VIDEO: Syrian protests hit Lebanon tourism

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
2 October 2011 Last updated at 19:03 GMT Help

View the original article here

Lecturers' pension action resumes

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
6 October 2011 Last updated at 23:01 GMT The dispute could escalate to new strikes, the UCU said Lecturers at 67 UK universities are going to re-start a programme of industrial action from 10 October over changes to their pension scheme.

They will start a "work to contract" if the universities do not resume negotiations over the pension changes.

Substantial cuts to the benefits of the Universities Superannuation Scheme (USS) were introduced on 1 October.

The University and College Union (UCU) said 40,000 members at the affected universities might eventually strike.

The union's general secretary, Sally Hunt, said the aim was to force the university employers to renegotiate some of the changes they have just brought in.

"There are key areas that we believe need to be looked at again," she said.

"Examples being accrual rates and another example being redundancy payments for those who are 50 and 55."

The dispute affects staff at the 67 traditional universities which were in existence before 1992, when the former polytechnics and higher education institutions were upgraded to university status.

'Sustained campaign'

The industrial action may be a precursor to more widespread action which has been threatened by unions with members in other parts of the public sector, such as local government, the civil service, NHS, schools, police and the fire service.

The government is trying to press ahead with substantial increases in staff pension contributions, to be followed by full-scale conversion of most of the schemes from their current final-salary basis to become less generous career average schemes.

The lecturers' industrial action will start with a "work to contract" which the UCU said would be the start of a "sustained campaign of industrial action".

Depending on local employment conditions, this might include union members working no more than their contracted hours, not covering other lecturers' classes, and refusing to carry out any additional duties or attend voluntary staff meetings.

"This will affect the universities in very different ways," said a spokesman for the employers body the UCEA (Universities and Colleges Employers Association).

"The changes would be considered moderate by many as they include the retention of a final salary pension for all existing USS members."

The UCU said if the employers refused to start negotiating again at a scheduled meeting later this month, the action might be escalated to a boycott of internal administration, student assessments and even rolling strikes.

Second campaign

The USS pension scheme has 137,000 contributing members at nearly 300 education institutions.

One-day strikes in March, at universities around the country, failed to deter the employers from pressing ahead with the bulk of their pension changes, which have been in train for three years.

So the UCU held a second industrial action ballot last month, which produced a 77% vote in favour on a 42% turnout - even higher than in the union's first ballot earlier this year.

The union said the some of its members would lose ￡100,000 of their pension income over their prospective retirement as a result of the changes.

It said the employers' private aim was to make huge savings by cutting their contribution rate from about 16% of staff salaries to just 10%.

This might be achieved, the UCU said, if the university employers were able, in a few years' time, to impose the career average scheme for new recruits on existing staff as well.

Big changes

The USS changes were brought in from 1 October in a separate process to the one the government has initiated for the other big public sector pension schemes.

The university pension changes were changes were:

A normal pension age of 65 came in for new entrants and for the future service of many existing members. The exceptions to this are those members who were in the scheme before 1 October - and who were also aged 55 or over at that date. They will be exempt from the normal reductions in their accrued pensions that will be imposed if they take their pensions before the age of 65. The normal USS pension age will rise in line with any increases in the state pension age, which is scheduled to rise to 66 by 2020. It is important to note that this will only affect pension built up after April 2020.The employee contribution rate for members of the final-salary section has gone up from 6.35% to 7.5%. Pension increases (for pensions in payment and deferred pensions) will now be inflation-proofed in line with increases in the consumer prices index (CPI) up to 5% a year. But for pensions earned after 1 October 2011, if inflation is more than 5% but less than 15%, the increase in pension will be 5% plus half of the increase above that level. And if inflation is more than 15%, there will be no extra pension increases - they will be capped at 10% a year.A career-average revalued earnings (CARE) benefits structure has been introduced for new entrants. The benefits are still be based upon a 1/80th accrual rate and cash lump sum of three times the pension.The contribution rate for members of the new CARE section is 6.5%. If the overall cost of the scheme rises above 23.5% of salaries, then "cost sharing" will be introduced. This means any further increases in contributions will be shared in the ratio 65:35 between employers and employees respectively.

