Page Six 



below.) The total annual premium for each individual is 

 thus ascertained. Owing to the method of computation used, 

 the ratio of premium to salary is id(^ntical for all members 

 of the j>;ioup. According to tentative computations, based 

 on a standard group insurance taV)le and complying with a 

 plan adapted to Museum conditions, the rate for each em- 

 ployee participating would be in the neighborhood of 13^% 

 or 2% of his salary. If the Trustees should contribute one- 

 half of the group premium, the insurance would cost the 

 employee about ^% or 1% of his salary. Most companies 

 guarantee their rates for a period of five j^ears. In any event, 

 assuming, as we safely may, that the institution would have 

 an annual employee turn-over of at least 15%, the actual 

 individual premiums would remain approximately stationary. 

 For the taking in of new and younger emplo3'ees in this pro- 

 portion would ofTset the increase due to increased age, in 

 the provisional individual premiums of the older employees, 

 and would consequently keep the actual individual rate more 

 or less constant. 



The most convincing way of showing the advantages of 

 group insurance is by illustration: 



Number of 





ProvL 



nonal hid 



ividual 



ToL 



il Provisional 



Employees 



Age 



Premium per 



11,000 



Premium per $1,000 



4 



29 





$6.40 







$25.60 



7 



40 





7.85 







54.95 



10 



51 





14.78 







147.80 



2 



60 





29.39 







58.78 



23 Total premium per $1,000 for 



the group $287.13 

 Actual individual premium per SI ,000— $12 . 49 



