Loss of Licence and salary continuance
This is a specialist insurance written by relatively few companies. Few appreciate the way that aviation medical regulations interact with the normal practice of insurers.
The problem is that in the search for cost-savings buyers - usually airlines - look at the cost and not the cover. This can cause serious problems for aircrew with health conditions - benign or serious - because of insufficient scrutiny of proposed changes of insurer or policy conditions.
A simple example is that policy A may cover psychological problems but B may not: CASA permit relicencing in specific circumstances while taking anti-depressives, most authorities do not. Consequently, the impact on the member may be very different.
Most specialist insurers provide lump sums for "permanent" licence denials - this can be difficult to determine because most authorities do not permanently cancel licences now given the dynamic change in medicine generally and human rights legislation. Its therefore important to ensure that any policy has checks and balances to protect members if there is disagreement without recourse to legal proceedings: examples are the medical referee process in BALPA's policies and ALPA's pilots benefit review board.
My experience in this area is that it is important for associations to provide impartial advice - either themselves or via a third party according to domicile and regulation. Its not always in members interest to embed a programme too closely and not offer alternatives - or at the least regularly tender that programme to ensure that the differing needs of members are protected by the Union's umbrella but sufficiently flexible to reflect individuals requirements.
Might be worth a look at BALPA's website and their in-house Independent Financial Advisor, BALPA financial Solutions. Its a different approach but gives a lot of flexibility.