Provider Insurance

America’s Best Coffee Cities

Whenever Steve Novak is in San Francisco, he always makes time to get an espresso at the Steps of Rome Caffé in North Beach. “I’m a coffee snob,” says the owner of Honolulu-based management consultancy company PPR Management Services. “And their espresso is the gold standard.”

Like a lot of people, Novak loves seeking out coffee places when he’s traveling. A good coffee place can be like a life raft: familiar offerings, comfortable chairs, and maybe even free Wi-Fi. “I prefer the local, non-chain shops because of the variety,” Novak says, “but I just want a place to relax and get a feel for the local atmosphere, away from the tourist zones.”

No doubt, charming places like Steps of Rome helped San Francisco land in the top 3 of America’s best coffee cities, according to this year’s America’s Favorite Cities survey from Travel + Leisure.

For the survey’s past five years, readers have weighed in on the qualities—such as hotels, nightlife, friendly locals—of cities across the U.S. This year, we’ve upped the number of cities to 35 and the number of categories to 54. Readers can now evaluate, say, how eco-friendly a city is and its vintage and flea market potential, as well as its local specialties such as barbecue, burgers, and coffee bars.

Granted, when Starbucks and other chains reign in so many shopping centers and office-building lobbies, it may be hard to imagine how one city’s coffee scene is much better or different than any other anymore. But when we looked at the survey’s top 20 results, we found several towns with great historic districts that still offer a unique café culture.

Other winners boast plenty of independent coffeehouses—such as Portland, OR, which took the silver medal position. “Portland has more neighborhood places to get really good coffee than almost anywhere in the country,” says Matt Lounsbury, the director of operations for Portland-based Stumptown Coffee.

New York City and San Francisco were also in the Top 10, though their coffee cultures can be a little more fast-paced. These days you’re likely to find new coffee places that are truly bars: stools up against a counter, great for espresso lovers who just want a quick shot before they move on.

Even for coffee snobs, though, good coffee is an affordable luxury. “It’s a rare surprise to find a shop that makes a passable espresso,” says Novak. “But that’s the fun of finding new shops—to occasionally find that gem that makes me want to return.”

No. 1: Seattle
No surprise—the home of Starbucks is the mother ship for coffee-loving AFC voters. But there is more than just that familiar logo here—you’ll find plenty of indie coffeehouses all over the city, as well as espresso shacks and carts on street corners and in parking lots. All that caffeine gives the locals an edge, but in a good way: they ranked No. 2 for smartest locals in the AFC. And while colder months seem like a great time to enjoy that hot cup, the Emerald City took last place for winter visits.

No. 2: Portland, OR
Portland ranks No. 1 in the AFC for being environmentally aware: locals like their food and drink wholesome and with a local vibe. (It’s No. 1 for farmers’ markets too.) Indie coffee shops may tell you exactly where the beans came from—and one coffeehouse co-op even lets you pay whatever you deem fair. But there may be one Portland beverage that AFC voters like even more than the java: microbrews, which rank No. 1 in the survey.

No. 3: San Francisco
As a Top 10 cultural city in the AFC survey, the City by the Bay caters to coffee lovers with well-developed palates. Big chain Peet’s started in nearby Berkeley. Caffe Trieste and Steps of Rome in North Beach appeal to old-school types. And coffee gourmands also rave about Oakland’s Blue Bottle. In top-5 shopping mecca San Francisco, your to-go cup might even be considered a fashion accessory: the locals rank No. 5 in the survey for their sense of style.

No. 4: Providence
The capital of Rhode Island claims to be the birthplace of coffee syrup—and it’s reportedly also home to the most Dunkin’ Donuts branches per capita. But AFC voters clearly like it for the multitude of mom-and-pop-style cafés such as the legendary Coffee Exchange. Voters put Providence in the top 3 for neighborhood joints, and its locals rank in the Top 10 as the most diverse. Mix your coffee with some artsy outings—the town ranks second for its theater and performance art.

