Social responsibility all about worker welfare, survey says – National Consumers League

/in imported/by

More than environmental stewardship and philanthropy, nearly one in two Americans believe the most important proof of corporate social responsibility is treating employees well.

A national opinion survey commissioned by the National Consumers League and Fleishman-Hillard International Communications found that American consumers have their own views on corporate social responsibility that run counter to established beliefs.

“Our research reflects an exciting coming-of-age for consumers, as they are more empowered than ever to assess and react to corporate social responsibility issues,” said National Consumers League President Linda Golodner. “Activists and consumer watchdog groups remain important opinion leaders, but rank-and-file Americans are becoming more knowledgeable than ever on socially responsible behavior, and this trend will influence businesses and increasingly benefit society.”

Americans define CSR in ways most relevant to them

The survey found that 76 percent of American consumers agree that to be socially responsible, companies should place employee salary and wage increases above making charitable contributions. Similarly, the survey found that 76 percent believe that a company’s treatment of its employees plays a big role in consumer purchasing decisions.

“What American consumers are telling us — perhaps influenced by ongoing coverage of corporate layoffs and employee-benefit reductions — sheds new light on how we view corporate social responsibility,” said Fleishman-Hillard Chairman and Chief Executive Officer John D. Graham. “If companies want to maintain and strengthen their reputations, it will be essential for them to invest actively and visibly in their employees. It is also more important than ever to understand the online resources that Americans are using to learn about companies and their track records for corporate social responsibility.”

Values matter

Average Americans feel strong about buying products from or working for a company whose values are aligned with their own personal values. Survey respondents say it’s “extremely” or “very” important to work for (79 percent), buy products and services from (65 percent), and socialize with (72 percent) those who have similar values and principles.

“The study findings are especially welcome because they demonstrate that the brand of CSR that most corporations favor simply isn’t enough to impress most consumers,” said Mal Warwick, chair of the Social Venture Network and co-author of Values-Driven Business: How to Change the World, Make Money, and Have Fun. “The consumer attitudes reported in this study reflect more closely an approach to social responsibility called the ‘triple bottom line,’ in which people, planet, and profit are balanced. Rather than detract from the traditional bottom line, this approach, requiring policies that actively favor the key stakeholders in a business — its employees, its customers, its suppliers, its community, and its environment, as well as its owners — makes that business more competitive.”

Corporate America receives low marks for CSR performance

While Americans believe that social responsibility is important, only 21 percent give U.S. corporations top marks for being socially responsible. When asked to rate how companies are performing compared with two to three years ago, only 30 percent believe that companies are doing a “somewhat better” or “a lot better” job of being socially responsible.

The Internet Is transforming the CSR landscape

Use of Internet technology is changing the way people learn about and determine which companies are socially responsible, the survey found.

Almost half of the respondents (47 percent) say they have used the Internet to learn about the extent to which a company is or is not being socially responsible. The survey results also demonstrate that 53 percent of Americans believe that their own online research is one of the most credible means by which to shape their opinions on deciding whether U.S. companies are being socially responsible.

The research indicates that a new generation of online activists is emerging that cuts across many socioeconomic groups in the arena of corporate social responsibility. Going online to learn and advocate for social issues appears to be increasingly a mainstream activity of the average American. The survey found that 58 percent of survey respondents said that because of the increased availability of online resources and information, they (or other people like them) are “more informed” about companies’ records for social responsibility than they were a few years ago.

The survey also found a positive relationship between active Internet use and engagement in social responsibility. About two-fifths of those using the Internet have sent e-mail to a company about its products or services (41 percent) or to an elected state or federal official about an issue (38 percent). Americans who frequently use online resources were also more aware of global standards.

“These survey findings indicate that as the American public continues to refine its definition of corporate social responsibility and gain empowerment through online resources in their new role as activists for social change, companies, academics, and interest groups must re-evaluate the criteria they have established in this arena,” said Paul Argenti, professor of Corporate Communication at Dartmouth’s Tuck School of Business.  “Corporations must engage in a new level of dialogue that resonates with stakeholders’ personal values. They also will have to increase transparency and adopt a more integrated approach to monitoring and influencing the online communications shaping their reputations.”

