The CIPD has welcomed the launch ofa specialist cyber police unit that will help employers crack down on e-fraud,computer hacking and Internet abuse.The National Hi-TechCrime Unit is the UK’s first countrywide law enforcement organisation to combatcomputer-based crime.As part of theNational Crime Squad, the unit will develop intelligence and support as well asco-ordinate law enforcement operations and offer expert advice to local policeand businesses.Mike Emmott, CIPDemployee relations adviser, said the crime squad will play an important roleadvising employers on best practice and how to counter computer hacking ande-fraud.”The workplace isbecoming increasingly virtual and crime is moving in the same direction so itmakes sense for the police to develop their expertise,” he said.The new body isfunded by £25m over three years and will be headed by Det Chief Supt Len Hynds.Annabel Abbs, HRdirector for Firefly Communications, welcomed the new force but feels itspowers need to be defined. “It signals that the Government is taking theInternet seriously as a form of communication,” she said.”As an HRpractitioner I would like to know what guidelines this force is working to.This squad could have access to personal files, which as an HR person I feelresponsible for. There needs to be a clear understanding of the remit of thesquad.”www.ncis.gov.uk New cybercops force secures backing of CIPDOn 24 Apr 2001 in Personnel Today Previous Article Next Article Comments are closed. Related posts:No related photos.
Comments are closed. …in briefOn 12 Mar 2002 in Personnel Today Previous Article Next Article This week’s news in briefEqual pay audit call Trade union Amicus is calling on the Government to introduce compulsoryequal pay audits. The move comes after three-quarters of the 6,000 companies itapproached to complete a pay audit refused to do so, while 25 per cent failedto respond. In all, only 50 firms agreed to carry out an audit. www.aeeu.org.ukSteel tariff jobs risk The general secretary of Amicus, Sir Ken Jackson, claims more than 5,000jobs could be lost in the UK because of the US tariffs on steel imports. Hesaid the US decision to load a 30 per cent tariff on imports could cost 18,000steel jobs in the European Union and 5,000 in the UK. The union estimates thatthe losses will occur as cheap steel imports flood into the EU. www.aeeu.org.ukKitemark launched Barbara Roche, Minister for Women, last week launched a gender equalitykitemark. The aim of the Castle Award, named after Barbara Castle whointroduced the Equal Pay Act in 1970, is to reward employers’ work in tacklingequal pay issues. www.womenandequalityunit.gov.uk/castleawardsRenaming trend Staff are being given fancy job titles instead of cash, research claims.According to the survey of 1,700 workers by Reed.co.uk, companies are using‘uptitling’ to motivate and retain staff when budgets are tight. Almost half ofthose questioned thought a new job title would improve their job satisfaction. www.reed.co.ukJobcentre strike fear Up to 10,000 Jobcentre and benefit office staff will strike unless theGovernment scraps plans to remove safety screens, the Public and CommercialService Union has warned. There are 225 new safety-screen free offices set toopen later this year, and 750 staff have already been on strike over theremoval of safety screens. www.pcs.org.uk Related posts:No related photos.
Discussions onlineOn 14 Nov 2006 in Personnel Today Related posts:No related photos. Comments are closed. Previous Article Next Article Appraisal grading schemesQ We are interested in finding out what other companies do with regards to grading staff in the appraisal process. Our company works on an A-D basis (with plus and minus shadings) as follows:A: exceeds expectations by a large marginB: exceeds expectations in most areas of the roleC: meets expectations in the roleD: does not reach expectations.However, comments from our management team reveal that staff view a C grade as only one step away from the lowest grade, and managers are worried that a C may be demotivating.Could you let me know how you grade your staff what concerns staff have with the schemes you operate and what the pluses and minuses are of the schemes you run?A I think that the three grades of ‘exceeds expectations’, ‘meets expectations’, and ‘requires further development’ make the middle standard less demotivating. But my query is how you define in practical terms what is good, excellent or bad. ‘Requires further development’ is fairly clear, but I find that distinguishing the difference between an employee with good performance and one with excellent performance is more difficult. We have key competencies, but these are also fairly vague, and I would appreciate any ideas on how I might define performance.A The only reason your managers are unsure is because you have given them four options to pick from rather than five.Perhaps you might want to consider relabelling your grading system. Rather than have A, B, C and D, consider exceptional, above average, average and needs development. This would eliminate employees associating the appraisal with college/school grades.A I have used many different grading (rating) methods over the years, but in the past few years I have reached the firm conclusion that the best approach is not to use them at all.I have successfully introduced new performance management processes in two organisations where there was no overall rating given to performance. Whichever scheme you use is bound to have a category that will apply to most staff, and it will demotivate those people that are awarded it. There are other, and I believe better, ways of ensuring performance management is handled openly and effectively. A In higher education, it has become the norm that students expect a 2:1 grade (out of a range including 1, 2.1, 2.2 , 3 and fail), irrespective of the standard they demonstrate. Unfortunately, in higher education, complicity in lowering standards to retain students and massage performance figures plays a large part in students’ elevated 2:1 expectations. When student (or employee) expectations around grading shrink to so narrow a range of acceptable marks, it is a problem. Rather than extend the list of possible marks (it wasn’t in my power to do that anyway), I focused on creating a culture where students developed a fuller and more productive relationship with the existing range. Sadly, that effort was rather against the tide.