No. 5: New York City
The Big Apple may be the most expensive city in the survey, but coffee here can still come cheap. In the No. 1 city for diversity, the coffee offerings range from sleek stand-up espresso bars to the classic blue-and-white Greek-style cups from convenience-store bodegas. Coffee is so plentiful that people apparently have it coursing through their veins: it’s the last-place city for relaxing.

No. 6: Denver
Folks in the Mile High City might embrace their coffee due to the snowy winters—or just for fuel. This top 5 city for outdoor access has the most fit locals in the U.S., according to the AFC survey. And you can bet your cup is recyclable: Denver is the No. 2 city for being environmentally conscious.

No. 7: Savannah
As a newcomer this year to the AFC survey, the Georgia city, with its quaint historic district, offers plenty of places to relax and enjoy a cup of joe. Perhaps the good-looking locals are drinking lots of decaf too: it’s the No. 3 city for peace and quiet.

No. 8: New Orleans
In the No. 2 town for wild weekends, strong coffee is an essential—but the Crescent City takes its coffee to a level all its own. Maybe it’s that legendary chicory, or how good the coffee tastes with a beignet—but both factors no doubt helped make New Orleans the No. 1 town for cafés. If it weren’t for the great ethnic food (No. 2) and bars (No. 1), you might just sit and drink coffee all day.

No. 9: Austin
This laid-back capital city makes a priority out of brunch and plenty of down time—it ranks No. 9 for neighborhood joints and cafés. The only downside of drinking coffee here: it doesn’t always go that well with the other best local specialties: barbecue and burgers, which both ranked in the top 5 of the survey.

No. 10: Minneapolis/St. Paul
Need to warm up? Holding the last-place position for weather may have nudged the Twin Cities into the top 10. But you also won’t pay too much for your large latte. Minneapolis/St. Paul is one of the most affordable metro areas, according to AFC voters. If you want to blend in at the coffeehouses, just remember to bus yourself: the Twin Cities came in at No. 2 for cleanliness.
View Source

Provider Insurance Hires New Director of Private Client Group

Kerry Tyrrell will join a talented group of professionals where she will bring not only her management skills, but also Private Client Group insurance knowledge.

Needham, MA.  April 7, 2011.  Provider Insurance, the award-winning insurance agency, announces that Kerry Tyrrell has joined the firm as the new Director of Private Client Group.  In this role, Tyrrell will be responsible for managing the Private Client Group, the personal lines department and act as a producer for the agency.  She will be working out of our Needham, MA office.

Tyrrell brings 20 years of insurance experience to Provider working with high net worth individuals and their wealth management advisors.  In addition to working in the area of personal risk management, Tyrrell’s strengths lie in her knowledge of product expertise and best of class personal service to high net worth clientele.

Tyrrell began her insurance career as a sales executive working with personal lines products.  She has also held the position of Senior Account Executive with one of the largest global professional services firms in the United States as well as the Director of the Private Client Group for a large privately held local brokerage.

“Kerry’s insurance experience and expertise in private client service experience and personal lines management will be a huge asset to our personal lines department,” says Bill Darcey, President and CEO of Provider Insurance.  “We’re ecstatic to have someone of Kerry’s caliber join our team and look forward for her to help us bring the ultimate experience and unmatched customer service to our personal lines clients as well as service our Private Client Group.”

In addition to attending the University of Massachusetts, Tyrrell holds a Massachusetts broker’s license as well as the professional designation of Certified Insurance Counselor. She is an active member of the Boston Estate Planning Council and the Family Firm Institute.

About the Provider Insurance
Founded in 1945, Provider Insurance Group is a Trusted Choice insurance agency that has grown over the past 60 plus years into a world class, client focused organization. After a rigorous examination and fitness review of 17 quality points, Provider was awarded the Five Star designation, which is held by less than 1 percent of insurance agencies in New England. Headquartered in Massachusetts, Provider also has an office in Woonsocket, R.I. where it was voted ‘Best Place to Work.’  Provider also made the Boston Business Journal’s Book of Lists for Largest Insurance Agencies in 2011.

