Education Problem in Korea Essay Example for Free

Education Problem in Korea Essay A mother gets a headache whenever she comes back home after attending mothers regular meetings, the purpose of which is to get some information about private instruction. Her children keep her as busy as a professional manager. She surveys popular newly opened institutes called hagwon, makes a group for private lessons, chooses instructors and pushes her children to study. When they are asked about their plans for the declining years of their lives, most are not saving for old age. They feel uneasy because they are not able to save money, so some mothers go to work to earn enough for extra instruction expense. Many husbands and wives argue about their childrens education. However, their children dont care about their parents troubles. The children regard it as the natural role of parents, because they are the kings or queens of the family, served by sacrificing parents from birth. Parents seem to allow their childrens complaining. Children dont appreciate their parents because they are not happy with their support. Sometimes they act like robots controlled by mothers orders. They dont have time to talk with family, to play with their friends or to get sufficient sleep. They always hurry to learn something. As for me, I also have anxiety about my daughters private education. There are moments that I want her to push to study a little bit more because I feel worried when I hear how many kinds of extra instruction her friends are taking. But I can calm down my selfish desire by looking at my exhausted daughter. I try to confirm that the most effective result of studying comes from self-studying with strong motivation. Most parents dont wait until their children ask them to help with their studying. Theyre never satisfied. For example, many Korean goose daddies decide to sacrifice their lives by themselves, not by the childrens demands, in spite of the struggle with loneliness after they send their families to a foreign country. These days, many ordinary families without sufficient finances are planning for their children to study abroad despite the huge cost. They probably need to squeeze their budget or even borrow the money. Are their precious sons and daughters going to thank their parents in the future? Will their parents be satisfied with their children later? I wonder how great their outcomes will be. In addition to problems within families, there are many side effects with private education at school, which are usually from the studying burden. They learn the material they need in advance in hagwon before they learn it at school. Many math teachers in middle school become upset while they are teaching theorems or concepts. Some students dont concentrate on the lesson because they are under a delusion that they already know everything. Actually, they cant solve even the easy and basic problems when slightly changed. What is the investment of the money and time for private lessons for? Math teachers say the incomplete knowledge spoils the students ability to think. In English class, there are several fluent students with native pronunciation gained in English speaking countries. However, sometimes teachers are upset when they are very quiet and never volunteer for the class because they dont want to be victims of cynical teasing from their friends. The students high-leveled from private education tend to be bored during class. Another big problem is about the students who have a kind of mental disease, some of who are extremely offensive and some who have abiosis without any interest in anything. Their attitude is usually caused by the pressure of studying and of too high expectations compared to their ability. Koreans all know that economic growth is based on educating for the future generation. Korea doesnt have enough natural resources, so we need to develop knowledge and skills. The government nowadays wants to increase autonomous high schools for competitive system to build up superior talents. But parents are not likely to reduce the private education. We hope the government listens carefully to what the citizens say. For instance, English teachers need small classes according to students levels in order to achieve the aim for English-speaking class. Parents and teachers dont want epoch-making policy, but just one step in the development of education policy. Korean parents need to remember this truth: their investment in children who dont have self-motivation might waste their money, their time and their energy. Id like to advise parents to give their children a chance to choose what they want, and to wait until they are eager to study what they need. Also, I suggest they should ignore their neighbors private education, not public education.

EU’s Adoption of IFRS

EU’s Adoption of IFRS Introduction From 1st January 2005, all European countries are required under EU law to use the IFRS[1]standards for their financial reporting statements, which includes corporations domiciled within the UK (Nobes and Parker, 2006, p.103). This applies to all year-ends that complete after that date. In addition to this requirement, it is a requirement of the standards that, for comparison purposes, the previous year financial included within the statements must be recomputed to reflect a true IFRS position. The main proposals for these standards and their first year usage are contained within IFRS 1. The change of standards has had a significant impact upon financial reporting in the UK. Therefore the intention of this paper is to discuss why the EU felt it necessary to adopt the IFRS; provide an understand of the IFRS main goals and to ascertain the areas in which this has affected the UK reporting methods, outlining the key areas of change by comparing them to the previous financial reporting methods used. Adoption of IFRS by the EU In previous books (published in 1998 and before), Nobes and Parker (2006) discussed the Varity of different standards that were being operated within the member states of Europe, including those that have converted to capitalism from the former communist bloc, which included countries such as Poland and Romania. These differences have been determined by the political and capitalist attitudes of individual nations and can be separated into two main groups, those where markets and reporting is driven by the state, with weak equity markets, and those driven by business, where the equity market is strong. It has long been accepted that the differing financial reporting standards that have existed in the past has led to difficulties, particular in terms of international trade and financing (Gregoriou and Gaber 2006, p.460). The EU recognised that, within its own region, this was affecting the flow of capital and finance between member states. In an attempt to address this issue, the commission sought to achieve harmonisation through raising legislation and regulations. However, when these failed to work, somewhat reluctantly the commission then changed its position and became an active supporter of the US dominated IFRS standards (Nobes and Parker 2006, p.105). IFRS standards have become increasing accepted as an international method of financial reporting, primarily because of its benefits in improving the globalisation of trade and financial activities, which will become less complex. In addition to the US, an ever-increasing number of countries have adopted IFRS, thus it was only a matter of time before the EU acquiesced. The intention is to move towards a system of fairer values (Bruce 2004), and to make the EU as a regional and international trading bloc far more competitive. However, the EU adoption of the standards, intended