Unlike, say, the French, Ireland’s bench made a big impact with Sean Cronin, Cian Healy and Ian Madigan particularly bright eyed and bushy-tailed. The game itself was tailor-made for Madigan – coming on against tiring, second-tier opponents with lots of space to give the box of tricks the full outing. Tougher tests lie ahead, but Schmidt has stuck with Madigan as his game-changing closer despite some pretty average form for Leinster, and he continues to produce the goods for Ireland.Bench impact: Ian Madigan made an impression off the bench (Pic Inpho)Taking centre stageWhen Joe Schmidt finalised his RWC squad, Darren Cave was a surprise inclusion – he had an eye-catching warm up series, but has never quite convinced at international level. It turns out Joe Schmidt’s logic was sound – of the specialised centre in the training squad, Gordon D’Arcy was too old, Noel Reid wasn’t ready and other alternatives (Stuart McCloskey, Luke Marshall) were not selected for the audition, so Cave would go as cover for Robbie Henshaw and Jared Payne. All clear? Well, not so much, for when Henshaw got injured, it was Luke Fitzgerald who stepped into the vacant 12 shirt. Fitzgerald’s stop-start international career and his lack of recent game time in that shirt had many worried but he had a sound game, particularly in defence. Fitzgerald is undoubtedly a player with more potential to influence a game at this level, but you have to wonder why a valuable squad choice was spent on Cave if he wasn’t going to be pressed into action.Midfield conundrum: If Luke Fitzgerald was picked at 12, why was Darren Cave included in the squad?Worry. There’s always a worry TAGS: Canada Band of Brothers: Ireland move on with Romania Ireland vs CanadaIreland team at the end of the matchMandatory Credit ©INPHO/Billy Stickland The warm-ups were a bad dream, Ireland’s bench strength and Iain Henderson’s big future are all covered LATEST RUGBY WORLD MAGAZINE SUBSCRIPTION DEALS By Whiff of CorditeIreland opened their World Cup 2015 campaign with a comprehensive and sparky hit out over Canada. Ireland were never expected to lose the game, but then we said that about Georgia in 2007!Warm ups…are just warm upsTurns out that warm ups are…um…warm ups after all. Ireland had shown uncharacteristic fragility in defence and more characteristically, an inability to score tries in their summer outings. The nation fretted if the team were undercooked, or whether certain players were carrying injuries. It led to spurious rumour upon spurious rumour, but it turns out they were actually just warming up. Yesterday’s game played at a much higher intensity than in August. Ireland even rolled out a few attacking moves and scored some aesthetically pleasing tries – I know, the horror!Easy on the eye: Ireland cut loose with eight tries against Canada including Dave Kearney (Pic Inpho)Superstar-in-waitingIain Henderson has spent the last two seasons knocking on the door of the Ireland XV without managing to displace Big Dev or Peter O’Mahony, while creating an impact off the bench. In Saturday’s game Henderson announced himself to the world with a barnstorming performance, turning over, hitting hard, carrying with venom, before stepping up and scoring a try. Henderson has few obvious weaknesses and you could see him being one of the breakout stars of the tournament.To the manor born: Iain Henderson has made a big impression for Ireland (Pic Inpho)Impactful bench Ireland’s path to the semi-finals has become a national obsession. Our RWC high water mark. The becomes clearer through winning our pool and avoiding the All Blacks in the quarter-finals. There was both bad and good news from the other tournament games over the weekend. The France-Italy game was the poorest of the weekend, with a litany of errors, no structure or flowing rugby shown by either of the backlines. Both teams look extremely vulnerable to Schmidt-ball with loads of tackles, accurate ruck ball and pre-packaged attacking structures. That, however, would bring up Argentina, who had the All Blacks on the rack for 45 minutes and looked extremely comfortable in their rarefied company. The benefits of four years in the Rugby Championship looked obvious, and Juan Martin-Hernandez picked up where he left off in 2007. While the path to the pool top spot looks solid, for that reason, progressing further just got more precarious.To see all of Rugby World’s latest subscription deals click here