The Top Cars for Teens: Better Safe Than Sporty

For parents and teens, choosing a car for a first-time driver can be an anxiety-filled process. Teens want a sporty car they won’t be embarrassed to drive to school. Parents want safety, safety, safety.

Cross a new car off the list because the chances of a new driver putting a dent in it, or worse, are roughly 1 in 4.

Late-model used cars offer a just-right combination of modest power and performance, top-notch crash scores, advanced safety features and decent reliability scores that safety experts say parents should seek in any car intended for a new driver.

To come up with the best rides for a teen driver, I crunched the numbers from several key sources of data and safety rankings: safety and crash-test information from the websites of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, and quality and reliability scores from Consumer Reports, the nonprofit product-analysis publisher. Among the vehicles best suited for teen drivers: the Honda Accord (24 points,) the Ford Fusion (22 points) and the Toyota Camry (22 points).

You won’t see pickups, sports cars, or tiny subcompacts on the list. Pickups are too easy to roll. Sports cars tempt young drivers to drive too fast. Subcompacts don’t put enough metal between your kid and obstacles they may hit, even though today’s small cars are dramatically better engineered than the tiny hatchbacks baby boomers drove in the ’70s and ’80s.

For the first time, this year, the Insurance Institute says it can recommend certain sport utility vehicles as safe choices for young drivers. In the past, the institute’s experts said the SUVs’ propensity to roll over made them a risky option.

Newer SUVs and crossovers—wagons that ride on the chassis of cars—that are equipped with electronic stability control now have fatality rates as low or lower than most classes of cars, according to a new IIHS analysis of federal crash data.

“In the past, because [SUVs] are a bit top heavy, they could be twitchy in handling and it was easy to get out of control and roll them over,” says the institute’s president, Adrian Lund. The IIHS data now shows SUVs with stability control have 70% fewer single-vehicle rollover crashes than those without the technology, Mr. Lund says. SUVs also stand higher off the ground, he says, so more of the force hits the frame below the driver’s seat in a side-on crash.

The Insurance Institute’s website has vehicle ratings based on its crash tests. You can search by vehicle class. I looked for models that have “good” ratings for front and side impact tests. Then I turned to Consumer Reports and looked up reliability ratings for those cars. If one of my first picks had a below average reliability rating from Consumer Reports, it was out.

Finally, I threw in points for stars earned on the federal government’s crash tests. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration hands out up to 20 stars for a car’s ability to protect the driver and front passenger in front and side-impact collisions.

Among the midsize cars that scored well are the Accord, the Fusion and the Camry. Your kid may grouse that these are three of the blandest cars on the road, but they are reliable, four-cylinder cars that aren’t too big or too small, and are easily serviced. All these cars, at three or four years old, will cost between $15,000 and $19,000, depending on mileage, condition and model year. With Toyotas, be sure to take the Vehicle Identification Number to a dealer to check that all the recalls Toyota ordered were performed.

An older, second-hand luxury car is a good way to give a teen a vehicle with a full complement of safety technology. The trick is finding one that isn’t too powerful. Among those that got through the filter: the sedate Lexus ES, an Audi A4 and a 2004-2008 Acura TL.

The Acura TL gets 24 points in my scoring system mainly because it has a top rating for reliability from Consumer Reports. A caveat with this car: The six-cylinder engine is rated at 258 horsepower—too much for a new driver. That’s why four-cylinder versions of the Camry, Accord, Fusion and the Chevy Malibu are so appealing. Among those, the Accord scores highest because of superior reliability ratings and strong NHTSA crash-test scores.

Some of the crossover sport utilities that did well are the Acura MDX, Honda Pilot, Subaru Forester, and newer Honda CR-V or Toyota RAV 4 models with stability control.