About the survey

In 2005, Fleishman-Hillard partnered with the National Consumers League (NCL) to conduct a benchmark survey that would assess consumer attitudes toward corporate social responsibility as well as their behaviors regarding CSR. The survey also tracked the role that media and technology play in informing people about what companies are doing to be socially responsible.  In the first quarter of 2006, the professional interviewing service Western Wats conducted a quantitative survey with 800 U.S. adults nationwide through telephone interviews, averaging 30 minutes in length. The sampling error for the survey results reported is plus or minus two to four percentage points at the 95 percent confidence level.

 

Groups unite in call for action against phishing scams – National Consumers League

/in imported/by

March 16, 2006

Contact: 202-835-3323, media@nclnet.org

Washington, DC—Consumer confidence in conducting business and protecting personal data online is threatened every day by phishing scams. In an initiative led by the National Consumers League (NCL), law enforcement, financial services and technical industries have joined forces to combat this threat.  The group today issued a “call to action” with the release of a paper outlining key recommendations that form a comprehensive plan for combating phishing more effectively.

Phishing is a large and growing problem, in which identity thieves pose as legitimate companies, government agencies, or other trusted entities in order to trick consumers into providing their bank account numbers, Social Security numbers, and other personal information. In 2005, phishing scams ranked 6th in Internet complaints to NCL’s Internet Fraud Watch program and the scams continue to dupe consumers.  A May 2005 consumer survey by First Data found that 43 percent of respondents had received a phishing contact, and of those, 5 percent (approximately 4.5 million people) provided the requested personal information. Nearly half of the phishing victims, 45 percent, reported that their information was used to make an unauthorized transaction, open an account, or commit another type of identity theft.

NCL’s new report, the result of a comprehensive three-day brainstorming retreat organized by the Washington-based consumer advocacy organization last September, makes multiple recommendations on how to combat it. 

“There is no silver bullet to solve the phishing problem, but there are known responses that need more support and promising new approaches that could help deter it,” said Susan Grant, director of NCL’s National Fraud Information Center. The key recommendations in the report are:

  • Create systems that are “secure by design” to make consumers safer online without having to be computer experts;
  • Implement better ways to authenticate email users and Web sites to make it easier to tell the difference between legitimate individuals and organizations and phishers posing as them;
  • Provide better tools for investigation and enforcement to prevent phishers from taking advantage of technology, physical location, and information-sharing barriers to avoid detection and prosecution;
  • Learn from the “lifecycle of the phisher” and use that knowledge about how these criminals operate to exploit points of vulnerability and stop them;
  • Explore the use of “white lists” to identify Web sites that are spoofing legitimate organizations and use “black lists” to create a phishing recall system that would prevent phishing messages from reaching consumers;
  • Provide greater support for consumer education, using clear, consistent messages and innovative methods to convey them.

Sponsorship for the initiative was provided by the American Express Company, First Data Corporation, and Microsoft Corporation.  The recommendations were developed by retreat participants representing financial services firms, Internet service providers, online retailers, computer security firms, software companies, consumer protection agencies, law enforcement agencies, consumer and ID theft victims organizations, academia, and coalitions such as the Anti-Phishing Working Group and the National Cyber Security Alliance.  Peter Swire, C. William O’Neill Professor of Law at the Moritz College of Law of the Ohio State University, wrote the report for NCL.

In the next phase of this project, NCL is forming working groups and inviting organizations and experts who are concerned about phishing to examine how the anti-phishing strategies in the report can be adopted on a widespread basis. “We all need to work together in a systematic approach if we want to have a significant impact on the tidal wave of phishing that is hitting consumers and hurting legitimate organizations,” said Grant.

To obtain a copy of “A Call for Action,” click here.

###

About the National Consumers League
The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is America’s pioneer consumer organization. Our mission is to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. For more information, visit www.nclnet.org.

Groups unite to issue call for action against phishing scams – National Consumers League

/in imported/by

Consumer confidence in conducting business and protecting personal data online is threatened every day by phishing scams. In an initiative led by NCL, law enforcement, financial services, and technical industries have joined forces to combat this threat. The group have issued a “call to action” with the release of a paper outlining key recommendations that form a comprehensive plan for combating phishing more effectively.Phishing is a large and growing problem, in which identity thieves pose as legitimate companies, government agencies, or other trusted entities in order to trick consumers into providing their bank account numbers, Social Security numbers, and other personal information. In 2005, phishing scams ranked 6th in Internet complaints to NCL’s Internet Fraud Watch program and the scams continue to dupe consumers. A May 2005 consumer survey by First Data found that 43 percent of respondents had received a phishing contact, and of those, 5 percent (approximately 4.5 million people) provided the requested personal information. Nearly half of the phishing victims, 45 percent, reported that their information was used to make an unauthorized transaction, open an account, or commit another type of identity theft.

