Charity fundraisers are not the only people seeking donations online. For a list of various sites asking for money, some humorous and some plain odd, read Beg for it at Yahoo! Life. Howard Lake | 9 August 2000 | News 14 total views, 1 views today AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis Advertisement Begging for it AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis About Howard Lake Howard Lake is a digital fundraising entrepreneur. Publisher of UK Fundraising, the world’s first web resource for professional fundraisers, since 1994. Trainer and consultant in digital fundraising. Founder of Fundraising Camp and co-founder of GoodJobs.org.uk. Researching massive growth in giving.
BOXMATE is ingenuity on the farmThrough the years there has been a plethora of ingenuity happening on America’s farms. Add Indiana-based BOXMATE to the list, a product of Terre Haute, Indiana farmers who comprise Innovative Ag Systems. At Commodity Classic this year Tim Sarver gave HAT and a gathering crowd a quick demonstration of nesting and flipping a seed box with just one person at the BOXMATE controls.“So you drive in with your forklift with the seed box into the BOXMATE. The self-guided arms align with the stopping plates at the back to make sure you stop at the right place. Hop off the forklift, latch it, raise the BOXMATE up, spin it and when it comes down the latch will release itself on that arm. Then you go back up and set it on the height restraint and you’re ready for the next box to flip. Easily flip 30 boxes in one hour with one man and a forklift.”Not only does the work become a one-man job, but Sarver says increased safety on the job is a huge plus.“Safety is so important no matter whether you’re a farmer or a retailer,” he said. “One injury and the insurance claims and the workmen’s comp claims from that injury can put a real cost dampener onto the farmer or to that business. Nobody can afford an injury. If it’s a farmer you can’t afford to be injured in the spring of the season when you’re handling seed boxes. Your time is too valuable. We’ve taken the heavy lifting and the awkward twisting from manually lifting seed boxes out of it with this product. So we’ve made a safe product that’s easy, simple to use and has a fit on a lot of operations.”Marty and John Evans are part of the family effort to create, manufacture and patent BOXMATE, which retails for $3,995 and simply requires an air compressor. Hear more in the HAT interview:BOXMATE Terre Haute Farmers Introduce BOXMATE SHARE Home Indiana Agriculture News Terre Haute Farmers Introduce BOXMATE Facebook Twitter Previous articleVilsack Has Concerns about Syngenta China DealNext articleMorning Outlook Andy Eubank By Andy Eubank – Mar 9, 2016 SHARE Facebook Twitter
Data Provider Black Knight to Acquire Top of Mind 2 days ago Commentary from city leaders of Minnesota and New York said that all Americans should have access to homeownership, but “we are failing badly” at achieving this ideal, according to insight from City Lab. “In Brooklyn and Minneapolis, where we are city council members, skyrocketing prices push families out of the neighborhoods where they’ve lived for years,” the commentary said. “It’s impossible for young people to find a place to rent, much less own. Homelessness is at record levels, and in cities like Detroit, as many as one in five renters face eviction, part of a nationwide eviction epidemic.”The authors of the piece—Lisa Bender, President of the Minneapolis City Council and Brad Lander, Deputy leader for policy for the New York City Council—are members of Local Progress and last week began a three-day event in Durham, North Carolina, to address housing issues. Local Progress is a national network of “progressive elected officials” from cities and other local governments across the country. “Seventy years ago, the Housing Act of 1949 set the goal “of a decent home and a suitable living environment for every American,” but it has been decades since Washington was of any real help on affordable housing,” the authors wrote.The commentary adds that the removal of exclusionary zoning and building more housing is necessary to address the “imbalance of supply and demand,” but alone will not solve for displacement and