to be relatively straightforward, was not without difficulties (Bruce 2004). In the initial stages there were areas of dispute and, in particular, parts of the standards that the EU would not accept, for example IFRS 39 the standard that deals with â€Å"fair value†, although this has recently been adopted in a limited form. Furthermore, despite IFRS, differences between the financial reporting methods used in Europe still exist (Nobes and Parker (2006, p.19). Nevertheless, in view of the pressure from a number of stakeholders, it is inevitable that the impact of individual national standards will continue to be eroded in favour of a globally recognised system (Nobes and Parker 2006, p.13) Executive summary of IFRS IFRS 1, the mainstay of the standards has seen two amendments, the latest implemented in January 2007, although most of these have not affected the underlying core focus of the standards. Whilst each standard has a defined objective, there are a number of overall goals embodied within the process. Objectives The key focus and goal of the International Financial Reporting Standards is to achieve a position where, globally, one system will be seen to be the norm and form the basis upon which all trade, capital and financially motivated decisions in the international marketplace will be relied upon. The intention is that, through the acceptance of these standards, existing investment barriers will cease to exist as well, which will improve capital market performance. Furthermore, it is intended to promote reliable system of universal accuracy and comparability, together with a method that will ensure a standard model for corporate governance that can be referred to equally by all stakeholders, whether they are involved with the corporation or not. It is stated that the improvement to the reporting processes will also develop management data and lead to reduction of risk Individually, the standards have their own goals. For example, IAS 1.7 focuses on the presentation of the financial statements and Cash Flow in a manner that is understandable to everyone. Similarly, the objective of IFRS 7 are to ensure that corporate management discloses all information that has had an impact upon the business during the year covered within the financial statements. In particularly, emphasis is placed upon the accuracy of the corporate balance sheets, cash flows, as these are the areas where historically, as has been evidenced in cases such as Enron, and WorldCom, significant issues of financial stability arose, causing the loss of millions of jobs and investment monies. Achieving reliability within these areas is one of the fundamental goals of IFRS. Once of the main difficulties that arose with previous standards was the method of accounting for value, particularly with respect to assets and other balance sheet items. This situation was exacerbated in situations of the increasing incidence of mergers and acquisitions. Where a corporation takes over or merges with another, the cost of such a move, known as the goodwill payment, under the â€Å"historical cost convention† would be reflected in the balance sheet as the current value. However, goodwill is not a tangible asset in the sense that one can physically touch or use it. Its value will fluctuate in accordance with market determinates. Under the IFRS system items such as goodwill have to be accounted for in respect of the â€Å"fair value† at the time of the statements. Therefore, the core objective is that the statements reflect a realisable value rather than one that may have been eroded over time. To ensure that the financial statements of individual corporations reflected these objectives, IFRS also requires officers of the company and external experts to warrant that all the statements made, and financial information provided within the statements have been prepared in accordance with those objectives. The process of measurement is another key factor within the reporting standards. Here again, concentrating upon the relationship to the â€Å"current fair value,† the individual standards set our prescribed rules and guidelines as to how each item contained within the financial statement should be measured and what will be recognised as an acceptable method. Meticulous attention is paid to the valuation of assets, which apart from the year of acquisition when cost can be used, should have been based upon current realisable value as certified from a reliable and expert source, unless there is a justifiable reason for not doing so. These measurement guidelines are also extended to debts, other liabilities and equity items contained in the financial statements. Requirements for presentation and disclosure in financial statements feature prominently within the IFRS standards. The presentation requirements in particular determine the way in which the financial data should be analysed within each segment of the corporation’s main financial statements and supporting notes. The purpose of this is to ensure that relevant information cannot be, either deliberately or inadvertently, concealed from interested stakeholders. For example, IAS 1.68 identifies the minimum requirement for information analysis in the business balance sheet, and there are similar instructions in IAS 1.81 that relate to the revenue statements, which identify how revenue, finance costs, and profit or loss distribution should be displayed. As indicated earlier, the IFR standards include numerous requirements in respect of the information that corporations are expected to disclose, as can be evidenced from the information checklist that has been prepared by Deloitte (2005), one of the â€Å"big four† auditing firms. In addition to all of the factors already discussed within this papers, further disclosures are expected to be made in relation to the how the business has complied with corporate governance rules and regulations and the assessment of risk. Despite the arguments that have arisen in various circles in respect of individual aspects of the IFRS system, it is generally accepted that they do provide a framework which, when fully implemented and adopted internationally, will be of benefit in relation to the globalisation of trade. A case study of the IFRS impact on a UK corporation The financial statement of every UK Corporation has been affected by the implementation of IFRS and it has impacted upon the resultant financial information. To provide an example of these changes British Telecom is being used as an example. The 2006 statements in support of this analysis are attached in the appendix of this paper. As is allowable under IFRS 1, BT has availed itself of some of the exemptions and exceptions that are provided for in the preparation of the accounts. The exceptions applicable in this case are defined as follows: Business combinations. Employee benefits Share payments Cumulative translation differences Financial Instruments In the main, these exceptions relate to the retrospective treatment of the above items together with other aspects of the treatment of these items at the date of transition. For example, IFRS 3 is not being applied in a retrospective manner to business combinations. Pages 111 and 112 of British Telecom’s annual report for 2006 outlines the major areas of change that have impacted on the financials: Equity. The most important change relates to the reduction in equity. Brought about mainly by the change in employee benefits and adjustment to leases, this has seen a reduction of  £3.9 billion. Profit. As can be seen from the pages referred to, there was little impact from IFRS on the returned profit earned by the business during the year, with the debit and credit amounts cancelling themselves