Wednesday, December 25, 2024
Home Blog Page 11

Amazon hit by ‘strike’ during holiday season scramble

0
Amazon hit by ‘strike’ during holiday season scramble


grey placeholderGetty Images Amazon delivery drivers walk the picket line outside Amazon delivery station as they went on strike in Skokie, Illinois on December 19 2024. Getty Images

One of America’s most powerful labour unions is staging a protest against Amazon, aiming to put pressure on the tech giant as it rushes out packages in the final run-up to Christmas.

The Teamsters union said Amazon delivery drivers at seven facilities in the US had walked off the job on Thursday, after the company refused to negotiate with the union about a labour contract.

Teamsters members were demonstrating at “hundreds” of other Amazon locations, according to the union, which described it as the “largest strike” in US history involving the firm.

The company, which employs roughly 800,000 people in its US delivery network, said its services would not be disrupted.

“What you see here are almost entirely outsiders — not Amazon employees or partners — and the suggestion otherwise is just another lie from the Teamsters,” Amazon said in a statement.

It was not clear how many people were participating in Thursday’s action, which was joined by members of the United Services Union (ver.di) in Germany.

In the US, the Teamsters union said thousands of Amazon workers were involved.

Overall, the group claims to represent “nearly 10,000” Amazon workers, after signing up thousands of people at about 10 locations across the country, many of them in the last few months.

The organisation has demanded recognition from Amazon, accusing the company of illegally ignoring its duty to negotiate collectively over pay and working conditions.

“They’ve pushed workers to the limit and now they’re paying the price. This strike is on them,” said the union’s general president, Sean O’Brien.

“If your package is delayed during the holidays, you can blame Amazon’s insatiable greed.”

Watch: Amazon workers across the US strike after company refuse to negotiate

The Teamsters is a storied US union, with more than one million members overall. It is known for winning robust contracts for members at firms such as delivery giant UPS.

Most of the Teamsters’ Amazon campaigns have involved drivers technically employed by third-party delivery firms that work with the tech giant.

Amazon denies that it is on the hook as an employer in those cases, a question that is currently the subject of legal dispute. Labour officials have preliminarily sided with the union on the issue in at least one instance.

Amazon employees at a major warehouse in Staten Island in New York have also agreed to affiliate with the Teamsters.

Their warehouse holds the distinction as the only Amazon location in the US where a union victory has been formally ratified by labour officials.

But it has seen little progress when it comes to contract negotiations since the 2022 vote. It was not among the locations listed to go on strike on Thursday.

Amazon, one of the largest employers in the US, has long faced criticism of its working conditions and been the target of activists hoping to make inroads among its workers.

Its fierce opposition to unionisation efforts has also been called into question.

But it is not the only business facing pressure over its refusal to come to the table about a contract years after the start of unionisation efforts.

At Starbucks, where the first coffee shop voted to unionise in 2021, workers also recently authorised a labour strike, accusing the company of dragging its feet on negotiations.



Source link

The town in Georgia where everyone has to own a gun

0
The town in Georgia where everyone has to own a gun


grey placeholderBBC James Rabun in his family's gun store, surrounded by different kinds of gunsBBC

Guns – from antique rifles to Glocks – are James Rabun’s family business

Kennesaw, Georgia, has all the small-town fixings one might imagine in the American South.

There’s the smell of baked biscuits wafting from Honeysuckle Biscuits & Bakery and the rumble of a nearby railroad train. It’s the kind of place where newlyweds leave hand-written thank-you cards in coffee shops, praising the “cozy” atmosphere.

But there’s another aspect of Kennesaw that some might find surprising – a city law from the 1980s that legally requires residents to own guns and ammo.

“It’s not like you go around wearing it on your hip like the Wild Wild West,” said Derek Easterling, the town’s three-term mayor and self-described “retired Navy guy”.

“We’re not going to go knock on your door and say, ‘Let me see your weapon.'”

Kennesaw’s gun law plainly states: “In order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of household residing in city limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition.”

Residents with mental or physical disabilities, felony convictions, or conflicting religious beliefs are exempt from the law.