eviction. A report by the Los Angeles Times reveals that single-family zoning in California will soon be a thing of the past, as legislation is making it easier for homeowners to convert garages into residential spaces and freestanding homes. “We’re on the precipice of single-family zoning functionally not existing,” said Ben Metcalf, former Director of the state’s Department of Housing and Community Development.Durham, North Carolina, in September amended ordinances for higher density, “undoing decades-old vestigaes” of discrimination that have prevented African-Americans from owning homes. The ordinance, known as “Expanding Housing Choices,” amends zoning rules in areas near downtown to allow for higher density. City and county planners believe this could stabilize home prices as the market grows. Oregon’s HB 2001 went into effect on August 8, and mandates that cities with a population of more than or equal to 25,000 to allow middle-housing types on lots previously earmarked for the development of detached single-family housing. Previous: Top Markets for Home-Flipping Investors Next: Residential Real Estate on “Shaky Ground” in Daily Dose, Featured, News Subscribe Demand Propels Home Prices Upward 2 days ago About Author: Mike Albanese Governmental Measures Target Expanded Access to Affordable Housing 2 days ago Demand Propels Home Prices Upward 2 days ago Print This Post Housing Crisis Housing Market 2019 2019-10-14 Mike Albanese Governmental Measures Target Expanded Access to Affordable Housing 2 days ago The Best Markets For Residential Property Investors 2 days ago Share Save Related Articles Servicers Navigate the Post-Pandemic World 2 days ago Studying the Affordability Crisis Across America Mike Albanese is a reporter for DS News and MReport. He is a University of Alabama graduate with a degree in journalism and a minor in communications. He has worked for publications—both print and online—covering numerous beats. A Connecticut native, Albanese currently resides in Lewisville. Sign up for DS News Daily Data Provider Black Knight to Acquire Top of Mind 2 days ago October 14, 2019 990 Views Servicers Navigate the Post-Pandemic World 2 days ago The Week Ahead: Nearing the Forbearance Exit 2 days ago Tagged with: Housing Crisis Housing Market 2019 The Best Markets For Residential Property Investors 2 days ago Home / Daily Dose / Studying the Affordability Crisis Across America
Department Of Justice(NEW YORK) — Two Russians who ran illegal high-stakes poker games near Coney Island and at one point ordered a building that housed a rival’s poker game be set on fire are now facing life in prison.Lenny Gershman, 35, and Aleksey Tsvetkov, 39, on Tuesday were convicted of illegal gambling, loansharking, extortion, arson and marijuana distribution charges following a three-week trial in Brooklyn federal court. Both men also were convicted of pistol-whipping someone they accused of stealing marijuana from their stash house, shattering his teeth.“Today’s verdicts hold Gershman and Tsvetkov responsible for years of using intimidation, violence and their association with Russian organized crime to inflict crimes on our local communities, including carrying out beatings in broad daylight and committing arson in the dead of night, endangering the lives of tenants and New York City firefighters,” said Richard Donoghue, U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York. Gershman and Tsvetkov were linked to Russian members of organized crime called the “Thieves in Law.”On a given night, stakes at their illegal poker games reached hundreds of thousands of dollars. When they ordered their rival’s building set ablaze in 2016, a small boy was trapped inside and firefighters were hurt in the rescue, prosecutors said.Tsvetkov was caught on video beating an extortion victim in the middle of a street outside an auto body shop in the Gravesend section of Brooklyn.“This investigation and trial illuminated clues that solved international and domestic crimes committed by members of an Eastern European organized crime syndicate operating in Brooklyn,” said James Hunt, special agent in charge of the New York office of the Drug Enforcement Administration. Copyright © 2018, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.