View the original article here

Video: protesters March on Wall Street

Help 6 October 2011, last updated on: 10: 05 GMT

View the original article here

Abramovich 'intimidated' oligarch

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
3 October 2011 Last updated at 13:34 GMT Roman Abramovich is worth an estimated ￡10.3bn Roman Abramovich intimidated a fellow Russian oligarch into selling him shares in an oil company at a large discount, the High Court has heard.

Boris Berezovsky made the claims about the Chelsea football club owner with regards to Russian oil firm Sibneft.

He alleges breach of trust and breach of contract and is claiming more than ￡3.2bn in damages.

Mr Abramovich, who is worth an estimated ￡10.3bn, has denied the claims by his former business partner.

The Chelsea Football Club owner sold Sibneft to Russia's state-owned gas monopoly Gazprom in a multibillion-dollar deal in 2005.

Both men attended the first day of the trial, which is expected to last for more than two months.

They sat at either end of the packed courtroom.

Laurence Rabinowitz QC, who represents Mr Berezovsky, told Mrs Justice Gloster both men had worked together to acquire Sibneft and became friends.

He said the pair remained friends until Mr Berezovsky "fell out with those in power in the Kremlin and was forced to leave his home and create a new life abroad".

Mr Berezovsky is now exiled to the UK.

The barrister said his client had been "betrayed" after falling out with Russian political leaders and leaving Russia in 2000.

'Threats'

"It is our case that Mr Abramovich at that point demonstrated that he was a man to whom wealth and influence mattered more than friendship and loyalty and this has led him, finally, to go so far as to even deny that he and Mr Berezovsky were actually ever friends," he said.

Mr Rabinowitz went on: "Mr Berezovsky's case in relation to Sibneft is that Mr Abramovich intimidated him into selling his very substantial interest in Sibneft to Mr Abramovich himself at a very substantial under value and that he did so in effect by making threats.

"The threats being... that unless Mr Berezovsky... sold those interests to him, he, Mr Abramovich, would take steps with a view to the interest being effectively removed from them by those in the Kremlin, led by President Putin, who had come to regard Mr Berezovsky as his enemy."

The barrister claimed that Mr Abramovich had also threatened to "take steps with a view to preventing" the release from prison of a close friend of Mr Berezovsky.

Mr Rabinowitz said his client contended that as a result of "this intimidation", he was pressured into selling his Sibneft interest to Mr Abramovich for "very substantially less" than it was worth.

The case continues.

View the original article here

Mongolia and Rio reach stake deal

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
7 October 2011 Last updated at 05:09 GMT Resource-rich Mongolia has attracted many foreign investors Mongolia and mining giant Rio Tinto and Ivanhoe have reached an agreement on stakeholding of the Oyu Tolgoi project in the resource-rich country.

The Mongolian government had sought to increase its stake in the mine to 50% from 34% as previously agreed.

The mining companies had said that the government should honour an original agreement signed in 2009.

When completed, the project is expected to be one of the biggest copper mines in the world.

According to the initial agreement, Mongolia government could renegotiate its stake after a period of 30 years.

However, the authorities had wanted to bring forward the negotiation period, a move that did not go down well with the miners as well as industry analysts.

In a joint statement released on Wednesday, they said "all parties have reaffirmed their continued support for the investment agreement and its implementation".

Shares of Ivanhoe rose as much as 18% on the Toronto Stock Exchange.

View the original article here

Default retirement age abolished

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
1 October 2011 Last updated at 07:05 GMT The default retirement age has been phased out The default retirement age in the UK has been fully abolished after being phased out from April this year.

New legislation stops employers from compulsorily retiring workers once they reach the age of 65.

However, research by law firm Norton Rose suggests one in 10 firms plans to offer financial incentives to encourage workers to move on at a certain age.

The charity Age UK welcomed the legislation but said age discrimination was still prevalent in the workplace.

'Devastated'

The legislation came too late for Andrew Webster, from Richmond in Surrey.

He was issued with a compulsory notice to retire from his job as an English teacher at a performing arts school.

''I was devastated. I had found a job I loved, I felt I was in my prime. I got on well with the students and they had good results," he said.

"I wanted to go on doing it for as long as possible and I needed the money as well so it was a terrible blow when it happened.''

Andrew Webster said he was pleased others would not be in his position

He has found work as a tutor but said he took home only a third of his previous earnings, even taking his pension into account.

''I know it is too late for me but I am pleased that other people will not also be forced to retire before they are ready," he said.