out. Except for an addition of  £8 million. Under the UK GAAP system, firma were allowed to account for divided provisions within the profit and loss account. IFRS standards state that this should not be the case, and that the dividends can only be included within the year that they are payable, therefore these has been excluded. Assets and Liabilities. In terms of the Individual items heading, as can be seen, there have been a number of significant changes, for example with the reorganisation and re-evaluation of the various assets. However, overall the net reduction of the equity format of the balance sheet was only just over  £200 million. In terms of the cash flow statement, there has been no change to the cash flow that has been generated by the business during the year. In essence, this shows that whilst UK business have been concerned with the impact of IFRS, when one takes into account that all competitors are likewise affected, these changes make little or no difference to the market position of BT. Bibliography Whittington, Geoffrey (2005). The adoption of International Accounting Standards in the European Union. European Accounting Review, Vol. 14, issue 1, pages 127-153. Nobes, C. and Parker, R. (2006). Comparative International Accounting. 9th Edition. FT Prentice Hall. UK. Deloitte (2005). IFRS 7: A disclosure checklist. Retrieved 1 May 2007 from http://www.iasplus.com/fs/0510ifrs7checklist.pdf Gregoriou, Greg N and Gaber, Mohamed (2006). International Accounting: Standards, Regulations, Financial Reporting. Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd. Oxford, UK. Blake, John and Amat, Oriol (1993). European Accounting. FT Prentice Hall. Perry Michelle (2005). IFRS – The Next Steps. Accountancy Age. London, UK. Flower, John (2004). European Financial Reporting: Adapting to a changing World. Palgrave Macmillan. London, UK. Bruce, Robert (2004). Setting a new standard. Financial Times. London, UK. IFRS (2007). Summary of reporting standards. IFRS. Delaware, US. Retrieved 1 May 2007 from http://www.iasb.org/NR/rdonlyres/8177F9A2-EB2F-45A3-BBF3-3DE7DCB13E1A/0/IFRS7.pdf Footnotes [1] International Financial Reporting Standards

Can Legalistic mechanisms be effectively used to promote organizational safety

Can Legalistic mechanisms be effectively used to promote organizational safety Can legalistic mechanisms such as corporate liability be effectively used to promote organizational safety? Use two specific cases to illustrate your argument. In the era of globalisation and battle of business for expansion to foreign markets, large organisations in a form of legal entities (i.e. corporations) is seem to be taking the dominant role over the worlds economy. The growing size of corporations, their complexity and control of immense resources provides ground for misconduct that often results in adverse effects to both individuals and the community. Great numbers of incidents that resulted in a large scale harms caused to society in the past decades has brought the responsibility of corporate misbehaviour and the way they treat risks to many debates both in professional and lay public. The idea of attempting to manage organisational risks is recognized as a relatively new concept (Institute of Lifelong Learning, 2006: 5-6) and the complexity of social interactions of individuals that constitute organisations adjacent to fast development of advanced technologies in contemporary society may prove for identification of hazardous circumstances that affect safety within organisations, extremely challenging. As observed by the Institute of Lifelong Learning (2006: 5-6) there are some acknowledged professional and academic courses in Britain, but since the management of organisational risks is not a mature activity, it does not possess the same level of legitimacy that some other institutionalised concepts do. It appears that legal reforms in Europe and some other countries intend to make it easier to impose legal sanctions on corporations for serious wrongdoings. One might suggest that such reforms are logical consequence of some mayor harms produced by corporations that were later unsuccessfully prosecuted under existing laws and deemed insufficient to protect the public interests. In the United Kingdom (UK) some large scale accidents such as the train crash at Paddington, the fire at Kings Cross underground station, the capsizing of the ferry Herald of Free Enterprise are few that were catalysts for reforms making it easier to impose strict liability on corporations for physical injuries or deaths. The adoption of Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 might be perceived as an important indicator of these reforms. This paper will examine a much controversial aspects of the extent to which risk management regimes should be more or less blame orientated (Hood et al., 1996: 46) and, à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ whether, in the event of an avoidable accident, the company as well as (or perhaps rather than) identified individuals might or should be held morally or legally responsible for an act or omission (Institute of Lifelong Learning 2006, 4-22). The essay question opens a much discussed notion of corporate liability which this paper will discuss in the context of organisational aspects of health and safety as an integral part of managing risks in organisations. The essay will also discuss legislative aspects that are regulating corporate responsibility. However, the intention of the author is not to summarize the arguments on legislation basis in detail. It needs to be recognized that legislation that regulates corporate responsibility varies worldwide. Therefore, the paper will discuss some of the broader aspects that might affect health and safety compliance in organisations. Finally this essay will throughout the discourse provide an argument that strict financial and legal liability posed on corporate bodies can significantly contribute to a better organisational safety. This will be achieved by using two specific cases for discussion in order to support the argument. The case studies used in the discussion are the fire at Kings Cross underground station in London, UK in 1987 and the fire of the cable car in Kaprun, Austria in 2000. Definitions of terms For further discussion the key terms from the essay question needs to be defined. Bergman, (2000: 20) in his critical perspectives on corporate responsibility in UK uses the term company and corporate in the context of à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦companies set up with a view to profit that have been registered under the Companies Act 1985. In the same explanation, he further also considers a set of those companies that befalls under variety of other legal provisions, including a number of organisations in public sector. Despite some important distinctions can be made, this essay considers the term of corporation, company and organisation in the same context, with potential to produce a certain kind of harm. According to online dictionary a corporation is à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦a large company or group of companies authorized to act as a single entity and recognized as such in law; and liability is à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦the state of being legally responsible for something (Ask Oxford, 2010). In order to merge the terms, this paper will use the definition on corporate liability of another internet source, namely Wise Geek (2010), which defines corporate liability à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦as an assessment of the activities that a corporation may be held legally liable for in a court of law. The general