Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />• <br />' RECOMMENDATION <br />' Based on a review of the price and coverage analysis, we eliminated all <br />proposals from further consideration except the TML and Arthur J. <br />Gallagher (with Workers' Compensation continuing with the TML), Based <br />on a review of the proposals and our past experience with these organi- <br />zation, we believe that both are financially stable and capable of <br />providing the needed service levels. However, a note of caution should <br />be mentioned. The TML has awarded the service contract for the Workers' <br />' Compensation program to new service providers effective 10/1/83. We are <br />familiar with the new service providers and have discussed the motiva- <br />tions and expected implications of this change with the TML management <br />officers. It is reasonable to expect a certain amount of transition <br />difficulties to arise, but we have no reason to believe that any transi- <br />tion difficulties would be of a magnitude to justify the rejection of <br />' the TML proposal. <br />If the Gallagher program combined with the TML Workers' Compensation <br />program was accepted, the anticipated premium would be $19,400 more than <br />' if the entire TML proposal is accepted. It is our opinion that while <br />there are coverage differences between these two proposals, they both <br />provide very broad coverage. In our professional opinion, there are no <br />coverage reasons to justify acceptance of the higher bid. <br />After review of these proposals and preparation of this analysis, RIMCO <br />recommends acceptance of the TML proposal. <br /> <br /> <br />i <br /> <br />J <br />r <br />' Tillinghast Rimco <br />