NCL’s new report, the result of a comprehensive three-day brainstorming retreat organized by the Washington-based consumer advocacy organization last September, makes multiple recommendations on how to combat it.

“There is no silver bullet to solve the phishing problem, but there are known responses that need more support and promising new approaches that could help deter it,” said Susan Grant, director of NCL’s National Fraud Information Center. The key recommendations in the report are:

  • Create systems that are “secure by design” to make consumers safer online without having to be computer experts;
  • Implement better ways to authenticate email users and Web sites to make it easier to tell the difference between legitimate individuals and organizations and phishers posing as them;
  • Provide better tools for investigation and enforcement to prevent phishers from taking advantage of technology, physical location, and information-sharing barriers to avoid detection and prosecution;
  • Learn from the “lifecycle of the phisher” and use that knowledge about how these criminals operate to exploit points of vulnerability and stop them;
  • Explore the use of “white lists” to identify Web sites that are spoofing legitimate organizations and use “black lists” to create a phishing recall system that would prevent phishing messages from reaching consumers;
  • Provide greater support for consumer education, using clear, consistent messages and innovative methods to convey them.

Sponsorship for the initiative was provided by the American Express Company, First Data Corporation, and Microsoft Corporation. The recommendations were developed by retreat participants representing financial services firms, Internet service providers, online retailers, computer security firms, software companies, consumer protection agencies, law enforcement agencies, consumer and ID theft victims organizations, academia, and coalitions such as the Anti-Phishing Working Group and the National Cyber Security Alliance. Peter Swire, C. William O’Neill Professor of Law at the Moritz College of Law of the Ohio State University, wrote the report for NCL.

In the next phase of this project, NCL is forming working groups and inviting organizations and experts who are concerned about phishing to examine how the anti-phishing strategies in the report can be adopted on a widespread basis. “We all need to work together in a systematic approach if we want to have a significant impact on the tidal wave of phishing that is hitting consumers and hurting legitimate organizations,” said Grant.

Who does what: consumers confused about eye care providers, training, M.D. status – National Consumers League

/in imported/by

November 17, 2005

Contact: (202) 835-3323, media@nclnet.org

Washington, DC — A survey released today by the National Consumers League (NCL), found that many consumers, including those who wear glasses or contact lenses, are uncertain about the differences among various eye care providers, the services they perform, and the training and education they must complete. The survey showed that one-third of respondents (30 percent) incorrectly thought optometrists have earned medical degrees. Similarly, nearly 50 percent thought an optometrist can be board certified, when, in fact, only licensure is required. Despite the confusion about which eye care professionals have medical degrees, consumers have strong opinions on the need for the degree: when it comes to performing surgeries (including laser), injecting /prescribing medications, and emergency care, most respondents indicated that they would prefer their eye-care provider to have a medical degree.

“When it comes to eye care, it is vital for consumers to understand who can provide what kind of services,” said NCL President Linda Golodner. “There are a number of different types of professionals on the eye care team, and unfortunately, many consumers, as seen in our survey, don’t differentiate among them. As in any aspect of health care, consumers must take an active role and familiarize themselves with who it is they’re seeking treatment from.”

The nation’s oldest consumer advocacy organization, NCL commissioned the survey in order to explore consumers’ understanding of the eye care arena, which is often confusing due to the number of professionals who offer services.

  • Opticians dispense and fit contact lenses and glasses
  • Optometrists examine the eye to diagnose vision problems and abnormalities, and prescribe glasses, contact lenses and some medications
  • Ophthalmologists are medical doctors who deliver total eye care services, treat eye diseases and injuries, and perform eye surgery.
  • These professionals have different education profiles and their practice parameters are determined by varying levels of regulation.

To help consumers better understand eye care, NCL has created new Web resources and tips at its Web site, www.nclnet.org. At the site, consumers can learn about the various members of the eye care team, their training and the services they can provide. It also includes tips and a checklist of questions for patients to ask their eye care providers about treatments and services. NCL has also produced a white paper about the state of eye care in the United States. To learn more, visit www.nclnet.org.