point to be made here is that in principle a corporation can be held legally liable as a single entity for corporate activities (acts or omissions) that is breaching the law through the group or an individual it employs. Such breaches of law might have severe adverse effects on society, resulting in harm to health and safety of either the people or environment, where health is regarded more in the context of wellbeing of people. For further discussion the definition of the term safety is taken from a dictionary. Shorter Oxford (1973; quoted in Institute of Lifelong Learning, 2006: 4-11) regards safety as: The state of being safe; exemption from hurt or injury; freedom from danger the quality of being unlikely to cause hurt or injury; freedom from dangerousness; safeness. In order to merge the terms health and safety in the context of organisational structures and their legal responsibilities, the example is taken from an explanation provided by the Institute of Lifelong Learning (2006: 4-7), which argues that the term is not only about enforcement of legislation related to protection of employees. The argument goes à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦It is much more of a generic concept, which has developed the status of an ethos, à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦which is demonstrated by the use of the term `Safety Culture for the attitude of an organisation towards risk-taking. One might already observe that targeting the essay question in the context of effectiveness of corporate liability towards organisational safety in an affirmative manner might be considerably narrow. It becomes visible that managing safety in organisational framework requires further examination in a broader context of Risk, Crisis and Disaster management, if complementary progress on safety through imposed strict liability measures on corporations desires to be achieved. However, before the discussion on specific case studies, the term safety culture requires additional attention, since it was illustrated that it might play an important role in attitudes towards risk taking in an organisational context. Explanations of the term safety culture flourish. A very concise one was given by the CBI (1990) as the way we do things around here. Pidgeon et al. (1991: 249) define safety culture as those sets of norms, rules, roles, beliefs, attitudes and social and technical practices within an organisation which are concerned with minimising the exposure of individuals to conditions considered to be dangerous. As such defines individuals attitude and beliefs about organisations, their perceptions of risks and the importance, practicality and effectiveness of controls regarding organisational safety. The case studies The case studies used in this paper are both disastrous events caused by the sudden occurrence of fire which resulted in fatal outcome to many involved. The first, fire at Kings Cross underground station in London in 1987 claimed the lives of 31 people and injured many more. The fire followed a number of less serious hazardous fire incidents on the London Underground. The official report concluded the immediate cause of the fire as a failure to clean and lubricate the running tracks of the escalator where the fire took place after the match fell (Department of Transport, 1988; quoted in Bergman, 2000: 24). Kletz (2001: 116) argued that approximately 20 fires per year between 1958 and 1967 were à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦called smoulderings to make them seem less serious. Similarly, the November 1988 Public Inquiry report observes the London Underground managements reaction to earlier escalator fires from 1956 to 1988 as imperfect, describing the managements approach as reactive rather than proactive (Department of Transport, 1988; quoted in Bergman, 2000: 24). In particular, the report summed up in the evidence of the then Director General of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents, that many recommendations after previous fires: à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦had not been adequately considered by senior managers and there was no way to ensure that they were circulated, considered and acted upon. Londons Underground failure to carry through the proposals resulting from earlier fires such as the provision of automatic sprinklers, the need to ensure all fire equipment was correctly positioned and serviceable, identification of alternative means of escape and the need to train staff to react properly and positively in emergencies was a failure which I believe contributed to the disaster at Kings Cross. (Department of Transport, 1988; in Bergman, 2000: 25) Despite the fact that the report recognized collective failure for disaster from the level of most senior managers downwards over many years to minimise the risk of fire outbreaks, the sound blame was placed mainly to senior management of the company. The official report into the disaster claims the responsibility of management systems as playing a significant role in development of precipitating causes that triggered the disaster (Fennell, 1989; in Institute of Lifelong Learning, 2006: 3-5). However, was the applicability of existing legal instruments effective enough to reach the corporate decision makers and to what extent? Apparently, at the time of the accident there were sufficient instruments in place to find the London Underground legally liable for a criminal act of manslaughter or for a lesser offence under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 (Bergman, 2000: 29). Regardless sustainable grounds provided for legal punishment, the London Underground and its senior managers gained immunity from any form of criminal accountability (Bergman 2000: 29). It is beyond the scope of this paper to examine further in details all the failures that led to disaster and the debates that followed in the aftermath. Though, the failures summed above can already pinpoint that organisational safety culture was poorly maintained. The November 1988 Public Inquiry report specifically stated that the London Undergrounds understanding of statutory responsibilities for health and safety at work was mistaken and that many of the shortcomings which led to the disaster had been identified in earlier investigations and in reports by the fire brigade, the police and the Railway Fire Prevention and Fire Standards Committee (Department of Transport, 1988; in Bergman, 2000: 24-25). This exemplifies that the London Underground management was made aware of non-compliance with safety standards. Even though a history of small fire outbreaks was excessive, the London Underground failed to consider reported hazards seriously and to introduce safe guards to minimise t he risk of a fire with a potential for large scale loss of life. Such a conclusion stands much in favour of those who argue that à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦effective risk management depends on the design of incentive structures that place strict financial and legal liability onto those who are in the best position to take action to minimize the risk (Hood Jones, 1996: 46). The claim is that: à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦if liability is not precisely targeted on specific and appropriate decision-makers, a poorly designed institutional incentive structure will allow avoidable accidents to occur. Without close targeting of liability, there will be too little incentive for care to be taken by those decision-makers in organizations who are capable of creating hazards, and (the argument goes) risk externalization will be encouraged. Policies should, therefore, aim to support expanded corporate legal