Tourism Minister Pursuing Negril Beach Problems

first_imgRelatedTourism Minister Pursuing Negril Beach Problems Advertisements FacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmail A major initiative, involving the Government and a number of agencies, is being pursued to save the Negril beach at the western tip of Jamaica, Minister of Tourism, Hon Edmund Bartlett, has revealed.Mr. Bartlett says that the initiative is aimed at the sustainable re-establishment of the world famous seven-mile stretch of beach.“I am very pleased to tell you that both the Office of the Prime Minister, through Minister Vaz, on the developmental side and the environmental side, and ourselves (Ministry of Tourism), are at one in an initiative to deal with the issue of the beach enrichment programme,” he said.He said that the project would involve looking at the reef issues and determining how it can be restored and, more importantly, to develop a programme to re-establish the beach and make it sustainable.The Tourism Minister was addressing a luncheon with members of the Negril Chamber of Commerce and tourism stakeholders, at the Sandals Negril Hotel, on Thursday (December 10), following a tour of tourism facilities in Negril as part of his Tourism week activities.He pointed out that discussions have been held towards the implementation of the project, both locally and internationally.“Only a few weeks ago I was in Kazakhstan with the director general in my office, and we put forward a programme on the Negril Beach enrichment to the World Tourism Organization (WTO) for consideration, Mr. Bartlett stated.He said that the proposal entailed a new study to determine what is to be done. The study and the beach enrichment programme is estimated to cost approximately US$30 .5 million.He mentioned that the Tourism Enhancement Fund (TEF) will have a part to play in the programme, as there is a determination that Negril must be restored to pristine form.He stated that tourism stakeholders, and other residents of Negril, have a major role to play in the process.A 100 percent connection to a central sewage disposal system, proper management of water sports activities and other elements which disturb the ecosystem in the area, the control of how buildings are constructed along the beach front and a pro-active environmental awareness on the part of the residents are key issues in the whole sustainable re-establishment programme, the Minister said. RelatedTourism Minister Pursuing Negril Beach Problemscenter_img RelatedTourism Minister Pursuing Negril Beach Problems Tourism Minister Pursuing Negril Beach Problems TourismDecember 12, 2009last_img read more

News / Climate change will hit global supply chains as rising temperatures cause drop in productivity

first_imgThe reort calculates labour productivity using the wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT) metric, which assesses a combination of high temperatures and humidity, and how this can limit a human’s ability to undertake physical activity.When the WBGT exceeds 25C, people can start to experience the effects of heat stress. This hits fully when the temperature is 30°C and the relative humidity is 52%, or when temperature is 26°C and the relative humidity is 90%.When the WBGT exceeds 25°C, a person’s capacity for physical activity without suffering from heat stress drops by roughly 25%. At a WBGT of approximately 32°C, heat stress will likely occur in all instances of strenuous activity.And with global temperatures forecast to continue rising, workers in south-east Asia are expected to become the most vulnerable to heat stress.Verisk Maplecroft estimates the region could lose 16% of its current labour capacity over the next 30 years, with Singapore and Malaysia predicted to experience the heaviest tolls, with 25% and 24% decreases.Indonesia could see a 21% drop, Cambodia and the Philippines 16% and Thailand and Vietnam 12% decreases in labour productivity.This will mean a difficult balancing act for regional governments, as well as investors, with south-east Asia forecast to see a 50% increase in GDP over the same period to $9trn and accounting for 13% of the projected rise in global GDP.“The potential impact of heat stress on labour capital in the region has been largely overlooked in financial modelling, and the challenges heat stress presents national workforces in ‘extreme risk’ countries may need to be addressed if these forecasts are to be met,” Verisk Maplecroft said.“Investors in ‘extreme-risk’ countries may also be exposed to rising costs for manufacturing and health care provisions, alongside disruption risks in their supply chains,” it added.Verisk Maplecroft’s 2016 Climate Change and Environmental Risk Analytics predicts that 45 of the 50 cities most exposed to heat stress are in south-east Asia, with the only centres outside the region being Cartagena and Barranquilla in Colombia, Panama City and Arraijan in Panama and Brazil’s Manaus.The forecast reflects projections that by 2045, the number of heat stress days in both Singapore and Malaysia will rise to 364, from 335 and 338 respectively, while Indonesia is set to experience an increase from 303 to 355 and the Philippines from 276 to 337. As global leaders meet in Paris today to look at cutting greenhouse gas emissions and try to agree on new environmental targets, supply chain advisors have warned that rising temperatures will hit productivity in some of the world’s favourite sourcing locations.Global risk consultancy Verisk Maplecroft recently released a report which predicts that labour productivity in south-east Asia – rapidly becoming a major global manufacturing hub – could drop by as much as 25% if temperatures continue to rise.The company’s head of environment, Dr James Allan, said: “Climate change will push heat stress impacts to boiling point with significant implications for both national economies and the health of vulnerable workers.“Governments and business need to identify which assets, sectors, commodities and groups are most at risk and what protective measures should be put in place.” By Gavin van Marle 01/12/2015center_img Photo: Sangoirilast_img read more