Primary production was measured at a series of stations in austral summer 1996 in the vicinity of South Georgia. Five stations were occupied along a 700 km transect southeastwards towards the western tip of South Georgia. Three stations were located north of the Antarctic Polar Front (PF) with mean primary production of 0.41 g C m(-2) d(-1) compared to 0.54 g C m(-2) d(-1) for the stations south of the front. Three stations were in the shelf break and off-shelf region to the east of South Georgia where the lowest rates of primary production were recorded (mean 0.34 g C m(-2) d(-1)). At a further 4 stations northwest of the island, primary production was significantly greater: 0.8 to 2.5 g C m(-2) d(-1) (mean 1.5 g C m(-2) d(-1)). Photoinhibition was a marked feature of the production profiles, resulting in the underestimation of column production by 4 to 16%. An assessment is made of the primary production required to maintain a representative assemblage of metazooplankton around South Georgia composed of 30 g fresh mass (FM) m(-2) krill and 20 g FM m(-2) copepods. The total C requirement of both groups at maximum growth rate is estimated as 0.93 g C m(-2) d(-1), with 0.54 g C m(-2) d(-1) required to maintain basal metabolism (i.e. for zero growth). Local primary production rates are well in excess of the C demands for basal metabolism by the metazooplankton, and likewise the highest regional values exceed those for maximum metazooplankton growth. It is also estimated that the krill biomass required to sustain higher predators during their breeding season could be supported by local production at plausible maximum krill growth rate. In particular, high primary production found in this study to the northwest of South Georgia appears to be adequate to sustain maximum growth rate by krill when their biomass is 30 g FM m(-2), when krill production will exceed predator removal. It is already well known that advection from,higher latitudes is important in supplying energy to the South Georgia system. This study adds to the evidence that locally enhanced primary production is also important in supporting the local food web.
July 2, 2015 Share this article View post tag: News by topic Back to overview,Home naval-today Crowley Maritime Finishes Turnover of MSC’s Vessels Crowley Maritime Corp.’s global ship management group recently completed the successful turnover of the Military Sealift Command’s (MSC) T-AGOS/T-AGM fleet and is now responsible for the operation and maintenance of the organization’s five T-AGOS vessels and one T-AGM ocean surveillance ship.The vessels are USNS Victorious (T-AGOS 19), USNS Able (T-AGOS 20), USNS Effective (T-AGOS 21), USNS Loyal (T-AGOS 22) and USNS Impeccable (T-AGOS 23), and the T-AGM ocean surveillance ship is the USNS Invincible (T-AGM 24). The turnover phase began in mid-January, when a team of Crowley employees traveled to Sasebo, Japan, to meet with MSC officials and the incumbent ship manager to discuss change management.The T-AGOS/T-AGM fleet supports the Navy’s Surveillance Towed Array Sensor Systems (SURTASS) operations, the U.S. Air Force’s dual-band, phased array and parabolic dish radars and other government missions.The ships carry electronic equipment to process and transmit data via satellite to shore stations for evaluation.Image: US Navy View post tag: Crowley Maritime View post tag: Navy Authorities View post tag: vessels View post tag: Naval View post tag: turnover Crowley Maritime Finishes Turnover of MSC’s Vessels View post tag: MSC
Oxford University Student Union (OUSU) Council, Somerville JCR, and Magdalen JCR have each voted to donate hundreds of pounds to support the event sparking further controversy.OUSU and Somerville JCR both pledged £150 and Magdalen £200 to cover the costs of bringing the speakers to Oxford.OUJC condemned OUSU’s funding of the forum: “We believe that our students’ union and JCRs should not be supporting this event and therefore demand that their funding for the Oxford Radical Forum 2017 be withdrawn.”OUSU Communications Manager, Jo Gregory-Brough told Cherwell: “OUSU weren’t aware of any such allegations against the motion but take them very seriously. With this in mind, the OUSU Sabbatical team are looking into the allegations as a matter of urgency and from which a conclusion will be drawn regarding the funding.”Somerville JCR President Alex Crichton-Miller said: “ORF puts on panels for all sorts of currently relevant issues, and this absolutely does not mean it endorses each and every word the speakers have said in the past nor might say at the ORF.”Magdalen’s JCR Executive Committee released a joint statement:”We were unaware of the speakers at the time the motion came to be voted on. We condemn anti-Semitism in all forms.”This is not the first time that ORF has invited speakers with alleged ties to anti-Semitism. Max Blumenthal, who spoke in 2016, has been criticised for his 2013 book Goliath, Life and Loathing in Greater Israel, in which he compared Israel to Nazi Germany, advocated that the majority of Jews currently living in Israel be removed to make way for a Palestinian state, and referred to Israeli soldiers as ‘Judeo-Nazis’.Malia Bouattia and Max Blumenthal have not replied to Cherwell’s request for comment.Correction: The original version of this story (published 17/02/2017) carried the headline “Oxford Radical Forum speakers criticised for anti-Semitism ties”. We have amended the article and its headline to emphasise that the ties are alleged, and to make clear that criticism came from involved parties, and not from