The England coach has injuries to contend with ahead of the championship but no worry – Adam Hathaway has selected the men he needs for the Twickenham opener The rest of the bench virtually picks itself, although Tommy Taylor is having a decent crack at breaking into the hooker ranks. It is easy to see Haskell starting later in the tournament but after such a long time off he will most likely be a bench bunny against the French. Jones could still pull a rabbit out of the hat, though – he has done that before.For the latest Rugby World subscription offers, click here. Youngs is Jones’s preferred scrum-half – he has started 11 of the 13 games on Fast Eddie’s watch with Danny Care starting twice, both in the Six Nations.Dan Robson, tearing it up at Wasps, was in the 45-man EPS but tellingly not in the 33-man party which had a couple of days’ training in Brighton this month, whilst both Care and Youngs got a trip to the beach and a stick of rock. They will be doing the honours against France.Front row – Ellis Genge, Dylan Hartley (capt) and Dan ColeGenge was omitted from the EPS that Jones announced in December, but with Mako Vunipola and Joe Marler both crocked he should get a look-in. He put in a monstrous display for Leicester against Saracens, in Richard Cockerill’s last game in charge, and an even better one against Wasps a week later. Even though this is throwing him in at the deep end, he looks ready to rumble.With the two first-choice looseheads injured, Ellis Genge is ready to seize his chance (Pic: Getty)Jones has already said that if Hartley is fit and in the 23 he will be captain. That’s bad news for Jamie George but at least the skipper has been wrapped up in cotton wool whilst serving his latest ban. He has previous of coming back to Test rugby after a long lay-off, so his lack of action is not a problem.Cole, who had a wobble at World Cup time, is operating near his best now but is under pressure from Kyle Sinckler, who came off the bench four times in the autumn series.Second row – George Kruis and Joe LaunchburyThis pair have both had injuries recently – Kruis a fractured cheek and Launchbury a calf problem – but they are classy enough to deal with that.Kruis proved it when he played the last part of the autumn after seven weeks out of action and he runs the England lineout. Launchbury has grown into the captaincy at Wasps and with 37 caps under his belt is a no-brainer as we shift Maro Itoje out of the engine room.Courtney Lawes has been in hot form recently as well and was a cigarette paper behind Launchbury.Back row – Maro Itoje, Tom Wood and Nathan HughesWith Chris Robshaw out for the Six Nations, now is the time to try Itoje in the back row, where he has performed superbly for Saracens in the past.Wood can do the job that he did three times in the autumn as a defensive, ball-carrying option at No 7 and he has been in great nick for Northampton a year after seemingly being left on the shelf.No-brainer: With Chris Robshaw absent, Maro Itoje’s physicality must be deployed in the back rowHughes gets lucky here; Billy Vunipola is a huge loss for England and Jack Clifford has been earmarked as a potential No 8 by the boss.James Haskell, the star of the last Six Nations and the first two Tests in Australia, has only just come back from a toe injury and when he did arrive, for Wasps against Leicester on Sunday, he lasted 35 seconds before getting a bang on the head. He is aiming to be fit for Wasps’ final European game against Zebre.Bench – Jamie George, Matt Mullan, Kyle Sinckler, Courtney Lawes, James Haskell, Jack Clifford, Danny Care, Elliot DalyBath’s Nathan Catt is probably unlucky here, Mullan just getting the nod as loosehead replacement, and on current form Genge has leapfrogged the pair of them. TAGS: Highlight Eddie Jones names his squad for the Six Nations on 20 January and he must be wondering which black cat he ran over as the injuries pile up. Jones won the Pat Marshall Memorial Award at the Rugby Union Writers’ Club annual dinner last Monday, for his contributions in 2016, but now he has to really earn his money.First up for his England team are France on 4 February at Twickenham, but who should the coach pick out of those men left standing? The Australian has always talked about England’s strength in depth and with an injury list as long as your arm he will find out all about it in the next couple of months.This time last year Jones said he was “make do and mending” – he is in the same spot now and had better hope his Midas touch hasn’t deserted him. This team could look a lot different when the next World Cup rolls around in 2019 but, as every coach tells us, the next game is the most important…Full-back – Mike BrownBrown is still Jones’s go-to man at full-back and that impression was reinforced when Alex Goode was left out of the Elite Player Squad.Anthony Watson is probably one for the future at No 15 and Jones fancies Elliot Daly back there as well, but for the time being he should stick with the snarling incumbent. Brown has also been one of the team’s vice-captains – alongside Owen Farrell and Billy Vunipola – and is the man for France. But, at 31, he will be looking over his shoulder.Wings – Jack Nowell and Jonny MayWith Anthony Watson on the comeback trial after missing the autumn with a broken jaw, Nowell and May are the likeliest candidates for the wing spots.Flying: Jack Nowell is in brilliant form, scoring this superb try at Saracens last weekend (Pic: Getty)Nowell, who also missed the autumn, has been in top form for Exeter and showcased that with a stunning try against Saracens last weekend and a Man of the Match display against Bath on New Year’s Eve.May played three of the four autumn Tests and has been putting it about for Gloucester, although Watson may have something to say about this selection by the end of the tournament.Jones played Marland Yarde against South Africa and Australia before Christmas but also had a look at Daly on the wing before his red card against Argentina. Semesa Rokoduguni has been blistering in attack for Bath but Jones might not fancy him without the ball.Centres – Jonathan Joseph and Owen FarrellIf it ain’t broke don’t fix it and with so many parts of Jones’s first-choice XV broken, he should not be tampering with this combination.Hunting down: Jonathan Joseph’s defensive talents give him an edge over Elliot Daly at 12 (Pic: Getty)Joseph has been on fire since the autumn and there is a new respect for his defence since the Aussie tour. Farrell has just been Farrell – great defender and organiser, dead-eye kicker and running the Saracens back-line with aplomb, even though it has been from No 10.With the body count running so high, Farrell is one player Jones does not want to see in the casualty ward – he is too important and a world star in the making, if he is not there already.Fly-half – George FordFord’s goal-kicking radar was off beam when Bath played Newcastle in the latest round of the Premiership, but when you’ve got Farrell in the team that is not a problem. Jones has already stated he thinks Ford can be the best player in the world and is not likely to ditch him any time soon.When Daly got sent off against Argentina, it was Ben Youngs, Ford and Farrell who did the organising for playing with 14 men for most of the match and the fly-half is a big voice in the team.Scrum-half – Ben Youngs Decision time: Eddie Jones has changes to make after a succession of injuries (Pic: Getty Images) LATEST RUGBY WORLD MAGAZINE SUBSCRIPTION DEALS
“COPY” Projects Architects: Juan Pablo Merino Area Area of this architecture project Year: 2013 CopyAbout this officeJuan Pablo MerinoOfficeFollowProductsWoodGlassConcrete#TagsProjectsBuilt ProjectsSelected ProjectsResidential ArchitectureHousesAlgarroboHousesChilePublished on September 18, 2013Cite: “M House / Juan Pablo Merino” 18 Sep 2013. ArchDaily. Accessed 11 Jun 2021.
Philadelphia postal workers picket low-wage Staples store. The postal service wants to outsource jobs there.WW photo: Joseph PietteMore than 50 protests were held in 27 states on the April 24 “National Day of Action Protest to ‘Stop Staples!’” Postal worker unions demonstrated outside Staples stores with the theme “The U.S. mail is not for sale.”They were protesting an ominous privatization agreement between this office supply chain and the U.S. Postal Service. The agreement would take work away from unionized postal workers and allow Staples, whose workers are low-paid and unorganized, to provide those services.This scheme would hurt not only postal workers. People who lose their neighborhood post office to Staples could then lose services altogether if the company, which is closing 225 stores nationwide, opts to close operations in a location with low overall sales. The right under federal law to a hearing before a post office is shuttered will be lost if a Staples store becomes the de facto local post office.The struggle against the Staples plan has united four unions — the American Postal Workers Union, the National Postal Mail Handlers Union, the National Association of Letter Carriers and the National Rural Letter Carriers Association — in a “Grand Alliance.” Postal unions in other countries have voiced solidarity.Workers World participated in the actions in New York, Philadelphia, Detroit and San Francisco. In New York City, about 200 postal workers and allies marched from a post office to a Staples store. The rally featured APWU Metro New York President Jonathan Smith, NALC Branch 36 President Charlie Heege, Larry Adams of the Mail Handlers and a representative of APWU Mid-Hudson Area Local 3722. Support came from Community Labor United for Postal Jobs and Services, Community Postal Workers United, the Peoples Organization for Progress, Fight Imperialism Stand Together, the Peoples Power Assembly Movement and the May 1 Coalition for Worker and Immigrant Rights.Philadelphia-area postal workers handed out thousands of fliers and talked to passersby for six hours about why they should oppose the privatization deal. “The link between the postal struggle and the low-wage worker struggle was very clear to people. There was a very good response on the street,” reported retired letter carrier Joe Piette.Protests outside Staples stores in Dearborn and Clawson, Mich., both suburbs of Detroit, together drew more than 250 postal workers and other unionists. Among the creative chants was “The post office