In The Spotlight: Multiple-Job Executive Directors:

So what exactly did Theresa May achieve as Prime Minister? According to the Sunday Times on July 21st, she became desperate in her final few days in office to be remembered for more than her “failed Brexit policy”. Which is why, during the week preceding her resignation on July 24th, she announced a flurry of new proposals – among them a law committing the UK to net zero carbon emissions by 2050 and a £2 billion pay increase for some UK public sector employees.

As a result of what the Daily Mail columnist, Claire Ellicot, described on July 19th as May’s “farewell gift”, police officers, dentists and consultants will get 2.5% more, soldiers 2.9%, teachers and other school staff 2.75% and senior civil servants 2%. Quite how the new Prime Minister, Boris Johnson and his Chancellor, Sajid Javid,will fund this additional expenditure is not yet clear, though as Ellicot noted, the relevant Whitehall departments are likely to be told to find the cash from their existing budgets.

Will this extra money really relieve the financial pressures on the people it is designed to help? A survey conducted by the Police Federation of England and Wales (PFEW), cited by Jamie Grierson, the Guardian’s Home Affairs correspondent, has shown that 9,500 police officers took on second jobs during 2018 because they were struggling to make ends meet. These include a variety of roles such as taxi driving, photography, plumbing, gardening and beauty therapy.

On 17th June, the Oxford Mail journalist, Tom Williams, reported that firefighters in Oxfordshire are being forced to seek second jobs after years without a proper pay rise in order to pay their mortgages and utility bills. Many teachers are having to do likewise, often – as Mary Bousted, General Secretary of the National Education Union told the Guardian’s Donna Ferguson – because their low net pay means they can barely even afford their rent. The Council of British International Schools (Cobis), observed Ferguson, estimates that around 15,000 teachers leave the UK each year to work in education abroad – an exodus, declares Bousted, for which the Government is largely responsible.

The Financial Times commentators, Sarah O’ Connor and Vanessa Houlder, have pointed out that, due to real-term wages having fallen 8% since the financial crisis of 2008, more people across the country are cramming extra work into evenings, weekends and even their lunch hours to supplement their main incomes. A poll of the users of “People per Hour”, a website for online freelancers, has indicated that around 25% are doing extra work to cover a payday loan or credit card bills and another fifth to finance childcare costs.

Ben Chapman, a contributor to the Independent, has cited Henley Business School research that suggests 40% of UK workers have set up a business “on the side” due to the increasing insecurity of their day job. The precise numbers are uncertain as apparently many “moonlighters” don’t declare their second incomes to the tax authorities.

Taking a second job – or even several – has long been standard practice among the UK’s “elite”, for rather different reasons. George Osborne, the former Conservative Chancellor of the Exchequer, for example, currently has seven, among them as editor of the London Evening Standard, two different roles with Stanford University in California, advisor to the US fund managers Blackrock (for which he’s reputedly paid £650,000 a year working one day a week) and chairman of the Northern Powerhouse Partnership.

This isn’t unusual: Indeed, the media consultant Peter Cunliffe remarked in an article for The Times that “going plural” has become the fashionable career choice for executives of a certain age. “What could be more agreeable (he asks) than taking on three or four non-executive posts for £60,000 each and flitting from one boardroom to another to dispense wisdom?” Investors, however, he adds, are beginning to rebel against directors who take on too many non-executive roles – a phenomenon known as “overboarding”.

On 14th July, the Guardian highlighted stakeholder concerns that the chairman of Scottish Power Energy (SSE), Richard Gillingwater, may not be devoting sufficient time to the company because he’s also chairman of the £274 billion asset manager Janus Henderson and a director of Whitbread PLC, the UK’s largest hospitality company.

Other prominent business figures and industrialists who have become the focus of comparable disapproval are: Sir Nigel Rudd,chairman of the aerospace and defence group Meggitt as well as of BBA Aviation and Sappi, the Johannesburg-listed paper conglomerate; Barclays Chairman Sir Ian Cheshire who was retired from the board of the department store retailer, Debenhams, in January; ex Diago CEO Paul Walsh who resigned as an HSBC Director following unease regarding his “portfolio of directorships” such as with the Compass Group and Avanti Communications.

Stephen Martin, Director General of the Institute of Directors, has emphasised that organisations need to ensure their board members don’t spread themselves too thinly and have sufficient time available to effectively fulfil their duties. The UK Corporate Governance Code (July 2018) stipulates that candidates for a Board should disclose, prior to their appointment, any other significant business commitments they may have.

Filed under: Society | Posted on July 29th, 2019 by Colin D Gordon | No Comments »

The UK’s Fragile Bridges:

This year is the 125th anniversary of London’s Tower Bridge. It was inaugurated, after 8 years of construction work, on 30th June 1894 in a “lavish ceremony” by the then Prince and Princess of Wales. Building it was considered essential for the million people living in the eastern part of the capital, who had either to take a ferry to cross the River Thames or use London Bridge, which 128,000 pedestrians did every day. By comparison – as the official Tower Bridge guide has noted – the 2.3 million residents living to the west of London Bridge had 12 bridges up to Hammersmith at their disposal.

Promotional material issued by the Kallaway PR company has hailed Tower Bridge as “London’s defining landmark, one of the capital’s most iconic attractions”. The bridge, however, has had it’s problems: In 2016, it was closed to road traffic for three months so extensive repairs could be carried out. Its owners, the City of London Corporation, pointed out at the time that “The bridge carries around 40,000 people, including 21,000 vehicles a day. This heavy use had had an effect on the timber decking. Maintenance is also required on the lifting mechanism and the waterproofing of the brick arches”.