Gregory_DUBUS/iStock(NEW YORK) — A new investigation by the Illinois attorney general’s office has identified 500 priests and clergy members with credible claims of sexual abuse against them, all of whom have not been previously identified by church officials and some of whom are still active within the church.On Wednesday, outgoing Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan released the preliminary findings of an investigation that her office launched in August of this year.Before her office’s investigation, the six diocese in Illinois had publicly named 140 priests with claims against them. After Madigan’s investigation began, the Catholic Church named an additional 45 priests themselves.But Madigan’s investigation has found 500 separate priests and clergy with credible abuse claims against them, according to Maura Possley, the communications director for the attorney general.“Because I know that the church has too often ignored survivors of clergy sexual assault, I want to share the initial findings from our work,” Madigan said in a statement released along with her preliminary findings on Wednesday.The Illinois report is the latest update in connection with a string of ongoing investigations into sex abuse within the Catholic church across the country.The names of the 500 priests and clergy have not been publicly released by Madigan’s office and Possley noted that the investigation is ongoing.Possley confirmed that some of the 500 priests and clergy are active ministry, but did not disclose how many and noted that the investigation into the accusations against them continues.Of the 185 priests and clergy identified by the Archdiocese of Chicago and the five other diocese in Illinois, each individual is listed as either deceased or liaised, which means they have been removed from the church, except for three individuals in Springfield who were classified as “not active in ministry.”In the statement released by Madigan’s office, it notes that Madigan “anticipates additional names will be disclosed as her office’s investigation continues.”“While the findings are preliminary, they demonstrate the need for and importance of continuing this investigation,” Madigan said in the statement.Madigan chose not to seek re-election for a fifth term so she will be leaving office in January, but her successor, Kwame Raoul, posted on Twitter Wednesday that he is “committed to continuing this work when I begin my term as attorney general.”Madigan’s report states that the her office “found multiple examples where the Illinois Dioceses failed to notify law enforcement or DCFS [Department of Children and Family Services] of allegations they received related to clergy sexual abuse of minors” and noted that different dioceses used different criteria to determine whether a claim against an individual should be considered credible.“While the Illinois Dioceses have touted their ‘independent audits’ as evidence that they are adequately responding to clergy sexual abuse allegations, the audits are seemingly not designed to discover clergy abuse, but rather are perfunctory, ‘check the box’ exercises done in a routine manner by the same entity nationwide, using a process that does not appear to involve a systematic review of the contents of files or the decisions a diocese made,” the report states.Cardinal Blase Cupich, the archbishop of Chicago, released a statement expressing his “profound regret of the whole church for our failures to address the scourge of clerical sexual abuse.”“There can be no doubt about the constant need to strengthen our culture of healing, protection, and accountability. While the vast majority of abuses took place decades ago, many victim-survivors continue to live with this unimaginable pain,” Cupich said in his statement.The archdiocese noted in the statement that they “stand ready to cooperate with all institutions and agencies that care for children.”There are now at least 16 jurisdictions across the country that have launched investigations into clerical sex abuse following the release of a Pennsylvania grand jury report detailing the alleged cover-up of decades of abuse by hundreds of Catholic priests.In addition to the ongoing Illinois investigation, officials in Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Virginia and the District of Columbia — as well as the Archdiocese of Anchorage in Alaska — told ABC News their offices were reviewing their options and considering taking similar action.Copyright © 2018, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.
