clients with financially sound insurers who will be able to honor all claims. The museum has a very tight operating budget, however, and funding from public and private sources is always unpredictable. As a result, the museum is forced to be extremely frugal in its spending and has always chosen the lowest bid for any service without regard for quality. The dilemma I faced, then, was, Do I present the Reliable bid to the museum? If I do, it will almost certainly accept it given its priority of saving money. Because the market indicates that the value of the needed policy is around $100,000, the Reliable proposal is definite- ly an attempt to "low-ball" the competition, and the company would probably raise the premium in future years. Is this honest competition? And if not, should A&A go along with it? Allowing a client to accept a low-ball bid might also jeopardize our relations with the reputable insurers who submitted honest proposals in good faith. If relations with Reliable are not successful, the museum is apt to blame us for not doing our job, which is not merely to pass along proposals but to evaluate them for suitability