liability, more precisely targeted insurance premium practices, and regulatory policies that have the effect of criminalizing particular management practices and of laying sanctions directly on key decision- makers within corporations, rather than trusting corporations as undifferentiated legal persons. (cf. Fisse Braithwaite, 1988; in Hood Jones, 1996: 46) Was the looseness of regulatory and legal instruments in hands of the safety investigators that did not make it possible to enforce the London Underground to remove the identified hazards and that led to the disaster, this paper was not able to fully determine. However, it is of believe that strict liability imposed on those who represent a guiding mind and will of the company for non-compliance with safety regulations, would be effective to prevent an avoidable accident to occur. An absence of criminal charges against the senior company managers might to some extent support a positive answer on the essay question with Bergmans argument in criticising the authorities of their failure to prosecute directors. He suggested that it is often argued that only when proper action is taken against directors-with a real threat of imprisonment-will other companies take notice (Bergman, 2000: 90). Though, some wider perspectives of corporate liability in relation to organisational safety need to be further discussed before any conclusions drawn. This brings the discussion to the next case study, where all the regulations were complied and yet the disaster occurred. The second example that this essay considers is the fire of a funicular train in a tunnel that happened near Kaprun, Austria in November 2000. The fire on a Gletscherbahnen Kapruns funicular railway, carrying 167 people up to the Kitzsteinhorn glacier claimed lives of 152 passengers on board, the driver of the second train in the tunnel and two people near the top portal of the tunnel. In total 155 people lost their lives, injured not tallied (the total number of people involved in the incident varies throughout different articles. Figures presented in this paper are matching the majority of them). The 12 survivors who managed to escape out of the train through smashed windows were those who fled downhill away from the smoke. Others who fled uphill were overcome by smoke and fume. Those survived witnessed that smoke was emanating from the rears driver cabin before the train entered the 3.5 kilometres long and 3.6 meters wide tunnel with an average incline of 45 degrees. The immediate cause of the fire was a leaky tube of hydraulic oil that came into contact with a glowing heater at the rear cabin, nearby wooden panels and isolation materials. After the heater caught fire, the hydraulic line exploded and the oil was sprayed into the flames. This was stated as the reason why flames spread so quickly. The official results of the investigations confirmed belief of the experts that fire was caused by an electric heating ventilator, which was illegally installed into the drivers cabin (Transit Cooperative Research Program, 2006: 26-28; Beard Carvel, 2005: 6; Faure Hartlief, 2006: 31). Although the train driver reported the blaze to his base station, the train continued and stopped 600 meters into the tunnel. Following, as the Transit Cooperative Research Program (2006) suggests that: à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦the fire continued and the steep tunnel acted like a giant chimney, sucking air in from the bottom and sending toxic smoke billowing upwards. Despite an alarm signal and contact with the base station instructing the driver to open the doors, the train stayed at the location with its door sealed. Later investigation revealed that this was the immediate cause of death of most of the passengers. (Transit Cooperative Research Program, 2006: 27) Some observed that the accident has parallels with the Kings Cross fire. As Transit Cooperative Research Program (2006: 28) suggests that the Kings Cross escalator shaft at the centre of the fire had a 30 degree incline that, like the Kaprun fire created a chimney effect. The Kaprun blaze moved faster because of the steeper incline. Though, unlike the Kings Cross disaster, where several small fires were excessively observed before the accident, in the Kaprun case a regular inspection of an independent civil technicians performed two months before the first day of skiing season and also the day of the accident, has found no safety breaches or non-compliances with safety regulations. However, does that make the existing safe guards to prevent the accident sufficient and, nonetheless, the Gletscherbahnen Kaprun any less culpable for the disaster? As Tyler (2000) put forward à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦there was no sprinkler system to put out the flames in the tunnel, fireproof emergency refuges or an evacuation tunnel through which the passengers might have escaped. The BBC News (2004) stated that à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦the blaze was worsened by the fact that the tunnel was not lit, had only one narrow service stairway and the doors of the train could not be opened by the trapped passengers from the inside. Another author (Beier, Unknown: 3) in his paper claims that there were no emergency exits, lights or a method to pull the burning train out of the tunnel. Similarly the Transit Cooperative Research Program (2006: 28) stated that the train did not have enough fire extinguishers and that an evacuation drill never took place. The listed above illustrates that significant safety measures were ignored downwards many years of operating the Gletscherbahnen Kapruns funicular train. In recognition of that, sixteen people including company officials, technicians and government inspectors were arrested and charged with criminal negligence. The centre of the prosecution was to claim liability for those responsible for installing and servicing a non-regulation heater in the drivers cabin, which sparked the blaze by leaking oil. However, on February 19, 2004, Austrian court acquitted all sixteen with explanation of the judge in Salzburg that à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦there was insufficient evidence to find the 16 train operators, suppliers and inspectors responsible for the blaze (BBC News, 2004). The appellate court in Linz in 2005 confirmed the verdict of the Salzburg court with the decision that no criminal acts were demonstrated despite the obvious failure to take care. The defendants had complied with the regulations ( Beier, Unknown, 3). Many affected announced that they would continue with civil proceedings. Though, these cases are still pending. The main problem was that designers of the electric heater complied with the existing regulations. However, the regulations failed to distinguish required standards for different types of trains. The design of the heater installed was inappropriate for a train in a tunnel and obviously different hazards were not foreseen. As Beier (Unknown, 4) argues: A horrible risk caused entirely by the design and construction of the technical system had slipped through the entire legal and regulatory system because everyone focused on the compliance with the regulation not whether the system was safe. As he suggested in the paper, no one thought about a fire nor did regulators ask anyone to think about it (Beier, Unknown: 3). One of the conclusions drawn by Beier (Unknown: 4) on Kapruns accident is that even major companies will do only the exact minimum to comply with regulations and that compliance with regulations does not guarantee a safe outcome. It is important that, he as many argues that simple product can create extremely complex risk systems