This is not an unusual situation to arise with London’s bridges. Most of them (apart from the steel suspension pedestrian-only Millenium Bridge, linking Bankside with the City of London) date back to the 18th and 19th centuries. Westminster Bridge, for example, opened in 1750; Putney (1729), Battersea (1771), Vauxhall and Waterloo (1817), Hammersmith (1827), Chelsea (1858), Albert (1871), Wandsworth (1873).

Putney Bridge was closed for essential repairs from the 14th July – 25th September 2014. More recently and controversially, since 10th April motorists and seven bus services have been banned from using Hammersmith Bridge after safety checks revealed “critical faults”, though access remains available for pedestrians and cyclists. The Evening Standard’s City Hall Editor, Ross Lydall, has quoted estimates by the New Civil Engineer magazine (NCE) that the repairs could take three years, cost around £100 million and indeed that the bridge may never be re-opened to motorists. The main issue is where the money will come from: Government budget cuts have left both Hammersmith & Fulham Council (LBHF) and Transport For London (TfL) seriously short of funds.

Greg Hands, the MP for Chelsea and Fulham has however insisted that keeping the bridge permanently shut to motorists is not really an option: “There is a massive impact on communities like Fulham and Putney from diverted traffic”, he told Lydall. The leader of Wandsworth Council. Clr Ravi Govindia, agrees vociferously with Hands and has criticised LBHF for failing to keep their bridge in good working order – as a result of which it’s calculated that Putney Bridge now experiences 4,000 extra vehicles every day, Wandsworth Bridge 2,000 more and Battersea Bridge an additional 1,000:“The Nitrogen Dioxide pollution levels on Putney High Street, which we had managed to control and reduce, have now gone up by 4% and all this extra traffic is having a devastating effect on our roads, bridges and the surrounding areas”.

On 11th July, the NCE journalist, Katherine Smale, highlighted the fact that the backlog for maintaining London’s roads now exceeds £1billion. She noted that, in the opinion of the London Technical Advisors Group (LoTAG), the capital is getting an unfair maintenance deal from the Government, that its road network is suffering from “chronic underinvestment” and that other English authorities are being granted a much more favourable annual financial arrangement: “London boroughs and TfL are doing their best, using their own budgets, but if the current funding conditions remain, the future state of the capital’s infrastructure is clear: Failing highways, more potholes and more closed bridges”.

In fact, most councils across the country appear to be facing similarly difficult circumstances. On 7th January, the Transport Network correspondent, Dom Browne, reported that there are almost 3,500 council-maintained road bridges in the UK which are considered to be substandard. He was quoting from a survey conducted by the RAC (Royal Automobile Club) Foundation with the help of the National Bridges Group of ADEPT (The Association of Directors of Environment, Economics, Planning and Transportation) which infers, for example, that 18 of the 34 bridges in the London Borough of Lewisham, 2 of the 4 owned by LBHF and all of the 25 in Redbridge in the east of London, are in some way deficient.

Substandard” is defined as being unable to support the heaviest vehicles now seen on Britain’s roads, including lorries of up to 44 tonnes. The analysis found that an estimated £6.7 billion is needed to bring all these bridges back up to perfect condition – but that budget restrictions mean that the “economically-straightened” councils anticipate only 370 of these will have the necessary work carried out on them within the next five years.

Filed under: Society, Travel | Posted on July 16th, 2019 by Colin D Gordon | No Comments »

The Tussle To Control The Steering Wheel:

If you’re travelling by car to the beach, the countryside or abroad this summer, who will be in charge of the vehicle and making most of the decisions? The obvious answer would seem to be whoever is doing the driving – but a recent investigation conducted by Privilege Car Insurance, cited by the Sunday Times on 28th May, has indicated that this is often not at all the situation. On the contrary, the survey of 2,000 motorists revealed that arguments invariably break out between them and their passengers within 18 minutes of the start of the journey – the biggest reason initially being about which route to take and “bickering over whether to turn left or right”.

As Gil Warburton, a contributor to the Car Leasing UK website commented with some puzzlement on 27th May. “These days, with many of us using sat-nav’s to find the way to our destination, you’d have thought that peace and harmony would finally have taken over in our cars. But maybe we just love to quarrel with each other”. Warburton also observed that a third of the people questioned stated that, outside of the home, the car is the place where they feel most stressed.

Charlotte Fielding, the head of Privilege Car Insurance, has pointed out that although tensions can arise from apparently trivial issues such as the occupant of the other front-seat rummaging through the glove compartment, the main cause tends to be advice being offered by one or more passengers in the back of the car.

Wisegeek.com defines a “backseat driver” as a person who spends much of the trip in an unofficial co-pilot role, vociferously criticising the skills of the actual driver, shouting instructions to him or her and issuing superfluous warnings about potential or imagined road hazards. Lewis Kemp, a marketing official with Connect Insurance, notes that it’s usually someone who would prefer to be in control of the car rather than sitting as a passenger.

