If insurers didn’t want to go to Conn. before, they’re really not going to go there when the DOI tells St. Paul that the merger will not be approved because the Mayor of Hartford objects. Just my 2 cents.
Way to go Mayor Perez! Thanks for stepping up to keep jobs in Hartford! Lets hope the commissioner agrees this is definately not in the public’s best interest in CT!
Maybe Mayor Perez and Gov Rell should focus on all the illegitimate kids and crack whores that make up most of Hartford.
Then maybe people would actually step foot in what has become one more god forsaken city due to residue of politically correct policies
Let’s see, the mayor wants two things: promises that jobs are kept in Hartford and money for the community.
As for the jobs – that’s somewhat acceptable but I’m still uncomfortable with the government saying that a business can’t merge because jobs would be lost. Does this happen in other industries? No.
The money part sounds a lot like legal blackmail to me. Either promise to fund arts/shelters/projects or we will kill the deal. How can they get away with this?
CT does not sound like a good place to do business. Good luck to them when they try to get businesses to headquarter there.
Mayor Eddie Perez – I also want a guarantee income of $50,000 per year,with each major corp contributing to this guarantee. Do you think it will happen soon?
There is no promises that life will be a Rose Garden, so find another way to replace the loss of possible employement. Suggest a major fund be estiblished for re-training those that may be laid-off.
Well, for those of you who do not work in Hartford, like I do, you have not seen how much work has recently gone into this city. Again, I applaud Mayor Perez’s efforts to try and sustain the legacy of goodwill and positive support that The Travelers have worked hard to build up here in Hartford. When other companies have fled the city, the Travelers have remained a positive employer for the insurance community in Hartford.
Absolutely dead on, sir. How can an elected official dictate the outcome of a merger such as this. To hell with Hartford and their selfish approach. So what if they loose jobs (people who drive into the city because they won’t live there) to a more efficient system that rewards the tens of thousands of investors and policyholders. Perez, you should be ashamed at your myopic thought process that you should even have the kind of power you think you have. Go Travelers & MetLife and make it work for everyone involved over the long run.
One of the reasons why regulation of interstate commerce is reserved, under the United States Constitution, to the federal government, is so that multi-state businesses don’t have to satisfy the divergent parochial whims of each state (and, in this case, city) that they do business in. This isn’t a case where the state regulator has a concern that the merged companies will remain viable and able to honor the policies they have issued, which, last time I checked, was the job of the insurance commissioner. This is a case where a politician is trying to guarantee jobs and tax revenue, which may actually be at odds, or in conflict, with the role of state regulator in maikng sure that the merged companies remain viable. This mess in Connecticut is just one more reason why it might be time for the Congress to look long and hard at federal regulation of those parts of the insurance industry that are interstate in nature.
Insurance companies aren’t public utilities, and are not in business to operate in the state’s, or city’s, best interest; but, rather, in the best interest of the shareholders who have invested money in them, and the policyholders who they insure. As a shareholder, I want these two companies to do what is necessary to secure my investment and give me a decent return on my money. As a policyholder, I want these two companies to do what it takes to remain solvent so that my claims will be paid, and generate sufficient profit so that my premiums remain affordable.
In an era where cities and states are offering incentives to get companies, especially companies in “clean” industries like insurance and financial services, to relocate and bring jobs in order to boost local economies, the fact that Hartford and Connecticut need to blackmail corporations in order to get jobs to stay put should give the voters an idea of just how badly their elected officials have mucked things up. As a shareholder and policyholder, I don’t think it fair that I should have to shoulder that burden. If Hartford and Connecticut want to make it economically more attractive to stay, then, by all means, the merged companies should stay. But if their attitude is, “It may be your ball, but if you don’t play in my yard, by my rules, you can’t play at all,” I say, let’s find another yard to play in.
I have no idea what the “obviously right choice” is here, as I have no connections to Hartford or the companies involved. I just don’t have the facts.
I did have one thought, though, however tangential. It was the city of Hartford that provided the environment in which Travelers grew and developed. It was the people of Hartford that provided for its infastructure and jobforce, and played a real part in allowing it to get where it is now (including those who were relocated to live there).
I’m glad somebody’s viewing them as stakeholders in Travelers and what happens to its business, even if I have no idea what exactly should be done about that. I’m a bit tired of the apparently growing assumption that the “rank and file” who see to it a company’s day-to-day needs are met aren’t vitally important components of the company’s success who should be treated as such.
On that note, I’ll leave the details of how to work that out to better-prepared minds than mine!
It’s not security for his citizens the Mayor cares about, it’s the number of votes those people translate into. Just another Politician trying to keep “his” job.
As an employee of the company MetLife is trying to buy and a resident of Hartford County, CT – I appreciate that the local politicians are trying to preserve jobs in the city of Hartford. Thank you!