National Express swoops in to buy Clarkes of London

first_imgNational Express Group (NEG) has bought respected family-owned independent, Clarkes of London. It runs 56 coaches from its Lower Sydenham base, halfway between Croydon and the city.Says NEG: “The acquisition expands our significant presence in the commuter and private hire markets. It will be business as usual for our customers and the Clarkes team.”Clarkes will be managed by Gillingham, north Kent-based The Kings Ferry; itself bought by NEG nine years ago. Its MD, Ian Fraser, adds the new role of MD at Clarkes to his duties.Clarkes was run by husband and wife team Debbie and Terry Newman, who will stay with the business for a ‘transitional period’Clarkes was run by husband and wife Debbie and Terry Newman (pictured), who will stay with the business for a “transitional period.”The purchase price has not been revealed. Clarkes is financially strong; its latest accounts for the year ending 30 April showed a £329,667 pre-tax profit on an £8.4m turnover, a 3.9% margin. Its net assets were £4.3m and its acid ratio 0.44.Mr Fraser says: “It’s a company I’ve look at and admired for some time. The Kings Ferry has benefitted from the economies of scale by being part of a plc, and I’m sure this will also help Clarkes.”There is plenty of room for expansion at Clarkes, which already has a 70-vehicle O-Licence and space for 100 vehicles in its modern yard. The Kings Ferry runs 75 coaches.Commuter coaches are 20% of Clarkes’ turnover. It gives NEG a strong portfolio of corporate work and private hire – especially inbound tourism, an area that The Kings Ferry is weaker in – to the group.The firm, founded in 1958 by coal hauliers Edwin and Lillian Clarke, soon developed into coaching. In 1972 his eldest son, Bill Clarke and his wife, took control and began to broaden the services.Since Bill’s retirement in 2002, control passed to his eldest daughter, Debbie Newman, who instituted a major business change programme and expansion.last_img read more

Employment

first_img Emma Smith (instructed by Beachcrofts (Bristol)) for the appellant; Anna Beale (instructed by Leigh Day & Co) for the respondent. The appellant employer (M) appealed against the employment tribunal’s finding that the respondent former employee (C) had suffered direct ­disability discrimination contrary to section 3A(5) of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. C was an executive director in an industry which paid high bonuses. He was successful in his work but had been told that he needed to widen his client base. In 2007 C severely injured his back and, as a result, his working hours and ability to entertain possible new clients were significantly reduced. At his appraisal, C was told that he had made a strong showing despite his injury. However, M noted that 65% of C’s revenue still came from one client. C was awarded a much lower bonus than the previous year and was later selected for redundancy. The tribunal found that C had been unfairly dismissed and had suffered direct disability discrimination in relation to his bonus and his dismissal. However, it also found that, in accordance with Malcolm v Lewisham LBC [2008] UKHL 43, [2008] 1 AC 1399, a non-disabled comparator in similar circumstances would have been treated in the same way in relation to bonuses and selection for redundancy. The tribunal consequently dismissed C’s claims for disability-related discrimination under section 3A(1). M submitted that, as the tribunal had found that there was no disability-related discrimination because the Malcolm comparator would have been treated in the same way, there could not, on the same facts, be direct disability discrimination. Held: (1) Although the tribunal could, before considering other ingredients of the statutory tort, ask itself ‘the reason why’ for the alleged discriminatory treatment, a comparator was still required, Shamoon v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary [2003] UKHL 11, [2003] 2 All ER 26 and Bahl v Law Society [2003] IRLR 640 EAT applied. In the instant case, the tribunal had not constructed a comparator so far as direct discrimination was concerned, and had not explained what the discrimination was. The comparator for section 3A(1)(a) was a person in similar circumstances to the claimant who either did not have the claimant’s disability or was not disabled, or where the circumstances of the comparator were unconnected with the claimant’s disability, and Malcolm had rendered the scope of section 3A(1)(a) for all practical purposes to be the same as for direct discrimination under section 3A(5). Therefore, if the case on disability-related discrimination failed, it was difficult to see how the same allegations relied upon in support of that case could found a successful claim for direct discrimination; if the claimant had not demonstrated that he had suffered less-favourable treatment, both claims would fail, Edinburgh City Council v Dickson, unreported, 2 December [2009] EAT (SC) applied. The tribunal therefore appeared to have confused the test of determining direct discrimination under section 3A(5) with the pre-Malcolm test of disability-related discrimination, Malcolm applied. Furthermore, it was unclear whether the tribunal considered there was direct discrimination for reasons other than unfair dismissal, failure to increase the client base and in connection with the bonus. If the tribunal did consider that the direct discrimination related to other matters, it was not clear what those might have been and who would have been the appropriate actual or hypothetical comparator, if not the comparator identified for the purposes of disability-related discrimination. If the tribunal considered that a comparator who had failed to widen his client base would have been treated differently it should have said so. (2) The matter would be remitted to the tribunal to determine whether there had been direct disability discrimination on grounds other than the bonus, dismissal or failure to increase the client base. Appeal allowed. Discrimination – Comparators – Reasons – Unfair dismissalcenter_img JP Morgan Europe Ltd v R Chweidan: EAT (Judge Serota QC, A Gallico, K Mohanty): 26 August 2010last_img read more

Surf Zup in downtown Farmington July 28

first_img admin Share this:Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Farmington’s Rhythmz in Riley Park offers up a beach party July 28, with Surf Zup taking music lovers back to 1964.Jamming together since 2013, Surf Zup plays everything from The Ventures to TV and movie themes with a surf guitar influence. Get a concert preview and listen to the rundowns, rapid double pickings and use of a reverb tank and whammy bar here: http://tinyurl.com/SurfZupatRiley.The 7:30 p.m. concert in Riley Park and Walter E. Sundquist Farmington Pavilion at Grand River and Grove Street is free and open to the public. Bring a lawn chair or blanket. Reported bylast_img read more