Kemp provides a list of 25 types of behaviour associated with such people, among them: Complaining that the driver is going too fast (or slow) or is too close to the vehicle in front; telling the driver which lane they should be in; pressing an imaginary brake pedal; getting impatient at traffic lights; disagreeing with the SatNav; clasping their hands over their face or closing their eyes frequently; gasping at any slight braking; loudly reading out road signs; complaining whenever the car is stuck in traffic or that the ride is too bumpy.

Data from a different survey, of 1000 motorists, carried out by Budget Insurance, suggests that one in five of people in Britain consider their partner to be a terrible driver – so much so that 26% of them refuse even to get into the car with them and 68% who are reluctantly prepared to do so a “ bite their tongue when their partner makes a blunder, to avoid a confrontation”.

According to Budget Insurance, men get upset with their partner if they drive in the wrong gear or too slowly, lack confidence to overtake other cars, take too long to get out of a junction, brake too late or too hard and park too far from the kerb. Whereas (they say), women get annoyed with their partner if they tailgate (are too near the car in front), drive too fast – especially in country lanes or on motorways, put up the music on the radio to a high volume, continuously honk the horn, dangerously overtake other cars or indulge in road rage.

Michelle Megna, a correspondent for Insurance.com has quoted another investigation, commissioned by the company, which found that 40% of husbands say their wives are the most annoying backseat drivers, followed by friends (17%) and mothers (15%) and that 34% of wives regard their husbands as their most irritating passengers, followed by mothers (18%) and friends (15%). Included in Insurance.com’s compilation of annoying passenger attitudes are: making faces and gestures, blocking the rear view mirror, grabbing the car’s handles, getting car sick, telling the driver to turn when it’s already too late and giving incorrect directions.

Yet another survey of 2,000 motorists, this time by the car insurance retailer Swinton, has concluded that men are officially the worst backseat drivers because they adopt bullying tactics to compensate for the fact that have been removed from the dominant role of controlling a car- consequently 68% of all the drivers questioned declared they’d prefer to have women as passengers.

The UK’s Highway Code specifies that drivers should “avoid distractions such as trying to read maps, tuning the radio, eating, drinking or smoking and arguing with passengers”. Concentration, it emphasizes, is of paramount importance. Statistics for 2018 provided by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) show that there are 38.2 million licensed vehicles in Great Britain – 4.5 million of which are light or heavy goods vehicles, 1.2 million motorcycles, but with the overwhelming majority, 31.5 million (82.5%) being private cars.

Filed under: Travel | Posted on June 18th, 2019 by Colin D Gordon | No Comments »

Fingerprints (Almost) Never Lie:

When you go shopping, how do you pay for your purchases? Possibly with cash, if the amount is small. However, for a larger expenditure, you’re more likely to use your debit or credit card, either by entering your pin number or, if your card is “contactless”, waving it in front of the terminal. As we’re all aware, this latter option in particular involves risks: If you mislay your contactless card, anyone who finds it can then use it without having to provide identification.

As the Daily Mail journalist, Charlie Bayliss has noted, statistics provided by the UK Finance organization indicate that there has been a significant surge in contactless fraud, hence their advice that banks in Britain should not increase the existing limit of £30 for such payments. In many other countries, the limit is even less. For example, Spain (£17.90), Chile (£13.65), Brazil (£10.50), Italy (£22.47), although in the USA it’s higher – £78. Several UK banks have now come up with what they consider to be the ideal solution.

On 24th April, the Daily Mail columnist Joe Pinkstone, reported that NatWest is launching “Britain’s first biometric bank card which will allow people to verify payments over £30 just with their fingerprint and so without having to enter their PIN.” They will have to first arrange with their bank for their fingerprint to be converted into an encrypted digital template to be stored on the card, which they can then slot into any retailer’s terminal while placing their finger (or thumb) on the embedded sensor.

The technology has been developed together with the digital security company Gemalto, Visa and Mastercard, successfully tested in South Africa and “makes use of features that are naturally unique from person to person, so is thought to be much more secure than traditional authentication methods”.

According to research conducted by Purdue University in America and INHA University in South Korea – cited by the Guardian’s Money Editor, James Coney on 12th May – there is one “small problem” with this new system. Fingerprints fade as people get older, especially after they reach their sixties, due to the fact that the skin becomes thinner, and less moist. These “friction ridges”, as they are known by the experts, are found not only on our finger-tips, but also on our palms, our toes and the soles of our feet.

The BBC News magazine has pointed out that, although these patterns are durable and supposedly permanent, they can wear down. Builders who lay bricks, people who work with abrasive materials or frequently wash dishes by hand can lose some of the detail: “Labourers could also find their fingerprints are not recognised by new high-tech equipment. They are not alone: Typists, pianists, violinists and guitarists also face potentially inaccurate readings”.

The fingerprint expert, Raymond Broadstock, has emphasised that trying to change your fingerprints artificially – for instance by burning the finger-tips with fire and acid, as the American gangster, John Dillinger, did in the 1930’s – only works for a while, as the skin eventually grows back.

Another criminal, Robert Phillips, grafted skin from his chest to his fingers to erase his fingerprints – but was identified from the prints of his palms, which are also unique. “Others have tried smoothing their finger-tips with glue and nail-varnish. Again, they were caught from palm prints”, Even identical twins who have the same DNA have different fingerprints.

Although checking fingerprints to solve crimes might seem to be a relic of the past and to belong more to the era of Sherlock Holmes, it is still – according to IMI Data Search – “one of the best ways we have to track down offenders”. The Federal Bureau Of Investigation (FBI) in America now deploys “Advanced Fingerprint Identification Technology (AFIT) which, it insists, “increases the accuracy and daily fingerprint processing capacity and improves system availability”.