To Mayor Easterling’s knowledge, and that of multiple local officials, there have been no prosecutions or arrests made for violating Article II, Sec 34-21, which came into law in 1982.

And no one that the BBC spoke to could say what the penalty would be for being found in violation.

Still, the mayor insisted: “It’s not a symbolic law. I’m not into things just for show.”

For some, the law is a source of pride, a nod to the city’s embrace of gun culture.

For others, it’s a source of embarrassment, a page in a chapter of history they wish to move beyond.

But the main belief amongst the townsfolk about the gun law is that it keeps Kennesaw safe.

Patrons eating pepperoni slices at the local pizza parlour will propose: “If anything, criminals need to be concerned, because if they break into your home, and you’re there, they don’t know what you got.”

There were no murders in 2023, according to Kennesaw Police Department data, but there were two gun-involved suicides.

Blake Weatherby, a groundskeeper at the Kennesaw First Baptist Church, has different thoughts on why violent crime might be low.

“It’s the attitude behind the guns here in Kennesaw that keep the gun crimes down, not the guns,” Mr Weatherby said.

“It doesn’t matter if it’s a gun or a fork or a fist or a high heel shoe. We protect ourselves and our neighbours.”

grey placeholderA vintage cash register is adorned with a sign that says "fight crime, shoot back"

Pat Ferris, who joined Kennesaw’s city council in 1984, two years after the law was passed, said the law was created to be “more of a political statement than anything”.

After Morton Grove, Illinois became the first US city to ban gun ownership, Kennesaw became the first city to require it, triggering national news headlines.

A 1982 opinion piece by the New York Times described Kennesaw officials as “jovial” over the law’s passage but noted that “Yankee criminologists” were not.

Penthouse Magazine ran the story on its cover page with the words Gun Town USA: An American Town Where It’s Illegal Not to Own a Gun printed over an image of a bikini-clad blonde woman.

Similar gun laws have been passed in at least five cities, including Gun Barrel City, Texas and Virgin, Utah.

In the 40 years since Kennesaw’s gun law was passed, Mr Ferris said, its existence has mostly faded from consciousness.

“I don’t know how many people even know that the ordinance exists,” he said.

grey placeholderBlake Weatherby in church

Blake Weatherby says that growing up, his father told him “if you’re a man, you’ve got to own a gun”

The same year the gun law took effect, Mr Weatherby, the church groundskeeper, was born.

He recalled a childhood where his dad would half-jokingly tell him: “I don’t care if you don’t like guns, it’s the law.”

“I was taught that if you’re a man, you’ve got to own a gun,” he said.

Now 42, he was 12 years old the first time he fired a weapon.

“I almost dropped it because it scared me so bad,” he said.

Mr Weatherby owned over 20 guns at one point but said now he doesn’t own any. He sold them over the years – including the one his dad left him when he died in 2005 – to overcome hard times.

“I needed gas more than guns,” he said.

One place he could’ve gone to sell his firearms is the Deercreek Gun Shop located on Kennesaw’s Main Street.

James Rabun, 36, has been working at the gun store ever since he graduated high school.

It’s the family business, he said, opened by his dad and grandad, both of whom can still be found there today; his dad in the back restoring firearms, his grandad in the front relaxing in a rocking chair.

For obvious reasons, Mr Rabun is a fan of Kennesaw’s gun law. It’s good for business.

“The cool thing about firearms”, he said with earnest enthusiasm, “is that people buy them for self-defence, but a lot of people like them like artwork or like bitcoin – things of scarcity.”

Among the dozens and dozens of weapons hanging on the wall for sale are double barrel black powder shotguns – akin to a musket – and a few “they-don’t-make-these-anymore” Winchester rifles from the 1800s.

grey placeholderA city street in Kennesaw, where an American flag - and a Confederate flag - are hung

Deercreek Gun Shop is located next to a Confederate memorabilia store

In Kennesaw, gun fandom has a broad reach that extends beyond gun shop owners and middle-aged men.