is not broke! Free our mail from Wall Street’s yoke!” This chant exposed the false claims by the USPS that it must close locations, privatize and end Saturday delivery due to financial strain.In California, Bay Area activists were outside stores in San Leandro, Campbell and San Francisco. Retired letter carrier Dave Welsh praised the protest in San Francisco: “The demonstration was tremendous. This issue has a resonance with people. Drivers in their big rigs honked enthusiastically. People see the working-class character of these demonstrations and take pleasure in seeing these militant protests against privatization.”Johnnie Stevens, Dave Welsh and Joe Piette contributed to this article.FacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmailPrintMoreShare thisFacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmailPrintMoreShare this
By Hoosier Ag Today – May 25, 2012 SHARE 11:35 update Equities little changedDrought and flooding cut Argentine soybean crop to 39.9 MTKansas wheat harvest now looks averageChinese May bean imports were a record 7.22 MTU of M consumer sentiment was better than expected but had no impact Facebook Twitter Facebook Twitter Home Market Market Watch Gary Wilhelmi 5/25/2012 Update1 SHARE Gary Wilhelmi 5/25/2012 Update1 Previous articleIndiana Dairy and 500 Rookies a Good FitNext articleFFA Rally to Fight Hunger” Planned for 2012 Convention Hoosier Ag Today
Benton McDonald TCU rowing program strengthens after facing COVID-19 setbacks Linkedin Benton McDonaldhttps://www.tcu360.com/author/benton-mcdonald/ Courtesy: GoCoyotes.com Twitter Thousands of TCU community members receive COVID-19 vaccines as university supply increases Facebook Benton McDonaldhttps://www.tcu360.com/author/benton-mcdonald/ Chancellor talks stimulus money, COVID-19 vaccines and more at limited attendance faculty town hall Board approves tuition freeze, RRI actions but doesn’t act on eligibility issue spurred by Williams printThe TCU Women’s Basketball team announced the addition of transfer Jaycee Bradley on Wednesday. The 5’9’ guard played three seasons at South Dakota, averaging 8.7 points per game and an impressive 43 percent mark from three.Bradley was a member of a Coyotes squad that went to three straight WNIT’s, including a championship in her freshman season.While she didn’t start her freshman year, Bradley played in all 38 games and made 31 three pointers.After becoming a starter her sophomore year, she averaged a career high 12.9 points per game and was sixth in the country with a 45.3 percent mark from three point range.As a junior last season she averaged 10.5 points per game and was named honorable mention All-Summit League.Her final game at South Dakota was against TCU, where she scored 21 points in a second round WNIT loss.Bradley will sit out the 2018-19 season due to NCAA transfer rules and have one season of eligibility remaining.The announcement comes just days after former TCU guard Amber Ramirez announced she was transferring to Arkansas. Facebook Ramirez averaged 10.4 points per game last season and set a Big 12 record with 11 three pointers in a game versus Southeastern Louisiana. Benton McDonaldhttps://www.tcu360.com/author/benton-mcdonald/ Benton McDonald is a senior journalism and political science double major from Austin, Texas. He has worked for TCU360 since his freshman year and is currently the executive editor. Linkedin Benton McDonaldhttps://www.tcu360.com/author/benton-mcdonald/ Settlement reached between TCU, former professor in discrimination lawsuit ReddIt Another series win lands TCU Baseball in the top 5, earns Sikes conference award + posts Previous articleBrodziansky joins Williams in Summer League, added to Cavaliers rosterNext articleBanogu, Turpin named to Preseason All-Big 12 Team Benton McDonald RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR TCU baseball finds their biggest fan just by saying hello Twitter ReddIt
Comments are closed. Previous Article Next Article Comet in centre reformsOn 12 Sep 2000 in Personnel Today HR managers at electrical retailer Comet have challenged the image of customer service call centres as sweat shops.Manager Simon Longbone said measures such as staff forums, a robust and fair progression scheme and proper training of line managers had made the two-year-old centre more employee friendly. Their efforts have been rewarded with an Investors In People award.He added, “We hope to open an NVQ centre in the future to allow our staff to gain call centre qualifications. Because the staff know that if they work well, they could be selected to be managers they are more motivated to work.The recognition comes as industry experts prepare to debate the future of call centres next week at Call Centre Expo.They will question the media perception of call centres and invite delegates to comment on the main issues of the work trend.• Call Centre Expo, 19-20 September, NEC, Birmingham. Related posts:No related photos.