Some vehicles didn’t make my list because they aren’t rated in one or more of the three rankings I used. The 2008-2010 BMW X3 crossover, for example, has good scores from the Insurance Institute, and a better than average reliability rating from Consumer Reports. But the NHTSA hasn’t posted crash-test results. Odds are it would do well: Most BMW models get 19 out of 20 stars on the NHTSA front and side-impact crash-test ratings.

It’s tempting to buy a teen a very cheap, older car or a small pickup. But old cars often don’t have safety technology such as side air bags, or anti-lock brakes, that can greatly improve the odds of avoiding or surviving a crash. Pickups have rollover death rates that are more than twice as high as those for cars, according to federal data.

Teens may wind up driving family haulers like SUVs because it’s the vehicle their parents have handy to lend. Keep in mind you don’t want teens hauling lots of friends around or they’ll be distracted and get in trouble. Some states now restrict how many passengers a teen driver may carry in the first year or two on the road.

David Champion, senior director of Consumer Reports’ auto-testing division, says he would still steer young drivers away from large SUVs. “I’m not sure all-wheel drive necessarily is a good thing,” he says.

In slick conditions, all-wheel drive can get a vehicle going faster than an inexperienced driver can handle, and when the kid hits the brakes, the vehicle will skid.
View Source

Do You Need Disaster Insurance?

The earthquake and tsunami in northern Japan has prompted homeowners everywhere to double-check their coverage. But those who decide that more coverage will help them sleep better may find an unpleasant surprise: Premiums are expected to spike.

The costs of earthquake insurance and flood coverage were already climbing, even before the disaster in Japan (and that, analysts say, won’t help pricing either). Earthquake insurance premiums jumped by as much as 58% in some regions, says Mike Chaney, commissioner of insurance for Mississippi. They now costs anywhere from $100 to $3,000 annually depending on where you live. Flood coverage costs an average of $570 a year, up 4% from 2009. And those costs are expecting to keep rising, says Drew Woodbury, an equity analyst covering insurance at Morningstar.

What’s driving the uptick? Insurance premiums move up after more claims are filed, and over the past few years U.S. homeowners have filed thousands of claims related to the series of hurricanes in the South and Midwest, says Chaney. Another jump in claims is expected next year if more devastating hurricanes and other natural disasters occur. On top of that, a proposal in Congress could also boost annual premiums by as much as 20% as part of a plan to overhaul the federal government’s flood insurance program, itself underwater by $18 billion.

These higher premiums come just as natural disasters are happening more frequently, says David Neal, director at Oklahoma State University’s Center for the Study of Disasters and Extreme Events. There is now a 50% chance that at least one major hurricane will hit the East Coast this year, up from 31% historically, according to a study from Colorado State University. Earthquakes are also becoming more common: On average, 15 magnitude-7 earthquakes occur worldwide each year, says Dr. Harley Benz, a seismologist at the U.S. Geological Survey. But in 2010, that number spiked to 21, and already this year there have been seven, according to the USGS.

Not every homeowner needs the extra coverage. But while basic homeowners’ insurance usually protects again fire and lighting, it often doesn’t cover floods, earthquakes and other natural disasters. Consumers instead need to purchase additional policies. One thing to consider, say experts: Do you stand to lose more paying premiums every year or saving that money to possibly pay for repairs should a disaster occur? Over 10 years, flood insurance premiums could cost up to $27,340, for a high-risk home with $250,000 in coverage to rebuild the house and $100,000 to cover the contents, according to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which runs the National Flood Insurance Program. The typical cost to repair a basement after a flood of six inches is about $25,000, not including the cost of replacing furniture, appliances or belongings, according to FEMA.

Of course, homeowners can also avoid these expenses by moving to less disaster-prone areas. Individuals can research the country’s earthquake and flood zones for safer places to live. Also, before moving, check with a lender; most will tell borrowers they’re moving into a high-risk flood zone and make sure they sign up for flood insurance.

