A new report has claimed that higher premiums for women's income protection (IP) are unfair and inde...
A new report has claimed that higher premiums for women's income protection (IP) are unfair and indefensible.
The report by disability campaigners, the Disability Alliance and gender equality campaigners, the Fawcett Society, claims women are more at risk of poverty through long-term ill health than men.
It recommends insurance companies to think again on higher premiums, and collect and publish gender statistics. It also urges the Government to review the insurance industry's exemption in the Sex Discrimination Act.
The report, In sickness and in health: exploring women's access to State and private sector benefits, said women pay higher IP insurance premiums than men and yet many earn too little to receive benefits from the State.
Even among high earners, women earning over £20,000 are three times less likely to have income protection, for women that earn over £35,000 this increases to seven times less likely.
Lorna Reith, chief executive of the Disability Alliance, said: 'We realise the insurance industry is not a Social Service and would not be providing for low earners ' that is a role for the State. However, our examination of the available data does not seem to explain why the industry feels women are a higher risk. The last time the industry made its argument was quite a few years ago, but we question whether that is still the case and insurers may be missing out on a whole audience for these products.'
But Rosalind Pearson, personal finance research and planning manager at Swiss Life, defended providers' actions: 'The industry has been challenged on this point before, but we are allowed to discriminate only if we can prove statistically there is a sound reason for making that judgement. Statistically it has been proven sickness rates are higher for women, so as an industry we can prove our case.'
