Beazley vs 
CFC: How Do They Compare for Employment Practices Liability Insurance?
Beazley insures EPL and advertises limits up to US $20 million; CFC includes employment-practices liability in its product and notes California eligibility limits.
Beazley sells EPL on its own or bundled, with advertised limits up to $20 million for employers of up to 30,000 staff. CFC writes EPL only inside its US management-liability package and declines California-domiciled and publicly traded businesses. 1,2,3
What Are the Key Differences Between Beazley and CFC Employment Practices Liability Insurance?
Standalone EPL vs Package Only
Beazley writes EPL as its own policy or inside ExecuGuard with D&O and fiduciary. CFC declines standalone EPL, so you only get it by buying its full management-liability package. Choose Beazley if you want EPL alone or need high limits; consider CFC only if you want a single package and aren't in California or publicly traded. 1 2 3
Who Qualifies
Beazley considers employers in all industries with up to 30,000 employees, including harder-to-place classes, and routes healthcare through Beazley Remedy. CFC declines California-domiciled businesses and US public companies for this package. If you're in either group, Beazley is the option here. 1 3
Limits, Extras and Claims
Beazley publishes limits up to $20 million, lets you choose between insurer-appointed and self-chosen defense, and adds sublimits for immigration, OSHA and wage-and-hour defense, with dedicated employment claims staff. CFC publishes no EPL limit; its section covers claims from employees or third parties such as customers and can add wage-and-hour, immigration and workplace-violence costs. CFC claims go to a dedicated adjuster by phone, email or online form. 1 3 6
What Should You Confirm in Beazley and CFC Employment Practices Liability Insurance Quotes?
- If you only want EPL, ask for Beazley standalone; CFC won't write it alone. 1 3
- If you're California-domiciled or public, skip the CFC request. 3
- Get CFC's EPL limit on the quote and compare it with Beazley's $20 million maximum. 1 3
- Ask whether wage-and-hour damages are covered or only defense: Beazley Workplace Protect versus CFC's extension. 1 3
Beazley vs CFC Employment Practices Liability Insurance Compared
Beazley vs CFC: Employment Practices Liability Insurance: documented features by provider
| Criteria | Beazley Employment Practices Liability | CFC Employment Practices Liability |
|---|---|---|
| Who It’s For | Beazley says it considers employers in all industries with up to 30,000 employees, with no stated employee-count limit for staffing firms, and describes an appetite for harder-to-place classes such as law firms, hospitality, high-tech, healthcare, retail and transportation; healthcare risks are instead written through Beazley Remedy. 1Company-reported. EPL product page eligibility description; actual acceptance depends on underwriting review of a specific applicant. | CFC's brochure lists California-domiciled business and US publicly traded companies among the risks it declines for the package that carries this EPL coverage. 3Company-reported. Brochure's 'What we decline' list; underwriting still applies to any individual business. |
| Coverage Features | The EPL policy covers a broad range of discrimination, harassment and other "inappropriate employment conduct" claims, lets the policyholder choose between "duty to defend" and "pay on behalf" claim handling, and includes industry-specific wordings for classes such as law firms, accountants, staffing firms and PEOs. 1Company-reported. EPL product page coverage description; exclusions and conditions are set by the issued policy. Beazley lists sublimited extensions for immigration-practices defense costs and OSHA proceedings, and a wage-and-hour defense-costs sublimit subject to underwriting; standalone wage-and-hour indemnity (not just defense costs) is sold separately through Beazley's Workplace Protect product. 1Company-reported. EPL product page; sublimit amounts are not published and appear only on a quote. | CFC says its employment practices liability section gives cover to the entity, directors, officers, management personnel and employees for claims brought by employees or third parties. 3Company-reported. Brochure's 'Employment practices liability' description; the issued policy wording determines who and what is actually covered. CFC says it can include cover for wage and hour violations, immigration investigations, and costs following a workplace violence event as part of employment practices liability. 3Company-reported. Brochure's 'Employment practices liability' description and 'What else is in the policy?' list; availability of each extension depends on underwriting. |
| Role in This Line | Beazley underwrites employment practices liability (EPL) coverage as a standalone product on its dedicated EPL page and as one of three coverages bundled in its ExecuGuard package policy alongside D&O and fiduciary liability. 1,2Company-reported. US EPL as described on the two reviewed product pages; does not establish which entity issues a particular policy. | CFC includes employment practices liability only inside its US Management Liability package. Its brochure lists 'standalone EPL' among the risks it declines, so a business cannot buy this coverage from CFC on its own. 3Company-reported. Brochure's 'What we decline' list, which pairs standalone EPL with California-domiciled business as declined risks. |
| Claims Support | Beazley says it has dedicated employment claims personnel, including a named EPL claims focus-group leader, who work with outside employment lawyers across the country to resolve claims; no claims-outcome statistics are published on the page. 1Company-reported. EPL product page team listing; claims-handling quality is not independently assessed. | CFC provides a US claim-notification route by phone, email and online form, and says a dedicated claims adjuster manages a claim from notification through resolution. 6Company-reported. Claims page as read on 2026-09-23; not specific to EPL claim outcomes or timing. |