Comments are closed. Philip Titchmarsh outlines what the new directive will mean and what actionemployers will have to take to ensure employees’ rights to information andconsultationAt present, employees in the UK have far fewer rights to information andconsultation than their counterparts elsewhere in the European Union. Most ofthe time, in fact, employers in the UK have no legal obligation to keep theiremployees informed or to consult with them. Although employers do have toinform and consult employees in certain specified circumstances – relating tolarge-scale redundancies, business transfers and health and safety – atpresent, there is no general legal framework in the UK providing for theinformation and consultation of employees. Every EU member state except the UK and Ireland, has laws or legally bindingnational agreements which oblige employers to inform and consult with employeerepresentatives generally. However, the gap between the UK and most of theother members of the EU will narrow in the not too distant future. On 23 March 2002, the European directive providing for the information andconsultation of employees at national-level came in to force. The Directive in detail The final text of the directive differs considerably from the original textissued by the Commission in 1998. In general terms, it places more emphasis onnational-level custom and practice. It does not provide for a one-size-fits-allnational works council model and allows for employers to create information andconsultation arrangements which best suit their own organisational structure. Thresholds Member states may choose whether to apply the directive to either: – Undertakings with at least 50 employees in any one member state; or – Establishments with at least 20 employees in any one member state. Whereas the original text spoke exclusively of “undertakings”, thefinal text distinguishes between undertakings and establishments. This means that countries such as Germany – where employee representationmay be set up in establishments with at least five employees and works councilsmay be set up in establishments with at least 20 employees – will choose theestablishment option. Countries such as the UK, where there is no statutoryprovision for information and consultation of this kind, will in all likelihoodchoose the undertaking option, where the threshold is 50 employees. The term ‘undertaking’ is not defined in the directive. However, it is clearthat the meaning of the term is not restricted to companies. In European Courtof Justice decisions (predominantly concerning the Acquired Rights Directive(77/187)), the term has been held to cover public and private entities carryingout an economic activity, whether or not operating for gain. This will includecompanies and unincorporated entities such as partnerships. Potentially, otherorganisations such as charities or public sector bodies are also covered wherethey are carrying out an economic activity. Graduated implementation One of main concessions in the final text of the directive is that certainmember states may avail themselves of a graduated implementation phase. The directive must be implemented in the member states by March 2005.However, the implementation timetable can be extended in member states where thereis at the date of adoption of the directive: “no general, permanent andstatutory system of information and consultation of employees nor a general,permanent and statutory system of employee representation of theworkforce”. The UK is, of course, such a member state and will take advantage of thegraduated implementation phase. Ireland is the only other member state in aposition to do so. The UK and Ireland are entitled to restrict the applicationof the directive between March 2005 and March 2007 to undertakings with 150 ormore employees. Then it must apply to undertakings with 100 or more employeesand, after a further year – that is by March 2008 – to those with 50 or moreemployees. All other member states must apply the provisions of the directiveto undertakings with at least 50 employees (or establishments with at least 20employees) from March 2005. Content of information and consultation The directive draws the distinction between issues subject to informationonly and those on which information and consultation should be conducted. Therationale for this distinction is that the matters which are subject toinformation only are matters which are thought to be generally outside thecontrol of the employer. Employees through their representatives will have a right to be informedabout the recent and probable development of the undertakings or theestablishment’s activities and economic situation. Employee representatives will have a right to be informed and consulted on: – The situation, structure and probable development of employment within theundertaking or establishment; – Measures envisaged which could pose a threat to employment; – Decisions likely to lead to substantial changes in work organisation or incontractual relations including those covered by the Transfer of Undertakingsand Collective Redundancies legislation. The key point here is that the proposed subject matter of information andconsultation contains the two key elements of information, namely the ongoinghealth of the undertaking and any plans for changes, especially those inrelation to employees. Carrying out information and consultation The directive defines what is meant by ‘information’ and ‘consultation’ andlays down some rules as to how employers should carry out those processes. Information concerns the employer’s transmission of data to employeerepresentatives