and assuming that risks in technologically advanced -complex systems can be effectively managed by regulations they might prove as inefficient as in the case of Kaprun disaster. However, short before the accident in Kaprun took place, there were several occurrences of disastrous events that befell the road and rail tunnel users in the Alps and elsewhere (BBC News, 2000). Therefore, it should not be neglected that the Gletscherbahnen Kaprun managers together with the authorities inherently failed in the management of organizational risks by, as Toft and Reynolds (1994; quoted in Institute of Lifelong Learning 2006: 5-10) suggest, not taking advantage of the l essons learned by others. Conclusion The case studies revealed serious recklessness of the companies in their regard to safety, which unfortunately in both cases resulted in disastrous events with great losses of lives, many injured and large numbers of grievous families that lost their loved. Despite the fact that great harm was caused to society, neither companies nor their managers were prosecuted or found guilty in front of court for any kind of criminal behaviour. Though, it needs to be recognised that the concept of criminal corporate liability is only one perspective in a broader context of responsibility claimed in case of corporate wrongdoing. In the case of Kings Cross fire it is suggested that strict liability imposed on senior managers could stipulate the companys proactive respond in dealing with identified hazards that later led to disaster. In the case of Kaprun fire the possibilities for cross-organisational isomorphism to cover the gap of being unaware of the consequences that could happen and actually did happen, were obviously missed. In both cases this paper suggest that the companies regarded safety with gross negligence, with the main aim to do only exact minimum to comply with safety standards and regulations. Bergman argues that: à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦unlike the minds of individuals, which cannot be re-modelled, the components of a company can be analysed and reformed. New policies can be adopted, new job positions created and new management systems set up. The organisational defects of a company itspsyche can be taken into pieces and put together. Unsafe companies can be turned into safe ones. (Bergman, 2000: 99) Both companies operated in an inherently unsafe manner before the accidents occurred and responded with significant safety improvements only after the disasters. One might argue that such safety improvements were not out of sight in terms of available resources on both sides already before the accidents. With strict financial and legal liability incentives, avoidable accidents might be prevented. Bergman (2000: 90) argues that à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦there is a great need to increase the accountability of directors and senior company officers; the backbone of any system of deterrence in preventing corporate harm, must be action against those in control of the company. There are many that are sceptical of such an argument and consider it as possibly ineffective or even counterproductive. Such opponents can point to some other policy areas where criminalization leads to the adoption of artificial legal devices to limit liability, rather than to real changes in behaviour (The Royal Society, 1992: 157-158). Fitzgerald (1986; quoted in Hood Jones, 1996: 62) claims that à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦person should not be punished for occurrences over which they could not exercise no controlà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦if such targeting is to be implemented, then it must be accurate. Indeed, safety concerns should not be placed in the hands of management only. It should be overall responsibility of all aspects within organisational structures. However, it should be vested at the highest level of each organization (Bergmann 2000: 126). Wells (quoted in Hood Jones, 1996: 60) suggest, à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦if safety managers want to make themselves weatherproof, their barometers need to be tuned as much to the pressure of social constructions of accidents as to the legal categories into which they potentially be placed. The managers should exercise whatever is reasonably possible to prevent avoidable accidents to occur. Therefore, incentive structures that place legal liability on those corporate bodies that are in the best position to take action to minimize risks can be an effective mechanism to promote organisational safety. Regular safety audits or inspections could present an important instrument not only to penalize non-compliances of safety regulations, but to expo se hazardous circumstances that could develop into any mayor accidents. Gray and Scholz suggest that: Inspections imposing penalties result in improved safety because they focus managerial attention on risks that may otherwise have been overlooked. It is not the miniscule penalty that makes OSHA inspections effective in reducing injuries, but rather the concern of managers to prevent the costs associated with accidents once they are aware of the risks. (Scholz, 1997: 256)

Extending Business Hours in Australia :: Argumentative, Persuasive

In South Australia, the business hour is shorter than other places in Australia, such as Sydney and Melbourne. Some people states that the business hour is long enough to them in South Australia and extending business hour would raise social problems, such as social security and state budget. However extending business hour benefits a lot for South Australia. It can create more economic profits and is good for the whole society. The main argument against the extending business hours that is increasing trading hours will lead to many problems, such as social security and state budget. To extend shopping hour means criminal rates would rise rapidly. The reason is that people who shop at night may be threaten by the criminals and drunkards. It considers serious for people who lives far from the shopping centre and goes home by public transport at night, especially for young ladies. To solve the problems, the government of South Australia would require more police officers to keep environment safely. Moreover, the state has to pay amount of money to train and employ more police officers. There are not sufficient state budgets to support the issue. Therefore, it is not necessary to add the business hours in the South Australia. It is obvious that both community and the government would face the problems, particularly, those who live in poor areas. Nevertheless, the rising of tax from both companies and employees would be able to support the security problems. Additionally, extending business hours would create more job opportunities and people are able to earn more money from extra hours. Furthermore, it is possible for the government to develop the public facilities from the taxes. Initially, from economic point of view there some advantages will be grabbed. For instances, more job options will be available. Furthermore, there is some part-time and casual job vastly vacant. Fulltime workers will also gain more money since the payment hourly. At the same way, the stores that stay up late will also get the same chances, to earn more money, as fulltime workers. The most important considerable by extending business hours, it will open a broad chance for international investors to come to South Australia. Consequently, all the matters that have mentioned above will benefit the government by earning more taxes. As the result, it will raise up living standard and better public facilities in South Australia.