View Source

The Truth Is Online, But Should Employers Google Job Applicants?

The Internet is a rich source of information, providing quick and relatively easy access to seemingly unlimited data. With the increasing popularity of social networking sites such as MySpace and Facebook, and search engines like Google and Yahoo, employers are finding it easier and less expensive to conduct background checks on potential employees. But what happens when Internet activity intersects with the employment world?

Employers understandably want to obtain as much relevant information as possible about job applicants. Conducting research outside the formal interview process, however, carries possible legal risks, placing employers at risk of discrimination claims where employment decisions are influenced by personal details obtained from the Internet.

There are currently no known laws concerning Internet searches or forbidding what or how an employer can use information gleaned from the Internet in its employment decisions. Many of the legal issues raised by Internet searches do not circumvent the traditional rules regarding pre-employment inquires. With any background check, both federal and state law prohibits employers from making employment decisions based upon categories such as race, color, gender, disability, age and national origin. Information garnered through an Internet search, therefore, cannot be a basis for employment decisions if that information covers a prohibitive pre-employment area.

Employers researching job applicants online will likely learn much information about an applicant that would not, and could not, have been discovered through an interview since many online networking profiles generally present personal information about an individual that likely would not come up in an interview. Discovery of personal information in this manner is not unlawful, however, an employer cannot base employment decisions on all information uncovered via the Internet. For example, an individual’s online profile may reveal his or her religious affiliation or a disability that is unrelated to the ability to perform the job at issue. By learning this type of information online, the employer may have to explain that the information did not enter into the hiring decision.

Just as an employment application should not solicit information that may give rise to a wrongful failure to hire claim, information obtained through an Internet search should not be used to unlawfully weed out potential candidates. To that end, an employer should maintain thorough records that show its employment decisions were based on unbiased, legal considerations.

Indeed, technology has made search on potential employees easy, but employers are cautioned with regard to the use of information they find on the Internet. There is a great risk in relying on Internet sources to screen applicants since you have no assurance that the information you find about the person you check is accurate. For example, it is possible for a person to create a fake profile or publish incorrect information about another individual. Second, you cannot make blanket judgment based on what you see on the Internet. A picture of an applicant drinking with friends does not necessarily mean the applicant has a drinking problem or will be an unreliable employee.

Third, an online search may uncover a great deal of personal information, some of which has no employment-related purpose or may reveal information about an applicant that is better left unknown. In such case, it is difficult to “unring the bell” and pretend that you did not see the information. For example, if an applicant’s personal profile discusses his affiliation with a particular religious group, it is easier to defend a religious discrimination claim if the employer can say it did not know about the applicant’s religious affiliations.

As with any background check, if the employer uses a third party to conduct the check, the information found online may fall under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), which has disclosure and notice requirements. The FCRA is designed to protect the privacy of information and ensure that the information supplied by consumer reporting agencies is as accurate as possible. The FCRA applies to consumer reports obtained from third parties. Thus, an employer may avoid the FCRA’s requirements by conducting background checks internally – without the assistance of an outside company.

Employers that make adverse hiring decisions based on the information gleaned from an Internet search could face potential litigation. The practice could expose employers to liability because the sites can contain so much personal information about an individual, including information that is not properly the subject of an employment application or job interview. If you decide to do Internet background checks, you should take special care to make decisions based on job-related factors and to ignore information about protected characteristics. Also, be sure to clearly document the legitimate business reasons for the hiring decisions. Finally, be consistent – if you conduct Internet searches of applicants, do so in a consistent manner so as to avoid potential discrimination claims.

Monica M. Moore is a senior attorney at Nemeth Burwell, P.C., which specializes in employment litigation, traditional labor law and management consultation for private and public sector employers and works exclusively with management to prevent, resolve and litigate labor and employment disputes.
View Source

The Latest Voluntary Benefits Trends

 

View Source

Have Fun Without Letting An Office Celebration Become A Liability

View Source