so they can acquaint themselves with the subject matter in handand examine it. Information must be given in such a way (timing, method,content) as to enable employee representatives to conduct “an adequatestudy” and, where necessary, prepare for consultation. Consultation is a more meaningful process than the provision of information.Under the terms of the directive, it means an exchange of views andestablishment of dialogue between the employer and the employeerepresentatives. This is the same definition as that found in the European WorksCouncils Directive. The provisions governing consultation state that: The timing, method and content should be appropriate – It should take place at the relevant level of management and employeerepresentation – It should take place on the basis of relevant information supplied by theemployer and on the basis of an opinion formulated by the employeerepresentatives – It should enable employee representatives to meet with the employer andobtain a response, including reasons for the response, to any opinion therepresentatives might formulate, and – Insofar as decisions are likely to lead to substantial changes in workorganisation or in contractual relations, consultation should take place”with a view to reaching an agreement” on decisions within the scopeof the employer’s powers The employer is, therefore, obliged to enter into consultation “with aview to reaching an agreement” on significant changes in the workplace.What that phrase means is not explained in the directive. It is used, however,both in the context of the Acquired Rights Directive and the CollectiveRedundancies Directive. The phrase does not mean the employer is required to agree with any counterproposals made by employee representatives. However, consultation must beentered into with an open mind and with a willingness to be persuaded. Arguably, what is envisaged is a process akin to negotiation. An employerwho enters into consultation with a closed mind will be found not to haveproperly consulted at all, and will be exposed to liability for breach of theobligations contained in the directive. In considering whether an employer has discharged his duty to consult, evenwhere there is no obligation to consult “with a view to reaching anagreement”, the question of the employer’s state of mind at the outset ofthe consultation process will be relevant. Consultation clearly means more than the simple provision of information.Case law in the context of the collective redundancies legislation may beinstructive. In that context, in R v British Coal Corporation ex-partePrice,1994, IRLR 72, Glidewell LJ took the view that: “É fair consultationmeans:(a) consultation when the proposals are still at a formative stage; (b)adequate information on which to respond; (c) adequate time in which torespond; and (d) conscientious consideration É of the response toconsultation.” Glidewell LJ’s summary of fair consultation is consistent with thatenvisaged in the directive. Consultation must be entered into by the employerbefore decisions are taken. The employer must have an open mind and awillingness to be persuaded by employee representatives and the consultationshould take place only after appropriate information on the subject matter ofthe consultation has been provided to the employee representatives. Voluntary arrangements As with the original draft, the final text of the directive provides thatmember states may allow management and labour “at the appropriate level,including at undertaking or establishment level” to define, throughnegotiation, practical arrangements for informing and consulting employees. These arrangements may contain provisions which are different to thosedescribed above, as long as they respect the principles set out in Article 1 ofthe directive, including a provision that information and consultation takesplace “in a spirit of co-operation”. Any negotiated form ofinformation and consultation may also be subject to limitations set out bymember states in their implementing legislation. The UK Government is keen for employers to set up voluntary arrangementstailored to suit their organisation and it is unlikely that there will be many,if any, such limitations in the UK. This opportunity to enter into voluntary information and consultationarrangements is familiar from the European Works Councils Directive. However,in that context, there was only an ability to enter into a voluntary agreementin the period prior to the directive’s transposition in to the relevant memberstate’s national law. If that window of opportunity was taken, the directive,as implemented in national law, did not apply to the trans-national undertakingor group concerned. The National-level Information and Consultation Directive is different.Voluntary arrangements may be entered in to at any time, either prior to orafter the directive is incorporated in to national law. All the directive saysis that the voluntary arrangements for information and consultation may bedifferent to those envisaged by the directive so long as they provide for theeffective information and consultation of employees. The directive, therefore,sets out the minimum requirements. Confidentiality Employee representatives will not be allowed to reveal any confidentialinformation given to them in the course of the information and consultationprocedures if it is expressly provided to them in confidence and if this is inthe legitimate interest of the undertaking concerned. However, member statesmay authorise employee representatives and those assisting them to pass onconfidential information to employees and to third