Presentation of Black Characters in To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee :: Free Essay Writer

Presentation of Black Characters in To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee ‘To kill a Mockingbird’ is a story by Harper Lee. It is about Racial Segregation and the supernatural, it is based in a time and in a place that was very racist, where people put White trash above good black people. It is based in Maycomb, (It is a small town created by Harper lee the author of the book. In the book it describes the town as small and old, and it says the day seems more than 24 hours because everything moves slower there. This town is actually based on the author’s hometown, Monroeville, Alabama.) Alabama, in the 1930’s. This essay will discuss to you about all the main black characters in ‘To Kill a Mockingbird’ and how they are presented in this story, it will be focusing mainly on the following black characters: Tom Robinson (the man who is on trial in this story.), Calpurnia and Reverend Sykes. I will also talk about how the book was based in the depression, and how in that time, the blacks were good law-abiding people, but yet they were still treated as second class citizens. In the story Calpurnia or ‘Cal’ is presented as a very intelligent black person, she is educated (she can read) for one, and she is a good person at heart as well, and also she has Atticus’s respect. And also as we see in the book she leads an almost ‘double life’ when she is among the Finch family and other white people she speaks proper English, but when she is among her own people she speaks using a lot of slang and cuts words short. for example: sure enough, she says sho’ nuf’. She is also the mother of Zeebo; a full grown man who is married and reads out the sermons at church. She also acts as a motherly figure in (as she is always there; she cooks for the Finch family.) Scout’s life and they have a love-hate relationship, until scout starts school, and then it eases a little. In an argument with Aunt Alexandra, Atticus also insists that Calpurnia is part of the family. Also in the story is Tom Robinson he is presented as a good person with a pure heart, he is a sharecropper on a cotton farm, and each day on his way home he passes the Ewell household, I believe he is also brave because he accepted his fate; all human beings must die sooner or later, not many people I know would accept that. He also has his

The Articles of Confederation :: essays research papers

  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The Articles of Confederation was the first constitution of the United States. The Articles took place from March 1, 1781 to June 21, 1788. At the time of the American Revolution, the Articles were written by a committee of the Second Continental Congress. John Dickson was the head of the committee. He presented a report on the proposed articles to the Congress on July 12, 1776. He wanted a strong central government, control over the western lands, equal representation for the states, and the power to levy taxes. A powerful central government was feared by the thirteen states.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  John Dickson’s articles were drastically changed before they sent them to all the states for ratification. The Continental Congress had been careful to give the states as much independence as possible and to specify the limited functions of the federal government. Many years passed before the states ratified the articles. Disagreements were made over boundary lines. Decisions were made by state courts, on differing tariff laws, and trade restrictions between the states. The small states wanted equal representation with the large states in Congress, and the large states were afraid they would have to pay an excessive amount of money to support the federal government. The states continued to disagree over control of the western territories. The states wanted the government to control the sale of these territories so that all the states profited. The bordering states wanted to control as much land as they could. The states eventually agreed to give control of all western lands to the federal government, paving the way for final ratification of the articles on March 1, 1781.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The articles created a loose confederation of independent states that gave limited powers to a central government. The national government consisted of a single house of Congress, where each state would have to vote. Out of thirteen states, three would have to give consent so the Congress could borrow money as well as declare war and enter into treaties and alliances with foreign nations. The federal government had no judicial authority and Congress only had the judicial authority to arbitrate between states. The Congress denied the power to levy taxes. The new federal government was financed by donations from the states based on the value of each state’s lands. Any amendment to the articles required the unanimous approval of all 13 states.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The Second Continental Congress wanted to limit the power of the central government so

Goals of Competiton Law Essay

According to Barry Rodger and Angus Macculoch,competition law concerns intervention in the market place, when there is some problem with the competitive process or when there is market failure. This includes public authority intervention and is based on different concerns of the principal legal systems. They go on to state that monopolies, cartels and mergers are the three principal issues of interest for most competition law systems, the major concern with cartels and mergers being that, eventually they will achieve a monopoly position, dominate the market and exploit their position. Generally, the fundamental purpose of competition law is to ensure that markets for producing and selling products are effectively contestable.Competition law therefore exists to regulate the conduct of businesses, by preventing them from entering into anticompetitive agreements and abusing a dominant position, to ensure open and fair competition for both consumers and businesses. Nations adopt competition laws for various reasons hence it is important to state expressly if possible, in the legislation the goal that it seeks to achieve for easier implementation. Various goals have been put across to justify the existence of competition law which are discussed in the ensuing discussion at length. DISCUSSION: The consumer interest and protection from anticompetitive behaviours by cartels and firms with market power, has been stressed as the primary goal of competition law. In any economy there are competing interests between industry and consumers hence the former wish to amass wealth at the expense of the latter. It is therefore necessary for competition law to protect the ignorant consumer from the gluttony competitive tendencies of firms. Under the UK Enterprise Act 2002, section 11, the importance of the consumer is seen where super complaints are made to the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) by designated consumer bodies. Also, the OFT fined Manchester United, and other football clubs for their role in harming the consumer by resale price maintenance, of replica football strips. Another goal is to ensure preservation of liberty and prevention of the concentration of economic power. R. Whishcharacterized this as â€Å"the promotion of economic equity rather than economic efficiency†. It is a political ideal that relates to the pure competition objective, that economic power should be fairly distributed and is based on the idea that economic corporations should not become more influential than elected democratic governments.Jones