The Web-based survey of 600 adults over the age of 25 was conducted for NCL by TNS jstreet, a Washington-based survey firm. The survey was made possible by an unrestricted educational grant provided by the American Academy of Ophthalmology.

###

About the National Consumers League

Founded in 1899, the National Consumers League is America’s pioneer consumer organization. Its mission is to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. NCL is a private, nonprofit membership organization. For more information, visit www.nclnet.org.

Teens spend big, but don’t always spend smart – National Consumers League

/in imported/by

Over half of teens (52 percent) wrongly believe that a credit card is an informal agreement to pay money owed. And where are they learning this? Sixty-three percent say they get most of their information about money, credit, and other financial matters from their parents.

The National Consumers League commissioned a survey by Opinion Research Corporation International that tested teens’ knowledge of financial issues and examined their attitudes toward money, work, and savings. It also questioned how they plan to deal with credit cards and other loans. Findings showed that, while teens are thinking about saving, paying for college, and obtaining credit cards, they may not have a grasp of exactly what a credit card is, how much of college expenses their parents can pay, or what they’ll make when they get their first job.

Work, money, and savings

It’s not news to anyone who has visited a fast food restaurant in the past decade that many teens are working; 62 percent say they get most of their money from part-time employment, summer jobs, or neighborhood jobs such as babysitting or raking leaves. Over half (55 percent) say they work mainly for spending money. Another 35 percent mainly save the money they make.

Saving money is important to American teens; about nine out of ten save money, though 36 percent admit that they’re saving for specific items they want to purchase. Almost one quarter (22 percent) are saving for college and 27 percent save for no particular reason. Four out of ten say they save half or more of their money, and three out of four have a savings account. Only about one in five teens report having a checking account, and small percentages say they have ATM (12 percent) and debit cards
(8 percent).

Paying for college

Teens are falsely optimistic about their ability to obtain scholarships and grants to pay for college; 38 percent say that’s the main way they’ll cover the costs. One in four say their parents will carry the burden, 12 percent plan to work through school to pay the costs, and only ten percent believe they’ll mainly use student loans to cover the cost. According to a report by The College Board, loans comprise 58 percent of college aid packages, while scholarships and grants make up only 25 percent. Most of NCL’s survey respondents (56 percent) believe their parents will pay for 20-50 percent of their college bill, while 12 percent don’t expect their parents to make any contribution.

Life after college and credit cards

Over one-third (38 percent) of teens believe they will make under $25,000 in their first job out of college. The reality, according to the Collegiate Employment Research Institute, is that the average college graduate with a bachelor’s degree makes between $29,300 and $34,600. One in five survey respondents think they’ll make more than $36,000 in the first year. Teens are planning to get credit cards; 58 percent plan say they’ll get their first card before they graduate from college.

When teens plan to get their first credit card

This interest in credit cards is noteworthy since over half (52 percent) wrongly believe that a credit card is an informal agreement to pay money owed. And where are they learning this? Sixty-three percent say they get most of their information about money, credit, and other financial matters from their parents. But parents might not be the best resource. The average American family carries almost $9,000 in credit card debt. And even if their parents are providing sound advice, over half of the teens admitted that, when they do talk to their parents about money, it’s to ask for some to spend.

Financial privacy, shopping online

Though thought to be more Internet savvy than their parents, teens have some disturbing misconceptions about shopping online. Sixty-eight percent mistakenly believe it’s safer to pay for goods bought online with a check or money order than by giving a credit card number and 55 percent wrongly think that businesses must go through a screening process to make sure they are legitimate before they can put up a Web site. When asked the same two questions in 2001, adults knew a bit more than the teens, with 41 percent correctly answering the safest way to pay question, and 73 percent knowing that companies are not screened before they put up site. Teen respondents also showed a lack of understanding of important financial privacy issues. A majority (70 percent) wrongly believe that it’s illegal for banks to share a person’s financial information with other affiliated companies.

NCL’s consumer education campaign

NCL has launched a new consumer education campaign with an unrestricted educational grant provided by Bank of America. The goal is to help change misconceptions and provide teens with a financial education foundation they can carry with them as they make important financial decisions later in life. The campaign includes new lessons on banking and credit for teachers and LifeSmarts coaches as well as media outreach to promote LifeSmarts, the League’s program to bring consumer education to high school students. The lessons are available online at www.lifesmarts.org.