Most Latin American countries require a fingerprint on their ID cards so that public and private institutions can verify immediately if the bearer is the person they claim to be. The European Commission has now also proposed that identity cards held by European Union (EU) citizens should be required to include two elements of biometric data: an image of two fingerprints and a facial image. The objective, it declares, is “to eliminate paper-based identity documents that are easy to falsify and can be used to enter the bloc from non-EU countries”.

This development is vehemently opposed by the civil liberties group, Statewatch as “unnecessary and unjustified”. More than half of EU Member States, it observes, “don’t currently collect their citizens’ fingerprints to store on identity cards, so hundreds of millions of people will become subject to this disproportionate measure. It should be rejected by the European Parliament and Council”.

In Germany, nationals can choose whether or not to have finger-print data on their ID cards. In Belgium, it will be added as from October 2019. In Spain, new ID cards already include fingerprints. There’s no obligatory ID card system in the UK.

Filed under: Society | Posted on June 4th, 2019 by Colin D Gordon | No Comments »

The Limited Rights Of Airline Passengers:

If you’re taking a plane to go on holiday this summer, will you pay close attention to the safety instructions given by the cabin crew before take-off? Possibly not, if you’ve heard it all many times before. As the Daily Telegraph’s travel writer, Lizzie Porter, has noted, airline staff are not legally required to oblige people on board to take notice of their announcements, though they “can intervene if rowdy passengers are preventing others from listening”. Porter suggests it makes good sense to be familiar with the action you should take take in the event of an emergency and to check, for example whether there is really a life jacket under your seat. She quotes George Hobica, the founder of airfarewatchdog.com, who told the Huffington Post that “A plane might make several trips in a day, during any one of which a passenger could take a life jacket as a souvenir”.

Professor Robert Bor, an aviation clinical pyschologist at the Royal Free Hospital in London, has acknowledged on “Sky Library”that there is a lack of awareness among many passengers as to why certain procedures should be followed: “Most people have little understanding as to why they shouldn’t stand up until the seat belt sign has been switched off”. He agrees that, because flying has become so routine, the airlines need to find more effective ways of delivering their messages – not least because research has shown that 40% of passengers don’t want to be informed about risk and safety since they’d really prefer not to be on the plane at all and are suppressing their anxieties.

Bor’s colleague on Sky Library, the aviation consultant John Barrass, considers that the challenge airlines face is to minimise the threat posed by recalcitrant passengers and engage with them in promoting and enhancing safety. He refers to an occasion when he was on a flight descending to Los Angeles airport: “Even while the cabin crew were reminding passengers not to switch on their mobile phones, I looked around and saw that many people were already busy sending texts to announce their arrival”.

This reluctance to comply with the rules can sometimes result in airlines taking extreme action. A recent case reported by the Guardian on 9th May involved a “wealthy-looking woman with a Louis Vuitton handbag” seated in an exit row who was removed from an Air New Zealand flight en route from Wellington to Auckland because she refused to watch an air safety video or read an instruction card handed to her and put her fingers in her ears to indicate she had no intention of listening.

The most notorious recent episode occurred in April 2017 when a Vietnamese-American doctor, David Dao, suffered concussion, a broken nose and lost two front teeth while being forcibly removed from a United Airlines plane by Chicago Department of Aviation police due to his refusal to give up his seat to a crew member who would be accompanying the flight but not working on it. In the opinion of the Fox News legal analyst, Andrew Napolitano, Dao had paid for the ticket, was in his seat and had every right to stay there. However, Timothy Ravich, an aviation law professor at the University of Central Florida, has pointed out that passenger rights are limited under the “contract of carriage” system and that airlines have the authority and power to remove people against their will if they choose to do so.

According to the Sun journalist, Becky Pemberton, there are many situations in which you can be “booted off” a flight. Among them (she asserts): American Airlines gives its staff the freedom to eject passengers who smell strongly; Delta Airlines may refuse people who are so overweight that they can’t fasten their seatbelt; Jet2 staff will not allow anyone on board wearing t-shirts displaying offensive language. A group of 18 women on their way to a “hen party” in Magaluf were apparently kicked off a Jet2 plane for that reason.

Other examples: A passenger forced off a Ryanair flight from Rome to Milan because they refused to move their metre-long toy crocodile which was blocking an emergency exit (The Metro); another who attempted to take a squirrel onto a Frontier Airlines flight to Cleveland (The Daily Beast); a third because they berated a Donald Trump supporter on a plane going from Baltimore to Seattle ( Daily Mail); a fourth who complained vociferously when she was put next to a mother with a crying baby”(The Sun): a fifth who “launched into a tirade” about being seated between two fat people on a United Airlines flight from Las Vegas to Newark NJ (Canoe.com News).

Nevertheless, the latest UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) statistics show that despite the number of departures from Britain’s airports increasing by 8.9% between 2016 -2018, the number of disruptive passenger incidents has remained relatively stable: 415 in 2016, 417 in 2017 and 413 in 2018.

Filed under: Travel | Posted on May 21st, 2019 by Colin D Gordon | No Comments »

The Uncertain Future Of Britain’s Public Libraries:

When was the last time you used your local council library? Is there one near you that you can go to? The Reading Agency (RA) emphasises on its website that anyone living in the UK is legally entitled to borrow books free from public libraries, so as to ensure that “everyone can have equal access to the power and pleasure of reading, information and ideas”.