So Sandra, what you are saying is you are working within the city but living in the suburbs. Why not move into the “hellhole” they call Hartford, CT and help support the tax base? Any chance the Mayor can “force” you to do that? He could use your vote, too.
The last I heard we were a free society where businesses have the right to choose where they want to be. Unless The Peoples Republic of Connecticut sees it differently.
No town, city or state wants to lose businesses, but they usually attract them by offering tax breaks, a decent environment and a quality work force from which to choose. I don’t thing holding a company hostage is what is meant by democracy.
The big question the voters of Connecticut and Hartford need to ask is how they are going to overcome this “hold ’em hostage and milk ’em dry” perception that other businesses thinking about relocating will get from these shenanagins.
I sure wouldn’t want to open in, or move my business to, a City or State that has the political crassness exhibited by these guys.
Will the last Hartford Chamber of Commerce member fleeing to the suburbs please turn out the lights?
There comes a time when a company has a obligation to its stockholders that it has to do the difficult tasks of layoffs. The thought that one may loose their job is not to be taken lightly. On the other hand, if that job was one in which the company felt that its buisness would be effected adversely if that employee were not there it is the companys responsibility to maintain that employee. The fact is, of the jobs that will be eliminated, those jobs may not serve a major purpose in the companies day to day function. No one is entitled to a job. You do not have the right to maintain a job due to past performance. If your role in the company is critical to the surival of the company, I assure you that your position will be if the merger goes forward. Have we gotten to the point where it is difficult to fire an employee because he does not perform his job? Where we have to document their mistakes several times to support our decision when they file a suit against the company. The fact is, there are too many employees who sit in their offices and bid on items on ebay or play solitare that companies have no other choice then to part ways. (written on company time)
I sure hope you either live in the area, or have at least been to Hartford. If not, then I would wonder gives you the right to refer to Hartford as a “hellhole” without ever being here. There has been a lot of improvements made to the city, thanks to Mayor Perez. Although I am in agreement that he should not get involved in business and how business is conducted in his city, but I would suggest voicing your opinion in an intelligent and mature manner. This statement applies to all who have posted disrespectful comments. I expect more out of people who are suppose to be insurance professionals.
you think its tough there try northeastern ohio. i left a message for the last one out to turn off the lights. face the facts the wealth of this country is moving south and west.
If insurers didn’t want to go to Conn. before, they’re really not going to go there when the DOI tells St. Paul that the merger will not be approved because the Mayor of Hartford objects. Just my 2 cents.
Way to go Mayor Perez! Thanks for stepping up to keep jobs in Hartford! Lets hope the commissioner agrees this is definately not in the public’s best interest in CT!
Maybe Mayor Perez and Gov Rell should focus on all the illegitimate kids and crack whores that make up most of Hartford.
Then maybe people would actually step foot in what has become one more god forsaken city due to residue of politically correct policies
Let’s see, the mayor wants two things: promises that jobs are kept in Hartford and money for the community.
As for the jobs – that’s somewhat acceptable but I’m still uncomfortable with the government saying that a business can’t merge because jobs would be lost. Does this happen in other industries? No.
The money part sounds a lot like legal blackmail to me. Either promise to fund arts/shelters/projects or we will kill the deal. How can they get away with this?
CT does not sound like a good place to do business. Good luck to them when they try to get businesses to headquarter there.
Mayor Eddie Perez – I also want a guarantee income of $50,000 per year,with each major corp contributing to this guarantee. Do you think it will happen soon?
There is no promises that life will be a Rose Garden, so find another way to replace the loss of possible employement. Suggest a major fund be estiblished for re-training those that may be laid-off.
Well, for those of you who do not work in Hartford, like I do, you have not seen how much work has recently gone into this city. Again, I applaud Mayor Perez’s efforts to try and sustain the legacy of goodwill and positive support that The Travelers have worked hard to build up here in Hartford. When other companies have fled the city, the Travelers have remained a positive employer for the insurance community in Hartford.
Absolutely dead on, sir. How can an elected official dictate the outcome of a merger such as this. To hell with Hartford and their selfish approach. So what if they loose jobs (people who drive into the city because they won’t live there) to a more efficient system that rewards the tens of thousands of investors and policyholders. Perez, you should be ashamed at your myopic thought process that you should even have the kind of power you think you have. Go Travelers & MetLife and make it work for everyone involved over the long run.
One of the reasons why regulation of interstate commerce is reserved, under the United States Constitution, to the federal government, is so that multi-state businesses don’t have to satisfy the divergent parochial whims of each state (and, in this case, city) that they do business in. This isn’t a case where the state regulator has a concern that the merged companies will remain viable and able to honor the policies they have issued, which, last time I checked, was the job of the insurance commissioner. This is a case where a politician is trying to guarantee jobs and tax revenue, which may actually be at odds, or in conflict, with the role of state regulator in maikng sure that the merged companies remain viable. This mess in Connecticut is just one more reason why it might be time for the Congress to look long and hard at federal regulation of those parts of the insurance industry that are interstate in nature.