Trends in medicine: What is evidence-based medicine? – National Consumers League

/in imported/by

Doctors and health care professionals are attempting to help patients make sense of the overload of health information by gathering, evaluating, and sharing well–tested, proven medical research. This process of bringing the best available evidence from scientific research to patient care is known as evidence-based medicine (EBM).

The emphasis with EBM is on applying research to medical care: when there is evidence that a treatment works and benefits the patient, it is practiced; where there is evidence that a treatment has not benefited the patient, is ineffective, or harmful, it is not practiced; and where there is not enough evidence, healthcare professionals should proceed carefully.

Many patients are educating themselves about their health, self-diagnosing, and pursuing care on their own.

Some patients are using health information to self-diagnose their conditions and asking doctors to prescribe treatments based on their own research, others are confused by the overload of health information.  To improve health outcomes, doctors and patients should share the responsibility for making health care decisions.

  • Patients are bringing in articles and ads and self-diagnosing specific conditions. This presents an opportunity for doctors and patients to discuss the patient’s actual situation and make appropriate decisions based on shared information.
    • Pharmaceutical ads are a major source of tension because they tell patients to ask the doctor for certain prescriptions by name without knowing if it’s appropriate. Doctors should take the time to explain to patients why the drug is or is not appropriate for them and then discuss other treatment options as well.
  • Doctors can start the dialogue to help patients sort out their questions and concerns.
  • Learning about medical treatments from friends, family and co-workers is a significant source of information that is credible to patients.
  • Often times, patients feel they know what is wrong before seeing a doctor and the challenge is communicating this knowledge to the doctor.
  • Doctors who disagree with their patients’ diagnosis or do not provide them with the desired treatment are often criticized. Shared decision making helps avoid disagreements and leads to successful patient outcomes.

All of the health information now available to consumers is changing the patient/doctor relationship.

Patients’ increased access to medical information is changing the relationship between patient and health care professional.

  • Patients have access to more medical information than ever before through magazine articles, advertisements and online searches, and health care professionals can play a critical role in helping patients differentiate the good from the bad.
  • More patients are taking more responsibility for their own care and want doctors to be partners, not bosses, in this relationship.
  • As America becomes more diverse, we need to pay special attention to cultural, linguistic, and economic barriers that may inhibit consumers from getting the information they need to make appropriate health care decisions.

To help doctors and patients make treatment decisions, it is necessary to sort through health information and find the best medical treatment based on what has been proven to work and is effective

Many doctors and other health care professionals are attempting to help patients make sense of the overload of health information by gathering, evaluating, and sharing well-tested, proven, medical research.  With this research, the health care professional and patient make treatment decisions together based on what works and is effective.

  • Health care systems are working towards a decision-making process incorporating medical research evaluation along with good stewardship – if there is evidence a treatment works and benefits the patient, it is practiced; if there is evidence a treatment has no benefit or may harm the patient, it is not done.  In cases where there is insufficient evidence about a treatment or if evidence doesn’t exist, a consensus is developed among health care professionals and they proceed carefully.  It is a shared decision-making process between patient and doctor.
  • Your doctor uses clinical judgment, incorporating the best research, his/her knowledge and experience, to present you with treatment options.
  • Making decisions based on what has been proven to work helps ensure that you and your health professional choose the most effective and beneficial treatment for you.  Understanding what works most effectively helps spend your health care resources wisely and benefits everyone.

Ask your doctor or other health care professional about how you can decide together what is the best medical treatment for you.

Patients and doctors need to engage in a dialogue about making the best medical treatment decisions.

  • Health care providers are working at bringing together the best available information about health care practices to create and implement programs that help people live healthier lives.
  • Health care providers have created specific care management programs for many diseases, including diabetes, asthma, congestive heart failure, coronary artery disease and depression.
    • Health care professionals stay up-to-date by using a computer system of well-tested medical research that can be used right in your doctor’s office.

Additional Resources about Evidence Based Medicine

To learn more about making health care decisions based on the best medical evidence, check the following resources for quality health information:

Cochrane Consumer Network.  This Web site is part of the Cochrane Collaboration, an international organization that aims to review all healthcare evidence and publishes the reviews electronically. The consumer network website summarizes the reviews for consumers.

MEDLINEplus at www.medlineplus.gov has extensive health information for consumers from the National Library of Medicine and the National Institutes of Health.