and Suffrin therefore argue that competition law may serve the purpose of upholding the foundation of liberal democracy, by precluding the creation of excessive private power and that it decentralizes and disperses private power and protects individual freedoms, in a competitive market structure, where individual sellers and buyers are insignificant in relation to the si ze of the market. Competition law also aims at protecting competitors and ensuring fair competition. The argument behind this goal is based on the premise that, competition law should be applied to foster the ability of smaller companies to compete more directly with established larger companies. R.Whish argues that the competiton authorities should, ‘hold the ring and ensure that the â€Å"small guy† is given a fair chance to succeed’. That competition law should be concerned with both competitors and the process of competition. This is also known as the â€Å"populist goal† and has been heavily criticized by the Chicago school of antitrust analysis, who argue that antitrust intervention to protect competitors from their more efficient rivals is harmful to consumer welfare, since small inefficient firms may take wealth from consumers. I subscribe to the view that where a smaller firm is equally or more efficient than a rival but because of its financial resources it cannot survive a price war, competition law should protect it. Creation of unified markets and prevention of artificial barriers to trade is another goal of competition law. This is also called market integration, which led to the birth of the European Union (EU). Its overall aim was to integrate the member states, to create more united Europe, with a common; market, economic and monetary union, to achieve sustainable economic growth and economic development, to compete favourably in the world market. Indeed this resulted into the eventual birth of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union which regulates a total of 27 European country markets and protects the regional economy of the EU. Competition law may also service social, economical or industrial, environmental and regional goals. For instance, before approval of a merger competition au thorities may look at other issues outside competition like job creation or job losses. Such goals should however be accommodated in other governmental arrangements to allow for meaningful competition. On analyzing the above goals, it can be concluded that there is need for competition law in a poor country like Kenya or Tanzania, to attain economic development. G.R Bhatiai stresses that the absence of fair competition eludes stakeholders the benefits of competition, persuading countries to either enact competition law or to modernize their existing legislation and to revamp Competition Authorities. In the discussion below I majorly focus on Tanzania as per the question, considering her past socio-economic stages, the most fundamental being, the Arusha Declaration 1967 which led to nationalization of all major means of production, then liberalization of the economy in the mid 80s, leading to a dominant role of the private sector in commerce, though ‘state owned monopolies in the provision of social services, education and health still do exist. According to Louise du Pleiss et al, the challenges faced by developing countries Like Tanzania justify the need for competition law. That the general challenge faced by developing countries is high barriers to entry, yet for effective participation by any producer in the market, degree of accessibility to the market is important. These take the form of unrestrained business legalities such as licensing procedures, high taxes that limit imports of raw materials and a high degree of state intervention in the form of state owned enter prises. Her market like any other developing country is also generally smaller compared to their developed counterparts, making a limited number of firms to realize equitable distribution of resources and economies of scale. High production costs also act as a barrier to entry. Electricity for example costs US$ 1.11kwh, in Tanzania. In Uganda the same unit costs US$ 0.075 and KenyaUS$0.035, making it easier for investors to access the latter markets. However, competition law can serve to improve, infrastructure for instance, which if underdeveloped limits competitiveness in the domestic market by barring entry. In Tanzania export Gross Domestic Product (GDP) declined the period between 1995-1999 and so did the import GDP, one of the causes being closure in manufacturing firms due to rising costs of production, hence making the market small ,with few or no substitutable goods. Also, the structure of the economy of Tanzania is such that a bulk of the wealth is held by a disproportionate minori ty of its population. Competition law serves as a solution by which these inequalities can be addressed.Major industries according to Louise du Pleiss such as water, electricity, transportation tend to be dominated by the ‘state owned monopolies’ who in turn abuse their positions by charging excessive prices and tying goods and services. In Tanzania the Tanzania Electric Supply Company (TANESCO), monopolises distribution of electricity and takes advantage of this to charge high prices. It is argued that such monopolies discourage innovation, but through the promulgation and enforcement of a well-designed competition law, attainment of equality is possible since provisions to curb abuses by dominant firms will have a positive impact on the proper functioning of markets and equitable distribution of wealth. For instance, Section 59 (2) of the The Botswana Competition Act, 2009 permits the Competition Authority to assess whether a proposed merger may interalia, enhance competitiveness of a citizen owned small and medium size enterprise, to encourage fair competition in the market. Competition law however, serves as a tool in the alleviation of poverty, through the regulation of firms by ensuring that they do not charge high prices, which directly affects the consumer. It has been stated that due to Cartel conduct, countries such as Tanzania, Chile and Malawi have suffered a rise in food prices hence more than 100 million people have been pushed to deeper poverty. However in South Africa, two pharmaceutical giants accused of engaging in excessive pricing of branded antiretroviral had to engage in a settlement agreement hence medication fell between 58% and 88% in South Africa. It has been argued however that due to interalia lack of resources, skill and capacity to implement competition law, other concerns like poverty, illiteracy, and health should be attended to. The severe shortage of trained professionals to assess the complex competition law concepts also questions the need for competition law in poor country like Tanzania.Also competition law perse cannot achieve the goals stated above for it to be beneficial to Tanzania. Furthermore, the Fair Competition Act needs to be amended, to deal with the challenges discussed above to instill confidence in investors in the market and to protect consumers. CONCLUSION: Though arguments for and against the need for competition law have been advanced, it remains relevant to a greater extent and it must go hand in hand with the goals it aims to achieve. The question however which must be addressed is, whether competition law based on US or European models is relevant for an immature market like Tanzania’s which, like any other African country has virtually no culture of consumer advocacy and its small market can only accommodate a few suppliers. The answer should be in the negative but in this era of globalization, neocolonialism is evident which has made it a challenge to effectively implement competition law.