That money they give the family of not well managed and invested would still finish sooner and the deceased family would still suffer.No amount can be enough but it is necessary to get it especially if the deceased had children and the money can help the children survive
Yeah that's why it should handed to the more responsible person in the family especially if the children are still very young to do anything tangible with the moneyThat money they give the family of not well managed and invested would still finish sooner and the deceased family would still suffer.
itI would say as much as possible, especially if the deceased has young children. But make sure the money will be well managed.
Some companies even go as far as employing a relative of the deceased that doesn't have a job to work with the company. That's to keep something coming from the company to the family.If the relative works or becomes your employee, then apart from receiving insurance money, he will also receive compensation from you and will also receive severance pay, the amount of which is adjusted according to the length of service.
I agree because money gotten might just finished in no time. So giving them a job is betterFor me, I think giving the family of the deceased a guaranteed source of income would be better than giving money.
If the wrong persons are even in charge of the money, it would not even get to be of any benefits to the direct dependents of the deceased.I agree because money gotten might just finished in no time. So giving them a job is better
That's true especially if the money gets into the hands of a greedy person . it is just going to be a huge lose to the deceased familyIf the wrong persons are even in charge of the money, it would not even get to be of any benefits to the direct dependents of the deceased.