The National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA) consumer Web site at www.healthchoices.org explains how to choose a health plan based on quality. Includes a Health Plan Report Card.

Joint Commission on the Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO) website at www.jcaho.org has information on the quality of care at your local health care facility.  JCAHO evaluates the quality and safety of care for health care organizations.

Kaiser Permanente’s Care Management Institute, www.kpcmi.org, establishes care management programs for patients based on the best available evidence.

To learn more about evidence-based health care and how healthcare professionals are making treatment decisions, Check out the online course developed by CUE (Consumers United for Evidence Based Health Care) on Understanding Evidence Based Healthcare: A Foundation for Action.

About this Web page

These messages were developed by the NCL, in partnership with Kaiser Permanente, to educate consumers about the concept of Evidence-Based Medicine. For more information, contact NCL’s health policy team.

Just how private is your personal information? – National Consumers League

/in imported/by

The Financial Modernization Act (also called Gramm-Leach-Bliley, or GLB, after the chief sponsors), was supposed to help consumers understand how their banks, insurance companies, and other financial institutions handle personal information and give them some control over its use. Each institution was required to notify its customers about its privacy policy and consumers’ rights by July 1, 2001.

But many of those notices were more confusing than enlightening, and an incorrect email being circulated is making things worse. Now NCL and several other organizations are asking for changes in government regulations to standardize annual GLB privacy notices to clarify them. They also want it to be easier for consumers to exercise their rights under the law.

The most important thing for consumers to know is that financial institutions can share their “nonpublic personal information” (such as credit limits, account balances, or what types of products or services they purchase) with others. If financial institutions want to sell that information to “unaffiliated third parties” (other companies that aren’t legally related to them) they must give customers the right to say no. Advocates argue this right to “opt-out” should be explained in simple language and that consumers need a toll-free number, email, or pre-addressed postcard to respond.

Another point that may be unclear from the notices is that they can “opt-out” any time; GLB set no cut-off date. However, if the financial institution gives a deadline and the customer hasn’t said no by then, the information may be shared. And once someone else has it, it’s impossible to get it back.

Unfortunately, the anonymous email by an unknown author being circulated implies that people must act by July 1, 2001 or their credit information will be released to anyone who requests it. It also incorrectly refers to credit bureaus. Under a different law, the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), bureaus can only release information to those who have a legitimate need, such as companies from whom consumers are applying for credit, insurance, employment, or rental housing.

Consumers can’t “opt-out” of credit bureaus providing information from their credit files for these purposes. However, the FCRA does give consumers the right to block that information from being provided to lenders and insurers who want to send them offers they never requested. To avoid these “pre-screened” offers, consumers can call a toll-free number operated by the major bureaus, 888-567-8688.

National Consumers League applauds House passage of H.R. 3200 – National Consumers League

/in imported/by

November 12, 2009

Contact: 202-835-3323, media@nclnet.org

Washington, DC-The National Consumers League, the nation’s oldest consumer group, applauds the United States House of Representatives’ historic passage of the health reform bill, HR 3200. Since the 1930s NCL, has supported universal health care for all Americans. This legislation is a milestone toward that goal.

“We recognize substantively reforming our health care system is no easy task, and we support lawmakers’ efforts to unite stakeholders and work towards a higher quality system that is more patient-centered and cost-effective,” said Sally Greenberg, NCL Executive Director. “We look forward to the final law, which should ensure that effective and efficient care of the highest quality is accessible by all Americans.”

Key provisions of The Affordable Health Care for America Act include:

  • prohibiting insurance companies from denying coverage based on pre-existing medical conditions, imposing annual or lifetime benefit limits, or cancelling a policy when someone files expensive claims.
  • creating an “exchange” in each state where individuals and eligible small businesses could shop for insurance policies.
  • offering of a public insurance plan to compete with private companies.
  • expanding coverage to several million uninsured, including those who may not be able to obtain coverage through their employer or who may not have previously qualified for government programs.
  • expanding eligibility for Medicaid to individuals and families with incomes up to 150 percent of the poverty level.
  • reducing payments under the Medicare Advantage program, and enhancing the Medicare prescription drug program by phasing out a coverage gap.

For decades, NCL has been dedicated to achieving quality improvements to America’s health care system. In the 1930s, NCL’s Josephine Roche authored the first universal health care proposal and today, NCL is at the forefront of advocating for comprehensive health reform with legislation that is patient-centered and cost-efficient. NCL recently issued a statement calling the lack of comprehensive health care coverage “America’s albatross,” making our businesses less competitive and our workers less healthy. “We need to put partisan concerns aside and work NOW to ensure that the system is reformed. The cost of doing nothing is unthinkable.”