Cherwell. We have also clarified some of the alleged ties and contextualised them. We apologise for any upset or confusion caused. Bouattia was elected NUS President in 2016, but soon came under fire for stating that “with mainstream Zionist-led media outlets… resistance is resented as an act of terrorism”.The Home Affairs select committee said of her: “Referring to Birmingham University as a ‘Zionist outpost’ (and similar comments) smacks of outright racism, which is unacceptable, and even more so from a public figure such as the president of the NUS.”Another figure due to speak at ORF is Richard Seymour, a far-left blogger who previously spoke at at the forum in 2015.Seymour responded on Facebook to criticism of Jeremy Corbyn by Simon Weston, a British veteran of the Falklands war who suffered 46 per cent burns to his face after his ship was bombed, by writing “Seriously, who gives a shit about what Simon Weston thinks? If he knew anything he’d still have his face.”Later that year he wrote of an Israeli journalist reporting on Israel-Palestine “Fuck him, they should cut his throat”.He has also appeared multiple times on Press TV, the Iranian state broadcaster that has been accused of Holocaust denial and anti-Semitism, and wrote on his Leninology blog that “it’s sensible for occupied people to attack and kill British troops”, and “the poppies should be burned – not just a few, in a symbolic Islam4UK-style action, but all of them in a mass cremation; and any family members who actually sign up to wear a uniform of the armed forces in Afghanistan or anywhere else should be shunned, not loved.”In a statement Seymour apologised for his comments mocking Simon Weston and calling for the murder of an Israeli journalist, referring to them as “off-hand, off-colour statements made over a year ago in what I had assumed were private exchanges. Speakers at the Oxford Radical Forum (ORF), including controversial NUS President Malia Bouattia, have been condemned by Oxford University Jewish Society (OUJS) for alleged ties to anti-Semitism.ORF is described by the organisers as “a three day event for the radical left, held in Wadham”, although the College has not confirmed that they are hosting the event. There are currently seven speakers announced.OUJS said in a statement made to Cherwell: “OUJS stands in opposition to the decision of ORF 2017 to host Miriyam Aouragh and Malia Bouattia.“84 per cent of our voting members last year voted that they are unable to reconcile their Jewish identity with Bouattia’s presidency of the NUS, and 57 Jewish Society presidents across the country condemned her comments. Further, the Home Affairs Select Committee have condemned her ‘outright racism’ and an NUS investigation decided that her content had been anti-Semitic.“Last term, our own student union called for Bouattia to issue a full and formal apology, and should stand down otherwise. Jewish students are still waiting.“We believe that our community should not be inviting speakers who espouse anti-Semitism and hate speech. They should not be afforded a platform to spread their opinion.”ORF’s committee told Cherwell: “ORF is a weekend of events designed to critically interrogate current political issues from a range of left-wing perspectives, and has been a fixture of intellectual life at Oxford for almost a decade. We consider the speakers to be well qualified to take part in the specific debates to which they have been invited.“ORF is not committed to a unified political line and as such cannot and does not endorse all the views held by speakers. Its purpose is to enable critical exchange, self-reflection, and mutual questioning, and to contribute to vibrant and nuanced debates about key political issues of the day.” “These exchanges involved, as far as I was aware, a small number of friends who would know from the context that they were not intended literally or maliciously…“To be absolutely clear. I do not think that Simon Weston’s injuries deserve ridicule. I emphatically do not think that people who advocate for the West Bank settlers should have their throats cut… I am, of course, very sorry to anyone who was hurt.”Seymour declined to respond to these allegations in relation to ORF. He pointed Cherwell towards his earlier apology.Another speaker on the lineup this year is Miriyam Aouragh, a Dutch anthropologist and activist. In 2004, Aouragh attended a memorial service in Amsterdam for Ahmed Yassin, a Hamas founder and ‘spiritual leader’ who was killed by an Israeli helicopter gunship..In their statement to Cherwell, OUJS condemned her attendance as a tie to Hamas, describing the group as “a terrorist organisation whose charter issued in 1988 is overtly anti-Semitic, stating the need to kill Jews and referring to The Protocols of the Elders of Zion”.Speaking to Cherwell, Aouragh said: “Like many I was very angry about Israel’s murderous targeted killings campaign between 2000-2004, which saw hundreds of political activists and leaders assassinated when the popular uprising in 2000 broke out.“These war crimes were condemned across the political spectrum, especially the ‘collateral damage’ caused by extrajudicial killings using F16s, such as collapsing buildings with families in them and the killing of bystanders when cars were blown up.“One case was that of Ahmed Yassin of Hamas, an elderly man in a wheelchair living in a refugee camp in Gaza. I was part of a protest against the incredible violence of that period, many were making this argument, including the UN, the EU, as well as a large numbers of MPs in this country.”