The latest available statistics provided by the RA (for 2017/18) show that there are 3,618 public libraries, including mobile ones, in the UK with 15,483 staff who cater for 8 million active borrowers and issue almost 183 million books each year. During the 12 months cited, 58% of 5-10 year-olds, 72% of 11-15 year-olds and 36% of adults (of whom 38% were women and 27% were men)visited a public library .

The RA states that “72% of people in England think that libraries are an essential or very important service to the community, with 22% regarding them as fairly important”. The conversation.com/hard-evidence website has observed, however, that whenever a library is threatened with closure, “community groups and public figures spring into action to save it” yet simultaneously far fewer people are now using libraries than in the past.

This continuing trend has been attributed by the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA) to the “catastrophic’ scale of library closures resulting from £66 million being “slashed from libraries’ budgets as part of the Government’s austerity programme, which is turning the sector into a “war zone” and making it difficult to recruit staff.

As Rob Whiteman, the chief executive of CIPFA, has pointed out, in order for public libraries to be able to thrive, local authorities need adequate and sustainable levels of funding. The Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) has responded to the criticism by insisting that the government is “completely committed” to helping libraries to prosper and that it recognises the “important place they have in communities across the country”.

The “Top Five” most visited public libraries (according to “The Bookseller”) are: the Library of Birmingham, Central Library Manchester, Wembley in Brent, Woolwich Central Library in Greenwich and Croydon Central Library.

One way libraries have traditionally been able to augment their finances, of course, has been to levy fines for books that have been borrowed and then returned late. The amounts involved, though, are fairly modest. Lewisham Council,London’s “standard overdue charge” for customers aged 14-59 is 20p per day (maximum £10) and for senior citizens / over 60’s it’s 10p per day (maximum £10).

The rates are similar elsewhere in the capital and Hackney Council, for example, has a policy of no fines at all for anyone aged under 18. Last year, Trafford Council in Greater Manchester abolished the fines altogether with the objective of removing all barriers to its residents accessing its libraries. Hatton Council in Cheshire did likewise as from 8th January, for the same reason.

There have been several recent cases of books being returned many years after they were due back: On 4th January, BBC News reported that a copy of the crime novel “A Touch Of Danger” by James Jones which had been borrowed from the central library in Aberdeen in Scotland in 1978 had just been taken back: “Luckily for the person concerned, the fine was capped at £3.60”.

On 19th April, the Guardian journalist, Sarah Marsh, highlighted the reappearance of “The Manual of Daily Prayers and Litanies” by Jeremy Taylor, handed in anonymously after 43 years to the Royal Holloway University library – which estimated the accumulated fine to be worth about £6,278. As Marsh’s colleague, Alison Flood, has noted, this was still far less than the £209,000 theoretically owed for “The Law Of Nations” by Emer de Vattel, borrowed by the first US President, George Washington, in 1789 and returned to the New York Society Library 221 years later.

Universities tend to be much stricter regarding library items returned or renewed after the due date. As with many of its counterparts elsewhere in the UK, Kings College London charges 10p for each day beyond a stipulated 4-week loan period; 30p per day in excess of a one-week loan; £5 per hour or part of an hour for laptops and 50p per hour or part of an hour for headphones. If the amount owed reaches £20 or more, borrowing rights are suspended until the total is reduced to less than £20.

Research conducted by the Press Association a few years ago and cited in the Guardian revealed that Britain’s universities had collected almost £50 million in library fines over a six-year period. Top of the list was the University of Leeds with £1,2869,340, followed by Manchester (£1,299,342), Wolverhampton (£1,252,253), Kings College London (£1,197,715) and Hertfordshire (£1,147,238). The University of Westminster apparently doesn’t fine its students for returning library books late but instead bans them from using the library for the length of time the books were overdue. The investigation also indicated that many UK universities bar students from graduating until they’ve paid their library debts.

Filed under: Society | Posted on May 7th, 2019 by Colin D Gordon | No Comments »

How To Judge Someone: Look At Their Shoes:

What are you wearing on your feet at the moment? Perhaps slippers or just socks if you’re relaxing at home, trainers if you’re going outside to walk or jog and something rather more formal if you’re on your way to work. According to a report issued by researchers at the University of Kansas – quoted by Peter Harris, a contributor to careers.workopolis.com – your choice of footwear provides not only an indication of your current lifestyle and employment status but also reveals essential details about your personality.

The 63 students involved in the survey were required to look at hundreds of pairs of shoes and guess the age, gender and social status of the people to whom they belonged. That part was apparently quite easy. What was more surprising, pointed out Harris, was that they were also able to determine 90% of the owners’ characteristics. Among their conclusions: The most agreeable people like to wear practical and functional shoes, but ankle boots are suggestive of a slightly aggressive nature; if the shoes are not new but have been well cared for, then that’s a sign of a conscientious person.

Activists on the left of the political spectrum may not be too pleased to be informed that their shoes tend to be “shabbier and less expensive” than those of their more conservative rivals. The survey furthermore associates “plain and boring shoes” with “aloof and repressive” individuals and “showy and brightly coloured ones” with extroverts. As the Daily Mail columnist, Eddie Wrenn, has noted, in the opinion of the researchers, “shoes convey a thin but useful slice of information about the wearer. They serve a practical purpose but also offer non-verbal cues with symbolic messages. People pay attention to the shoes that they and others wear”.