“We need to address why we are overpaying for care that is not making us healthier. Health reform will move us towards greater accountability, efficiency, accessibility, transparency, and quality,” said Greenberg. “It is essential that everyone have access to affordable health care or the system will remain broken.”

For more information about NCL’s work in health, visit www.nclnet.org/health.

###

Online auctions: An in-depth look – National Consumers League

/in imported/by

Online auctions are wildly popular; nearly one third of adults in the United States who go online have participated in them—an estimated 35.6 million people. Most auction-goers are happy with their experiences and confident that they won’t run into trouble. However, at NCL’s Fraud Center, online auctions have consistently ranked as the top complaint since that category was added to the database in 1997.The average loss per victim in 2000 was $326. Auction victims often say that they never thought about the risks or how to protect themselves—until it was too late. As part of an effort to educate auction-goers about how to take advantage of this exciting new marketplace and reduce the potential for problems, NCL commissioned this Harris Interactive survey with support from Tradenable, a major provider of escrow services. The survey was designed to find out how and why people participate in online auctions, how confident they are as buyers and sellers, how they usually conduct the auction transactions, what problems they encounter, and how they deal with those problems.

Why online auctions are so popular

The Internet opens a global marketplace to consumers, one in which they can find anything they’re looking for and compare prices easily, no matter where they live. For sellers, it provides access to a greatly expanded pool of potential customers, and the low cost of access makes it easy for individuals as well as businesses to offer goods and services.

Most of the survey respondents who participated in online auctions did so only as bidders. A smaller group has participated only as sellers. Though most of the people who participate in online auctions have done so between one and ten times (65 percent), 22 percent said they had participated more than 26 times.

Online auctions appeal to bidders mainly because they’re looking for bargains (43 percent), hard to find items (23 percent), or things they collect (21 percent). When survey respondents who don’t participate in online auctions were asked why, most said they simply weren’t interested (52 percent) or didn’t see anything they wanted (12 percent); few expressed concern that they would not get what they paid for as buyers (six percent) or thought that it would be too much of a hassle as sellers (three percent).

Online auction buyers’ experiences

Of those who have participated as bidders in online auctions, 83 percent have actually bought something. The average value of most purchases was $100 or less (75 percent), but 21 percent of buyers said the average value of their auction purchases was between $101 and $500.

The vast majority of those who participate in online auctions are very or somewhat confident that if they are the winning bidder they will get what they pay for from the seller (94 percent). People who are mostly sellers but have also bought on auctions are also confident they’ll get what they pay for (99 percent).

Feedback about sellers’ previous transactions is obviously valuable information for potential purchasers. But only half of those who mainly bid on auctions say that if feedback information is provided on the auction site, they always check it before bidding; 37 percent usually check. Those who mainly sell on online auctions are also cautious when they’re bidders; 68 percent say theyalways check the information about the seller’s track record before bidding; 20 percent usuallycheck.

They are also reluctant to bid on items if there is no information available on the auction site about a seller’s track record. More than three-quarters (77 percent) of those who mostly sell on online auctions say they won’t bid on items in that case. Fifty-three percent of those who are mostly bidders are also reluctant to bid in these cases. People who are mostly bidders are willing to look for information from other sources like government agencies, consumers groups, or the Better Business Bureau before deciding whether to make a bid (17 percent). Overall, 29 percent of auction participants would bid on items even if there were no information on the auction site about the seller.

The most common way that people who buy items in online auctions pay is by sending a check, cashier’s check, or money order directly to the seller (69 percent). Unfortunately, by the time the buyer discovers that there is a problem with the transaction, the check or money order has usually already been cashed. And if the seller encounters a problem with the buyer’s payment, such as a check bouncing, the merchandise may have already been shipped.

Credit cards offer more protection because buyers have the right under federal law to dispute the charges if the goods were misrepresented or never delivered. Payment by credit card can also be safer for the seller than accepting personal checks. However, the frequency with which the auction buyers paid by giving their credit card numbers directly to the sellers is relatively low, only 17 percent. Services offered by or through some auction sites that facilitate payment by credit card are clearly helpful. Nearly half of all those who bought items have made payments through those services (44 percent).