parties bound by anobligation of confidentiality. Whether this means the employees must havesigned some form of confidentiality undertaking or whether their general dutyof confidentiality will suffice is not clear. Under the directive, an employer will not be obliged to disclose informationor undertake consultation when, according to objective criteria, theinformation or consultation might seriously harm the functioning of theundertaking or the establishment or would be prejudicial to it. This exceptionis likely to be construed narrowly. Member states will be obliged to set-up procedures for dealing with disputesover confidentiality of information. If the Government adopts a similar approachto that used in the context of the European Works Councils legislation, it willmake provision for disputes in this area to be referred to the CentralArbitration Committee. Protection of Employee Representatives Employee representatives must have specific protections to enable them tocarry out their functions. In the UK, we can expect this to be the now familiarpackage of the right not to be subject to any detriment for exercising theirfunctions or standing for election, and provisions rendering any dismissal ofan employee representative or candidate for election in connection with suchmatters automatically unfair without reference to the usual statutory tests. Sanctions – no nullification of dismissals One of the major differences between the text originally proposed by theCommission and the final text of the directive concerns the provisions relatingto sanctions. The 1998 text stated that, in case of serious breach of thedirective’s provisions by the employer, and where this would have direct andimmediate consequences in terms of substantial change or termination ofemployment contracts or employment relations, the decision (dismissal, forexample) would have no legal effect on the employment contracts or employmentrelationships of the employees affected. The original text also defined seriousbreaches as the total absence of information and consultation, and thewithholding of important information or provision of false information. These provisions have been omitted from the final text of the directive,which states merely (as also contained in the original draft) that memberstates shall provide for appropriate measures in the event of non-compliancewith the directive, that adequate administrative or judicial procedures shallbe available to ensure compliance and that member states should provide for”adequate sanctions” in the case of infringement, which must be”effective, proportionate and dissuasive”. Reactions The European Trade Union Confederation has stated that the directive”sends a strong signal to workers and to those who had serious concernsabout the high-handed and frankly intolerable way company management have beenbehaving in closures and industrial restructuring”. The ETUC maintains itis the result of concerted trade union action and lobbying. The Union of Industrial and Employer Confederations of Europe (UNICE) wasnot originally in favour of the directive, based on subsidiarity arguments andbelieving that a high level of protection of workers is already ensured by theCollective Redundancies, Transfer of Undertakings and European Works CouncilsDirectives. UNICE has, however, welcomed elements in the directive including,in particular, the exclusion of smaller employers from the scope of thedirective and the broad principles on sanctions. What happens next? While the directive as a whole must be implemented into UK law within threeyears, the UK will have up to six years to implement the provisions in full. ByMarch 2005, the directive must be applied to employers in the UK with more than150 employees; by March 2007 to those with 100 or more employees and, only byMarch 2008, will it have to be applied to those with 50 or more employees. Bycontrast, in those Member States where there is already in existence aframework for employee information and consultation [all existing EU MemberStates except the UK and Ireland], the directive must be applied, in full, toall employers with more than 50 employees from the standard implementation dateof March 2005. The DTI has already issued a discussion paper in connection with employeeinvolvement and has stated its intention to consult on the implementation ofthe directive in the UK during 2003. The consultation document will include draftimplementation regulations. Although UK law will probably not change until March 2005, employers shouldnot be complacent. They would be well advised to audit their employeeinvolvement arrangements now, or if no formal arrangements exist, consider introducingsome. This is particularly because voluntary information and consultationarrangements will be capable of satisfying an employer’s obligations under thedirective and the employee relations advantages of being pro-active are likelyto be quite considerable. Philip Titchmarsh is a solicitor at Pinsent Curtis Biddle Previous Article Next Article Lawyers view: The national-level information and consultation directiveOn 1 Sep 2002 in Personnel Today Related posts:No related photos.
An instructive DVD has been released in tandem with a new website by the Diabetes Research Network in the hopes of encouraging sufferers of diabetes to participate in clinical trials. 1 in 25 people in the UK are diabetic, even though it is not a widely discussed or understood disease. This DVD, which contains multiple images of diabetic patients, is to be distributed in care centres across the UK in order to attract volunteers to aid the treatment of the disease.