New research has revealed that consumer spending on gluten- and wheat-free products is heavily based on trust, rather than price, promotion or advertising, according to Dr Schär UK.The gluten- and wheat-free specialist commissioned the research as part of a focus group study, whereby consumers were questioned about their shopping habits and what they wanted from the sector. It revealed that many consumers had taken so much care finding a product that was right for them, that they were unlikely to be tempted by new products or promotions.Dr Schär said it showed that their loyalty to products outweighed that of brands and manufacturers, with many of the gluten-free consumers choosing to buy products on their taste, quality and ingredients, rather than price and brand.There were four common reasons given for purchasing free-from food: convenience, key staples, favourites and kids. Many consumers admitted that they often bought products that ensured their families and children on a specialist diet did not feel marginalised at mealtimes, said the firm.Poor packaging, which left the consumer unsure if a particular product was suitable for them, was also highlighted as an issue that put consumers off trying new products.Retail brand manager Emma Herring said the research served as an important insight into the changing gluten-free consumer and their purchasing behaviour. “Many gluten- and wheat-free consumers have learnt instinctively not to trust new products and so rely on heritage products and brands that they know well.”“Respondents suggested a universal colour-coding system to be worked across all free-from brands to help make it easier to see whom each product was suitable for,” reported Dr Schär.>>Free-from brand in Lloyds Pharmacy concept store
Border Biscuits has removed 90% of the plastic from its packaging, in line with the UK Plastics Pact.As part of the pact, companies have committed to eliminating all unnecessary single-use plastics by 2025, as well as increasing the percentage of recyclable plastics used.This repackage follows a £1.6m investment by Borders. To achieve the 90% reduction in plastic, the plastic lid and tray were removed and replaced by recyclable cardboard.This reduced the weight of the packaging by 50% and allowed the company to double the amount of product on each pallet for transportation. It estimated this has reduced the business’ carbon footprint by 537 tonnes of CO2.“Innovating to reduce single-use plastic has been a key focus over the past 12 months and our new packaging means we can address the environmental concerns of our customers without compromising on the high quality of our beautifully crafted biscuits,” said Suzie Carlaw, marketing manager at Border Biscuits.The company has also updated its logo to modernise the brand.
FARMINGTON – Even though not all students are in school on any given day that doesn’t mean they aren’t getting meals in one form or another.With the school year starting in hybrid mode and only half the students coming to school everyday it became tricky to figure out how to serve meals to the rest of the students.Director of Food Services Andrew Hutchins first tried to have parents or guardians pick meals up at the school, but with the limitations of the work day, turnout wasn’t as big as he had hoped for.“Parents or guardians could come to the school and pick up a meal for the day, a breakfast and a lunch. Because our staff is still feeding students who are in school breakfast and lunch we had a one hour pick up window where parents could pick up meals at the kitchen door…some parents are working or are at home helping kids so it was difficult for a lot of families to hit that window,” said Hutchins.The lack of meals getting out called for an alternative, so Hutchins and Food Services started planning a meal delivery system, which went live on Feb. 1 and was an immediate success.“It exploded right off the bat. Within a couple of days we were pretty much at the capacity to make those meals, which is about 125 meals a day,” said Hutchins.Food Services uses a van and station wagon to deliver the meals making on average 60-65 stops a day. The geography of the district makes it a little tricky to reach all the locations, so some students are bringing extra meals home with them“That’s helping us out a lot especially for the folks who are way out,” Hutchins said.Food Services is also not limited to just students who are enrolled. Any child age 0-18 is eligible for a meal, even if they are home schooled or not yet enrolled in school. The cost of serving meals is directly reimbursed by the USDA and as of right now has no impact on the RSU 9 budget.“We’re reimbursed a set amount for every meal that we serve. We’re not reimbursed on our cost necessarily, but we are reimbursed a flat rate per breakfast and per lunch through the USDA,” said Hutchins. “The only capacity we have is the amount of meals we are able to produce and serve.”
On June 25, 2013, the world of rowing lost a legend. Please share your reflections below.