Escrow services are another way that auction buyers and sellers can protect themselves. For a small fee, an escrow service holds the buyer’s payment and forwards it to the seller upon the buyer’s receipt and approval of the item within an agreed upon inspection period. But overall, only six percent of those who have bought items have paid through an online escrow service—the same percentage as a much more dangerous method of payment: sending the seller cash. Use of escrow services among those who are mostly sellers when they buy items is 15 percent.

Despite the high confidence rate that people generally have in online auctions, four in ten (41 percent) buyers have had problems, including: receiving items much later than expected (20 percent), receiving items that were different than promised (11 percent), receiving damaged items (ten percent), and never receiving the items (ten percent).

Most people who experienced problems were able to resolve these problems with the sellers by themselves (62 percent). Other actions buyers took included: complaining to the auction site (29 percent), disputing the credit card charges (eight percent successfully, two percent unsuccessfully), making an insurance claim (four percent successfully, one percent unsuccessfully), using an online mediation service (one percent successfully, two percent unsuccessfully), and complaining to a government agency, consumer group, or the Better Business Bureau (two percent). Many said they never took any action to solve their problems (21 percent).

Online auction sellers’ experiences

Nearly a third (32 percent) of those who offered items for sale on online auctions have sold 11 or more items. Smaller numbers have sold fewer items (24 percent sold 1-2 items, 19 percent sold 3-5, 9 percent sold 6-10). Most offered items for sale valued at $100 or less on average (69 percent), but 20 percent of sellers said they offered items with average values of $101-$500.

More than half of the sellers (52 percent) said they had experienced problems with buyers, including: late payments (34 percent), never receiving payments (27 percent), buyers changing their minds (20 percent), checks bouncing (five percent), and buyers using stolen credit cards (one percent).

The majority of sellers who experienced problems resolved their problems with buyers themselves (66 percent). Other actions that sellers took included: complaining about the buyer to the auction site (49 percent), participating in private online mediation (seven percent), contacting the escrow service they used to accept payment (five percent), and using a collection agency (two percent). Only seven percent said they took no action.

Familiarity with escrow services

Unfortunately, 42 percent of the survey respondents who don’t typically use an escrow service aren’t familiar with the services. Another 30 percent don’t think it’s necessary to use them, and 19 percent don’t want to pay the fee. Online escrow services are convenient for both auction buyers and sellers. The fee, usually a small percentage of the final purchase price, can be paid by either party as they mutually agree. For sellers, escrow may be a less expensive option than participating in the credit card payment system, especially if the buyer pays the fee. For buyers, it can help ensure that they will get what they pay for—or they won’t have to pay.

Conclusion: what does this mean for online auction participants?

Online auctions can offer great benefits to both buyers and sellers. But as the survey shows, when a consumer pays before receiving the merchandise, or a seller ships the goods before the buyer’s payment clears, there is some risk involved. Even though most people have good intentions, things occasionally go wrong. And some people are irresponsible, or even downright dishonest, in their dealings with others.

Auction participants need to be aware of the risks and know how to protect themselves. While there aren’t any guarantees in life, it is possible to reduce the potential for trouble in online auction transactions by following some basic safety tips, including

  • Understand how the auction works;
  • Check out the seller before you bid;
  • Get the contact information of the person or company you’re dealing with;
  • Look for information about insurance for buyers;
  • Payment by credit card can protect both buyer and seller;
  • Consider using an escrow service.

It’s easy to get carried away in the excitement of online auctions. Common sense and caution are the keys to happy auction experiences.

Survey methodology

This Harris Interactive QuickQuerySM survey was conducted via the Harris Poll Online, within the United States, from December 19-21, 2000. The poll was conducted among 2,196 respondents, 18+ years of age. Figures for age within gender, race, education, region, employment, and income were weighted where necessary to bring them in line with their actual proportions in the online population. QuickQuery is an omnibus service that provides approximately 2,000 respondents in two days.

In theory, with a sample of this size and after weighting the data, one can say with 95 percent certainty that the results have a statistical precision of plus or minus 3 percentage points of what they would be if the entire adult population of the United States had been polled with complete accuracy. There are several other possible sources of error in all polls or surveys that are probably more serious than theoretical calculations of sampling error. They include question wording and question order, non-response, and screening. It is difficult or impossible to quantify the errors that may result from these factors.