Drew Angerer/Getty Images(WASHINGTON) — Attorney General Bill Barr announced Thursday the federal government will be resuming capital punishment.In the announcement, the U.S. Department of Justice said the decision was made related to “five death-row inmates convicted of murdering, and in some cases torturing and raping, the most vulnerable in our society — children and the elderly.”The DOJ further added that Barr had asked Acting Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons to “schedule to executions” of those five individuals.“The Justice Department upholds the rule of law — and we owe it to the victims and their families to carry forward the sentence imposed by our justice system,” Barr said in the announcement.According to the Justice Department, the inmates to be executed include Daniel Lewis Lee, a member of a white supremacist group who murdered a family of three and threw them into the Illinois Bayou in Arkansas in 1999. Another is Lezmond Mitchell, who stabbed to death a 63-year-old woman and forced her granddaughter to sit next to her dead body on a “30 to 40-mile drive” before then murdering her as well. He was sentenced in 2003.Also to be executed is Wesley Ira Purkey, who was sentenced in 2003 for the rape and murder of a 16-year-old girl, whose remains he dismembered dumped into a sewage pond. The DOJ adds he also was convicted on state charges for bludgeoning an 80-year-old woman to death with a claw hammer.Alfred Bourgeois is now scheduled for a Jan. 13, 2020, execution after his 2004 sentencing for the torture, sexual molestation and murder of his toddler daughter. The last newly scheduled execution is for Dustin Lee Honken, who shot and killed five people, including a single mother and her 10- and 6-year-old daughters, and was sentenced in 2004.DOJ says all executions will take place at U.S. Penitentiary Terre Haute, Indiana, and will take place between December 2019 and January 2020.Amnesty International, which calls the death penalty “the ultimate cruel and inhuman punishment,” released a statement decrying the move.“The Trump administration’s decision to restart federal executions after a 16-year hiatus is outrageous. It is the latest indication of this administration’s disdain for human rights,” Amnesty International USA executive director Margaret Huang said in a statement.The issue of the death penalty has been a tug-of-war between states and the federal government.According to the Death Penalty Information Center, 78 federal defendants have been sentenced to death between 1988 and 2018. Only three have been executed and 12 were removed from death row.The last person to be put to death by the federal government was Louis Jones Jr. a Gulf War Veteran who raped and killed a fellow solider and his lawyers blamed it on Iraqi nerve gas. He was put to death in 2003 and before that Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma City bomber.In late May, New Hampshire became the latest state to ban the death penalty on the state level. Prior to the New Hampshire vote, there were 30 states that still had the death penalty, though four of those states have moratoriums in place banning executions.One such moratorium was put in place in California in March, which was significant because the Golden State has a sizable death row population but hadn’t performed an execution for years. Copyright © 2019, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.
Comments are closed. The Government has announced plans to review the law on consultation overcollective redundancies. But new obligations created by the tribunals havealready made it a trap for unwary employers, reports Nicholas RobertsonThere is a lot of speculation at the moment about the state of the Britisheconomy. If there is a downturn, this will inevitably mean a correspondingincrease in the number of large scale redundancies. For many employers thiswill mean getting to grips with the current thinking on their duty to consultstaff where collective redundancies are proposed. Ensuring that all the staff receive the news at the same time is difficult.Personnel director Allan Johnson of steel giant Corus recently refutedaccusations that the company did not consult with staff before it announcedover 6,000 redundancies. He said, “Once announced, the proposals were bignews and were straight on the news wires within one minute, but not beforeconsultative meeting had begun in every plant affected.” As Johnston’s experiences demonstrate, collective redundancies are nevereasy. Preparation and advanced planning will go a long way to smoothing thepath. However, as a result of three recent tribunal decisions employers need tobe fully up to speed on their legal obligations as well and factor these intotheir planning. The difficulty is that those who take a common sense approachmay easily find themselves in hot water. Basic rules on collective consultation The basic principle is that an employer should consult with appropriaterepresentatives of employees affected by large scale redundancies. The duty toconsult arises where the employer is: proposing to make redundant 20 or moreemployees; from any one establishment; in any 90-day period. The first three elements of this duty have recently been reviewed by thecourts, and on each occasion interpreted in a manner designed to give maximumprotection to employees. The penalty for failing to consult in accordance withlegal obligations is a maximum of 90 days’ remuneration. Is it a “proposal” or an option? Scotch Premier Meat v Burns In this recent case the company reviewed its business operations following adownturn in trading. There was a board meeting on 15 April in which it wasdecided the business would