Rules

The Employment Equality (Repeal of Retirement Age Provisions) Regulations 2011 started phasing out the default retirement age from the start of April.

That was the point after which employers could no longer issue the minimum six-month notification for compulsory retirement, using the default retirement age procedure.

Continue reading the main story

Discrimination in the recruitment process is against the law, but it still happens in practice quite a lot”

End Quote Christopher Brooks Age UK If employers still want to enforce retirement, their decisions will have to be objectively justified, but workers can no longer be forced to retire on the grounds of age alone.

The Norton Rose research indicated that some firms were preparing to offer employees a "golden goodbye".

''Our survey suggests employers feel there will be limited ability to take on younger workers as a result of the default retirement age being removed and their perceived inability to ask more senior levels of staff to move on,'' said Paul Griffin, an employment lawyer at Norton Rose.

''If firms are approaching people to retire that could be seen as age discrimination in its own right.

"But our survey indicates that firms are willing to pay to encourage people to move on at a certain time in their career."

Ageism

Age UK said that instead of focusing on making space in firms for younger employees, businesses should instead look at the benefits that experienced older workers could bring.

Christopher Brooks, head of policy for work and learning at Age UK, said there was still a prevailing culture of ageism.

"Many employers simply see the stereotypes of an older worker, particularly in the recruitment phase and statistics show older workers find it harder to find another job than any other age group," he said.

''Discrimination in the recruitment process is against the law, but it still happens in practice quite a lot.

"It is however quite hard to prove but we do get lots of feedback from people who have been in interviews and been told they are over qualified or just too old to do the job, which quite often amounts to age discrimination."

Life experience

Chief executive Liz Fields from business consultancy the Financial Skills Partnership said keeping older workers had benefits.

"The skills and life experience that an older person can bring to a business actually helps that business become much more competitive," she said.

However, the Federation of Small Businesses said the move was "unncessary meddling".

"It will lead to a legal quagmire for a lot of small business owners. If you can't get rid of someone, you then have to go through the process of performance managing someone out of an organisation, which if you have a big HR department and you're experienced in these things is easy," said Andrew Cave from the federation.

"The average business in this country employs four people. The owner-manager doesn't necessarily have that expertise."

View the original article here

Concern over football club owners

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
28 September 2011 Last updated at 13:50 GMT Damian Collins is part of the Commons committee looking into how football is run A Conservative MP has written to Sports Minister Hugh Robertson expressing concern about the ownership of Coventry City Football Club.

Damian Collins, who is part of a Commons committee looking into how football in England is run, wants to know more about owners Sisu Capital.

"In the case of Coventry City it didn't seem to be clear who the ultimate owners of the club were," he said.

A spokesperson for Sisu said the club is managed by private equity ownership.

Coventry's current owners have been in place since 2007 but there has been unrest, and changes were made at boardroom level this year.

The most notable of these was the departure of chairman Ray Ranson who had been integral to the takeover.

Mr Collins, who sits on the Commons' Culture Media and Sport Committee, told BBC Coventry & Warwickshire he was worried that it was not clear who is in charge of the Championship outfit.

"I took this up with the Football League to ask them and they confirmed to me that because no individual investor owned more than 10% of the club they didn't know who any investors in the club were," the Folkestone and Hythe MP said.

"I thought that was very unsatisfactory.

"We're constantly reassured that there are proper rules in place that govern who can own and invest in football clubs, what their background is, whether they have a stake or interest in other football clubs.

"To be able to apply those rules we've got to know who those investors are.

"One of the reasons these rules are in place on club ownership is to make sure there aren't conflicts of interest with people who've got stakes in different football clubs.

'Not anonymous'

"It's important from an integrity of competition point of view. It's also important in terms of the fans.

"When a club gets into financial difficulties it's the fans that suffer and it's also local businesses that are owed money by that football club that suffer.

"If the Football League and the Premier League were to turn around to Coventry and say, 'it's not good enough, you've got to have a declared owner of the club otherwise we won't let you play', I think you'd see a change."

Coventry City have declined to respond to Mr Collins' comments but have stood by quotes attributed to director Onye Igwe that appeared on The Guardian's website on Tuesday.

Mr Igwe told the publication: "We are not being anonymous. I am the fund's manager and a partner in Sisu, that is public."

He added that the funds for the club came from professional investors of various nationalities who wanted confidentiality, which was "normal practice in private equity".

View the original article here