Bernhard Roetzel, the German author of “Gentleman: A Timeless Guide To Fashion”, has however taken the footwear debate into more controversial territory. His view (states styleforum.net) is that “in more sartorially inclined cultures, brown shoes are not appropriate for many occasions, including work (even on Fridays)”. This attitude was echoed during a recent speech at a conference at the Hilton’s Tower Bridge London hotel, reported by the Daily Mail correspondent Isabella Nikolic on 8th April and tweeted by the legal affairs journalist Catherine Baksi, who was present at the event: An unnamed city lawyer advised delegates that, although wearing brown shoes with a blue suit “might be fine for footballers”, it would be considered “unsuitable dresswear” for anyone hoping to obtain professional employment in the City of London.

Nikolic highlighted the fact that this was reminiscent of the results of a Social Mobility Commission (SMC) investigation carried out in 2016, namely that “investment banks are less likely to hire men who wear brown shoes to a job interview”, that managers place as much importance on a person’s speech, accent, dress and behaviour as on their skills and qualifications and that often only those applicants who fit the “traditional image” are selected.

One unsuccessful candidate was told after his interview that, although he was “clearly quite sharp”, he wasn’t right for the bank because he wasn’t “polished enough”, the tie he was wearing was too “loud” and so was inappropriate for the suit he had on. The problem for bright working class university graduates, in the assessment of the Evening Standard writer Hatty Collier, is that – unlike their better-off counterparts who attended Oxford, Cambridge or the London School of Economics – they are unfamiliar with such “opaque” dress codes. The SMC did, though, acknowledge that the banks consider these are necessary in order to “reassure their clients about the quality of the service they will receive”.

So exactly what type of shoes should you wear to an interview? If you choose the wrong ones, declares Irene A Blake on work.chron.com, you’ll completely ruin your chances of getting the job. They should coordinate in colour and style with your clothing. For men, Blake recommends leather lace-ups or slip-ons. For women, “flats or low-heel pumps with sturdy wide heels, in black, white or a colour that combines with your outfit”. New shoes and those with extremely high heels should be avoided as “they can be uncomfortable, make you walk oddly or even fall”.

Blake emphasises that the condition of your shoes is as important as the type you select. Rather obviously, “If the tops, toe-caps or heels appear noticeably worn, choose a different pair or ask a cobbler to repair them”. If they only need mild cleaning, you should remove dirt, dust or scuff marks, use a shoe repair kit to cover any scratches, then shine or brush the tops. If they feel loose, install inserts or wear thicker socks. If the outsoles feel slippery, rough them up with coarse sandpaper. Furthermore:

Your socks or stockings should be of a neutral colour that matches your shoes and should contain an element of elastic that will prevent them from slipping around when you move”.

Filed under: Society | Posted on April 23rd, 2019 by Colin D Gordon | No Comments »

Licences For Cyclists: As Contentious As Brexit?

Did you watch ITV’s “Good Morning Britain (GMB)” programme on 1st April? If yes, you’ll have seen the furious argument that erupted between one of the presenters, Piers Morgan and Stanley Johnson, father of Boris, the Conservative MP and former London Mayor. They were discussing the proposal made by the IVF specialist, Professor Lord Robert Winston, that cyclists should be required to display licence plates. As the Sun journalist, Phoebe Cooke, reported on 29th March, Winston had claimed that two days previously, when he challenged a woman in the Bloomsbury area of London for riding her bicycle on the pavement, she became very antagonistic, swore profusely, snatched his mobile out of his hand, threw it into the road, kicked him, then rode off. Winston explained to Cooke that he hadn’t reported the incident to the police because it would be impossible to identify the cyclist.

Subsequently, on GMB, Morgan lambasted what he depicted as the “completely unaccountable cyclists creating havoc on the road”. Johnson’s response was that introducing licences for cyclists would be “crazy” and that the costs involved would be huge. The Manchester-based criminal defence lawyer, Nick Freeman has noted that the relationship of cyclists not only with pedestrians but especially with motorists has become “combustible and likely to get worse”, due to the booming popularity of cycling: More than 2 million people in Britain cycle every day. He acknowledges that many cyclists are “lawful road users” but is critical of the ones who “swathed in balaclavas or dark helmets, weave in and out of traffic with impunity, who feel untouchable because they remain anonymous”. He advocates a compulsory proficiency assessment for intending cyclists as well as the equivalent of the annual MOT test for motor vehicles: “Brakes, tyres, they all need to be checked”.

Freeman also cites the conclusions of the “Sharing The Road” survey conducted by the Halfords Bicycle company on behalf of YouGov and analysed by the “This Is Money” correspondent, Rob Hull: 59% of the 2,042 people questioned want all bikes to have registration plates, four out of five consider there should be tougher penalties for riders who jump red lights, 35% support the idea of a roadworthiness test for bikes and 65% feel strongly that cyclists should wear reflective clothing at all times to ensure that they are clearly visible to motorists and pedestrians. However, 80% also called for penalties to be increased for motorists behaving aggressively towards cyclists and 45% would like to see dedicated cycle lanes on all UK roads to “guarantee the safety of these vulnerable road users”.