Insurance companies aren’t public utilities, and are not in business to operate in the state’s, or city’s, best interest; but, rather, in the best interest of the shareholders who have invested money in them, and the policyholders who they insure. As a shareholder, I want these two companies to do what is necessary to secure my investment and give me a decent return on my money. As a policyholder, I want these two companies to do what it takes to remain solvent so that my claims will be paid, and generate sufficient profit so that my premiums remain affordable.
In an era where cities and states are offering incentives to get companies, especially companies in “clean” industries like insurance and financial services, to relocate and bring jobs in order to boost local economies, the fact that Hartford and Connecticut need to blackmail corporations in order to get jobs to stay put should give the voters an idea of just how badly their elected officials have mucked things up. As a shareholder and policyholder, I don’t think it fair that I should have to shoulder that burden. If Hartford and Connecticut want to make it economically more attractive to stay, then, by all means, the merged companies should stay. But if their attitude is, “It may be your ball, but if you don’t play in my yard, by my rules, you can’t play at all,” I say, let’s find another yard to play in.
I have no idea what the “obviously right choice” is here, as I have no connections to Hartford or the companies involved. I just don’t have the facts.
I did have one thought, though, however tangential. It was the city of Hartford that provided the environment in which Travelers grew and developed. It was the people of Hartford that provided for its infastructure and jobforce, and played a real part in allowing it to get where it is now (including those who were relocated to live there).
I’m glad somebody’s viewing them as stakeholders in Travelers and what happens to its business, even if I have no idea what exactly should be done about that. I’m a bit tired of the apparently growing assumption that the “rank and file” who see to it a company’s day-to-day needs are met aren’t vitally important components of the company’s success who should be treated as such.
On that note, I’ll leave the details of how to work that out to better-prepared minds than mine!
It’s not security for his citizens the Mayor cares about, it’s the number of votes those people translate into. Just another Politician trying to keep “his” job.
As an employee of the company MetLife is trying to buy and a resident of Hartford County, CT – I appreciate that the local politicians are trying to preserve jobs in the city of Hartford. Thank you!
Chris could not have said it better. Since when is it the function of the Insurance Department to protect jobs?
Another example of a politician trying to secure their own employment to the detriment of the big picture.
So Sandra, what you are saying is you are working within the city but living in the suburbs. Why not move into the “hellhole” they call Hartford, CT and help support the tax base? Any chance the Mayor can “force” you to do that? He could use your vote, too.
The last I heard we were a free society where businesses have the right to choose where they want to be. Unless The Peoples Republic of Connecticut sees it differently.
No town, city or state wants to lose businesses, but they usually attract them by offering tax breaks, a decent environment and a quality work force from which to choose. I don’t thing holding a company hostage is what is meant by democracy.
The big question the voters of Connecticut and Hartford need to ask is how they are going to overcome this “hold ’em hostage and milk ’em dry” perception that other businesses thinking about relocating will get from these shenanagins.
I sure wouldn’t want to open in, or move my business to, a City or State that has the political crassness exhibited by these guys.
Will the last Hartford Chamber of Commerce member fleeing to the suburbs please turn out the lights?
There comes a time when a company has a obligation to its stockholders that it has to do the difficult tasks of layoffs. The thought that one may loose their job is not to be taken lightly. On the other hand, if that job was one in which the company felt that its buisness would be effected adversely if that employee were not there it is the companys responsibility to maintain that employee. The fact is, of the jobs that will be eliminated, those jobs may not serve a major purpose in the companies day to day function. No one is entitled to a job. You do not have the right to maintain a job due to past performance. If your role in the company is critical to the surival of the company, I assure you that your position will be if the merger goes forward. Have we gotten to the point where it is difficult to fire an employee because he does not perform his job? Where we have to document their mistakes several times to support our decision when they file a suit against the company. The fact is, there are too many employees who sit in their offices and bid on items on ebay or play solitare that companies have no other choice then to part ways. (written on company time)
Bob –
I sure hope you either live in the area, or have at least been to Hartford. If not, then I would wonder gives you the right to refer to Hartford as a “hellhole” without ever being here. There has been a lot of improvements made to the city, thanks to Mayor Perez. Although I am in agreement that he should not get involved in business and how business is conducted in his city, but I would suggest voicing your opinion in an intelligent and mature manner. This statement applies to all who have posted disrespectful comments. I expect more out of people who are suppose to be insurance professionals.
you think its tough there try northeastern ohio. i left a message for the last one out to turn off the lights. face the facts the wealth of this country is moving south and west.