either be sold as a going concern or closed and theland sold. If the business was closed then more than 150 employees would losetheir jobs. This meant that there should have been at least a 90-dayconsultation process. The closure operation was subsequently followed throughand completed by 1 June, by which time the redundancies had gone through. The employees claimed there had been a failure to consult in accordance withthe employer’s obligations, an allegation which the company defended on theground that there had not been sufficient time to consult. This meant it wasnecessary to decide when the company was first proposing to dismiss staff byreason of redundancy. The employment tribunal decided that the employer had proposed to dismissstaff from 15 April, even though this was not the only option under activeconsideration. The company had gone a fair way down the road of formulating theredundancy option even though there was an alternative which would not havenecessitated redundancies. Consequently, the tribunal decided the company”proposed” redundancy on 15 April. Since consultation had not startedat all during April, there was a breach of the legislation. The EAT accepted this finding was open to the tribunal, and refused tooverturn the decision. This analysis of the point at which the employer was “proposing”to dismiss is puzzling. It is difficult to understand how an employer can be”proposing” redundancy when it is actively and genuinely consideringalternative options. It is not what most people would understand by the term. In many cases the point will not be crucial. Employers are no longer obligedto consult “at the earliest opportunity”. They merely have to consultin good time and in accordance with the minimum period laid down by statute. Ifthe employers here had been able to allow 90 days for the consultation periodthen it would not have mattered whether the employer first proposed redundancyon 15 April or subsequently. However, since the tribunal found there had beenless than adequate consultation, the start date became crucial. Is the employer proposing “redundancies”? GMB v Man Truck Following a merger, the employer wanted to harmonise the terms andconditions of two groups of employees. As a result it gave notice oftermination of the old contract and accompanied this with an offer ofemployment on new terms. The employer wanted all members of staff to accept thenew offer as there were to be no job losses. The employees claimed there hadbeen a breach by the employer of its obligations to consult on a collectivebasis. The employer claimed there was no need to consult as no-one was beingmade redundant. The EAT rejected the argument. It confirmed that the term”redundancy” has an extended meaning for the purpose of thecollective consultation obligations. It pointed out that under the legislation,collective consultation is required where 20 or more employees are beingdismissed for reasons which are not related to the individuals concerned. Inthis case the old contracts were terminated by the employer. Consequently therewere dismissals. These were unconnected with the capability or conduct of theemployees, and so the collective consultation obligations were triggered. Are the redundancies from one “establishment”? Mills & Allen v Bulwich The employer is only obliged to consult if 20 or more employees are beingmade redundant from any one establishment. The legislation does not define theterm “establishment” but the meaning had been relatively clear-cutuntil recently. The few reported cases in this area have tended to focus onwhether satellite offices should be aggregated with main offices or whetherthey should be treated as separate for the purposes of establishing whether thethreshold is met. In the Mills case, however, the employer had a number ofsites across the country. There was a direct sales force, which included theapplicant, of which 23 were made redundant. The employer took the view that itwas not required to consult collectively because the Manchester office, wherethe employee was based, had only two redundancies. But the applicant claimedthe employer had been obliged to consult on a collective basis. The applicant’s claim was upheld by both the employment tribunal and theEAT. According to the tribunal, the direct sales staff were autonomous andtreated as a separate entity within the organisation – they were not reallylinked with the office out of which they worked. Redundancies were announced asapplying to the direct sales force. On that basis the tribunal decided the”establishment” was the employer’s direct sales team and not theManchester office. Consequently, there had been a breach of the legislation. This is undoubtedly the most significant of the three cases. Until now itwas commonly understood that an establishment meant a physical location. Thisis the first time, in any reported case, that a tribunal has taken a departmentlocated across a number of separate sites and treated that as an establishment.This seems to be a very artificial interpretation of the word”establishment”. No one speaking in an ordinary non-legal contextwould describe a sales force as an establishment. Unfortunately, we understand that the employers in this case have decidednot to appeal to the Court of Appeal, which means this case will be theyardstick by which future cases are judged, for the time being at least. It islikely to mean that employers will have to consult more frequently than atpresent or risk indirectly breaking the law. Nicholas Robertson is a partner in the employment department at Rowe& Maw A victory against common senseOn 1 Mar 2001 in Personnel Today Previous Article Next Article Related posts:No related photos.