Brian Canty, a contributor to “the42.ie” has identified some of the situations that most annoy cycling commuters, such as: pedestrians, buses and cars encroaching on bike lanes (“stay away from them unless you are on two wheels”); other cyclists, for example, those who brake suddenly or are not completely focused because they are wearing earphones, are talking to friends, are still half asleep or simply admiring the scenery; Bike lanes which suddenly end for no reason. Grant also concedes that some “smug and self-righteous” cyclists attract hostility because they profess to be saving the world by pedalling to work every day, ignore red lights, mount kerbs, ride down one-way streets the wrong way and think that sounding their bell and saying “sorry” is a sufficient apology.

The Independent columnist, Tom Batchelor, has meanwhile pointed out that cycling campaigners and some motoring groups are totally opposed to

the introduction of numbers plates on bicycles. Edmund King, President of the Automobile Association (AA), has dismissed the idea as both “impracticable and unnecessary” and has observed that the police anyway already have the power to detain cyclists who are breaking the law. The “Cycling UK” organisation similarly regards compulsory licensing and cycling training as unworkable and unjustifiable, not least because it’s unrealistic to expect children as well as adults to acquire licences. The Cycling UK campaigner, Sam Jones, told Batchelor that registration would be very costly to implement, a bureaucratic nightmare to administer, would deter both newcomers and occasional cyclists and that it makes no sense to put obstacles in the way of taking up an activity which is clearly so healthy and environmentally-friendly.

The Cycling UK website highlights the fact that other countries and cities such as Toronto and Switzerland have experimented with but then abandoned a variety of regulatory systems for cyclists. The organisation affirms that it doesn’t condone unlawful cycling on pavements but urges the police in such circumstances to make a distinction between “those whose behaviour is dangerous and antisocial and those who are acting out of concern for their own safety without presenting any threat to others”.

The Government, as Lord Ahmad confirmed while he was a Minister with the Department of Transport, has no plans to make insurance compulsory for cyclists, but does encourage them to take out liability insurance. Cycling UK emphasises that all its members are automatically covered for up to £10 million third party insurance and that they offer a discounted rate to members of affiliated groups.

Filed under: Healthcare, Society | Posted on April 9th, 2019 by Colin D Gordon | No Comments »

The Money In Your Pocket: Genuine Or Counterfeit?

Do you ever worry whether the banknotes or coins you have with you are fake? Perhaps you should. It seems that, despite all the efforts of the Bank of England and the National Crime Agency, there’s still a considerable amount of bogus currency circulating in Britain . The Daily Star Sunday journalist, Joe Hinton, has asserted that false £20 notes have been flooding the UK and that in the first half of 2017, more than 237,000 counterfeit banknotes with a “value” of more than £4.88 million were seized by the police.

On 13th March, the London Evening Standard’s Court Correspondent, Tristan Kirk, reported the conviction of a gang that had been running an “Amazon-style factory” in east London producing phoney identity documents, passports and and driving licence along with enough material to create 40,000 sham bank cards and £15,000 in cash. As the local commentator for BBC News, Cormac Campbell, noted on 7th February, there was a similar scenario in Northern Ireland: Seven men were sentenced for their role in a “unique” £1 million pounds counterfeiting enterprise whereby they had been printing forged sterling and euro banknotes “which were good enough to beat the counterfeit pen test”.

Just before Christmas, Amy Fenton, Business Editor of the North-West Evening Mail, publicised the case of a shop owner in Barrow-On-Furness who had spotted that an imitation £10 note was being used to purchase items in his store. He’d realised that the logo on the bottom left of the note was orange instead of holographic silver. Another recent incident, highlighted by Jess Clark, a contributor to the south London publication “News Shopper”, involved a man from Orpington in Kent who had been helping to distribute more than £135,000 worth of fraudulent banknotes.

The Bank of England has issued an “Easy To Follow Guide To Checking Banknotes” encouraging us all to take a closer look at currency which comes into our possession. This includes a warning apparently directed in particular at shop and supermarket employees that the common practice of using detector pens which react to the starch present in “normal” paper (which is still used for printing £20 notes) isn’t always effective and is no help at all in identifying counterfeits printed on polymer.

In the opinion of Trevor Mogg, an Associate Editor with “Digital Trends”, the more robust structure of notes made of polymer, a thin and flexible plastic material, not only renders them extremely resistant to dirt and moisture, so they last much longer than the previous ones, but has enabled the Bank of England to introduce a range of innovative security features. Around 440 million new £5 notes were produced in 2016, followed by polymer £10 ones in 2017, though the changeover for £20 banknotes won’t take place until next year.

The Sun journalist, Jane Denton, has pointed out that the “scam artists” have not been deterred by the fact that the new notes are supposed to be impossible to reproduce. If your £5 note is genuine, she emphasises, the image of the Queen looking at the Elizabeth tower will be gold on the front and silver on the back. When it’s tilted at an angle, the word “Five” changes to “Pounds” and a multi-coloured rainbow effect is visible. The printed lines and colours should be “sharp, clear and free from smudges or blurred edges”. If you happen to have a magnifying glass with you, you’ll be able to see the lettering below the Queen’s portrait detailing the value of the note written in small letters and numbers and on the back there should be a circular green foil patch containing the word “Blenheim”.

In addition, we are advised to feel for the raised print across the words “Bank Of England”, hold the note up to check the watermark and look for the metallic thread running through every genuine paper note. Likewise, the News Shopper’s Jess Clark suggests we examine the front of a £10 note under a good quality ultra-violet light: The number 10 should appear in bright red and green whilst the background remains dull in contrast.

The main problem with all of this, of course, is that few of us have the time or inclination to stand around in a shop or supermarket analysing whether the change we’ve just been given by the cashier is bona fide. Nor are we likely to be carrying around with us the ultra-violet (UV) lamp that the Bank Of England recommends as ideal for checking the fluorescent features on all notes.

The old round-shaped £1 coin, which was apparently very easy to imitate, with an estimated 45 million forgeries in circulation, was replaced in 2017 by the current 12-sided version. Although the Royal Mint has claimed that it’s “the most secure coin in the world”, according to Joe Hinton, gangsters have already worked out how to mimic it, apart from a few minor details such as the fine markings on the head of the thistle emblem on the reverse side. “Anything can be copied”, they told him.

Filed under: Society | Posted on March 26th, 2019 by Colin D Gordon | No Comments »

The Laws On Finding Lost Money & Buried Treasure:

What would you do if you discovered a bag of money in the street? Try to hide it under your jacket & hope no-one else saw you, take it to the nearest police station, or just put it back wherever it was, perhaps next to a letter-box or lamp-post or on a pavement bench? As the Sun journalist, Gemma Mullin, pointed out on 2nd March, that was a decision an employee of the Cordant company had to make when she found £300,000 in a brown envelope while she was cleaning a London bus. She handed the money to the police, though the Sunday Times observed on 3rd March that it wasn’t yet clear whether she would be rewarded for her honesty.

The temptation to keep mislaid cash and use it to pay off debts, go on holiday or share it with friends is perhaps understandable in this era of austerity and restricted finances – but, in the opinion of Mullin’s colleague on the newspaper, Sarah Barns, “You should never pick up money someone’s dropped on the floor”. If it’s a substantial amount, doing so may be particularly inadvisable, as it could represent the proceeds from illegal activities. Whoever it “belongs to” will undoubtedly look for whoever has taken possession of it. That was the scenario in episode two of the BBC TV’s current Sunday evening fictional drama, “Baptiste”, in which a criminal gang based in Amsterdam, Holland, was determined to recover the million euros which had been stolen from them.

When a bag of £20,000 in cash, consisting of £20 and £10 notes tied together by red rubber bands, was discovered by the West Mercia constabulary in Telford, Shropshire, it was never reclaimed, reported the Birmingham Mail columnist, Mike Lockley, because it was drug money and had been “flung from a car amid fears it was being pursued by the police”.

The case of Nicola Bailey, a 23-year-old woman from Blurton, Stoke-on -Trent with no previous convictions, has attracted particular media attention. She was filmed on CCTV picking up £20 from a floor in a local shop. It emerged later that it had been accidentally dropped by a man who’d recently withdrawn it from a cash machine. Bailey was prosecuted and was ordered to pay £20 in compensation, a £20 victim surcharge and £135 in court costs – equalling a total sum, noted the BBC News correspondent, Alex Homer, which was more than eight times as much as she’d pocketed.

Finders Keepers, Losers Weepers”, commented Homer, is an old adage that these days doesn’t actually stand up to legal scrutiny. He quoted the view of Professor Robert Chambers, an expert in private law at King’s College, London, that if you are in the street, you could reasonably believe you don’t have a chance of finding the person who lost what you found, whereas if you find a lost object in a shop it may not be so difficult to find the person who mislaid it.

According to the Theft Act 1968, a person is guilty of theft if they “dishonestly appropriate property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it”. However, a person’s appropriation of property belonging to another is not to be regarded as dishonest if they do so in the belief that the person to whom the property belongs cannot be discovered by taking reasonable steps.

The definition of what constitutes “sufficient effort”, declares Professor Chambers, varies according to the location where the discovery is made. Furthermore, “if you make a reasonable attempt to find the person who lost it and they don’t come forward, you can keep it with a clear conscience”. Lost property, so Daniel Wise, an associate solicitor with the Slater Heelis law firm, informed the Metro contributor Ashitha Nagesh, continues to belong to another unless it has genuinely been abandoned by the owner: “The fact that cash has been dropped in the street doesn’t necessarily mean it has been abandoned”.

Meanwhile, the rules regarding looking for buried treasure are governed by The Treasure Act 1997, since when the number of reported treasure finds – sometimes worth in excess of £1 million – has grown every year. The Daily Telegraph’s Laura Silverman has cited estimates that there are now 10,000 treasure hunters in the UK with metal detectors. They are, states BBC News, searching mainly for coins that are older than 300 years and other objects which contain at least 10% gold or silver and are also at least 300 years old.

If they do find any of these, they are legally obliged to report it to their local police within 14 days, otherwise they risk a heavy fine or three months in prison. A coroner and the Treasure Valuation Committee will then assess its worth in order to determine how much should be paid to the finder by a museum if it wants to acquire it.

Eligibility for a reward is based on whether the finder is themselves the owner of the land or had the agreement of the tenant or freeholder to be there. As BT.com/lifestyle/money has emphasised “Whether it’s a public park, a friend’s back garden or the local beach, all land belongs to someone. Not asking for permission before you start metal detecting could see you getting charged with trespassing or may affect any reward if you’re lucky enough to find something”.

Filed under: Society | Posted on March 12th, 2019 by Colin D Gordon | No Comments »

Categories

Recent Posts

Archives

Copyright © 2019 Colin D Gordon. All rights reserved.