Cris Welsh, a mother of two teenaged daughters, is unabashed about her gun ownership. She hunts, is a member at a gun club, and shoots at the local gun range with her two girls.

“I’m a gun owner”, she admitted, listing off her inventory which includes “a Ruger carry pistol, a Baretta, a Glock, and about half a dozen shotguns”.

However, Ms Welsh is not fond of Kennesaw’s gun law.

“I’m embarrassed when I hear people talk about the gun law,” Ms Welsh said. “It’s just an old Kennesaw thing to hang onto.”

She wished that when outsiders thought of the city, they called to mind the parks and schools and community values – not the gun law “that makes people uncomfortable”.

“There’s so much more to Kennesaw,” she said.

City council member Madelyn Orochena agrees that the law is “something that people would prefer not to advertise”.

“It’s just a weird little factoid about our community,” she said.

“Residents will either roll their eyes in a bit of shame or laugh along about it.”



Source link

Corporate Transparency Act can be enforced, court rules. Here’s what it means for business owners.

0
Corporate Transparency Act can be enforced, court rules. Here’s what it means for business owners.


An anti-money laundering law called the Corporate Transparency Act, or CTA, appears to have been given new life after an appeals court on Monday determined its rules can be enforced as the case proceeds. The law requires small business owners to register with the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, or FinCEN, by Jan. 1, or potentially pay fines of up to $10,000. 

The registration rule had been on hold since Dec. 3, when a federal court in Texas issued a preliminary injunction prohibiting its enforcement. But on Monday, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals lifted the order, ruling that the decision is in the “public’s urgent interest in combating financial crime and protecting our country’s national security.”

The CTA requires that the owners and part-owners of an estimated 32.6 million small businesses must register personal information with FinCEN, such as a photo ID and home address. With the court ruling that enforcement can proceed, many small business owners may scramble to register ahead of the Jan. 1, 2025 deadline, although businesses that started in 2024 were given 90 days to register. 

Some civil liberties groups decried the ruling, saying that the regulation represents governmental overreach.

“The government cannot be allowed to maintain this unconstitutional statute, which stretches beyond Congress’s proper authority to regulate Americans,” said the New Civil Liberties Alliance, a civil rights group, said in a statement emailed to CBS MoneyWatch. 

The Treasury Department did not immediately reply to a request for comment from CBS MoneyWatch.

Here’s what to know about the ruling and the CTA.

What is the Corporate Transparency Act, or CTA?

The CTA, an anti-money laundering statute passed in 2021, was intended to get a look inside shell companies and crack down on attempts by “criminals, organized crime rings, and other illicit actors to hide their identities and launder their money through the financial system,” Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said in 2022.

The rules first became effective in 2024, but gave existing businesses until Jan.1, 2025, to register, while businesses that began this year have 90 days to register. 

FinCEN is a bureau within the U.S. Department of the Treasury that investigates money laundering and other illegal financial activities. 

What is the CTA’s reporting rule? 

The reporting rule is the CTA’s Beneficial Ownership Information reporting requirement, which mandates small businesses to register the following with FinCEN, according to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. 

  • Your company’s full legal name.
  • Its business address (P.O. boxes or lawyers’ offices aren’t accepted, the Chamber of Commerce says). 
  • The state where the company was formed or first registered.
  • A taxpayer identification number and an identity document, such as a filed Articles of Incorporation.
  • Beneficial owners’ full legal names and birth dates.
  • Beneficial owners’ home addresses.
  • A photocopy of beneficial owners’ U.S. driver’s license or passport.

How do businesses register under the CTA? 

Small businesses can file their beneficial ownership information reports at this link with FinCEN. 

What happens if I don’t register under the CTA? 

The penalties are up to $591 per day for failure to file, according to FinCEN. 

Businesses may also face criminal penalties of up to two years imprisonment and a fine of up to $10,000, the Chamber of Commerce notes. 

Which businesses are exempt from the CTA filing?

There are 23 types of businesses that are exempt from the beneficial ownership information filing, according to the Chamber of Commerce. These include many publicly traded companies and nonprofits, as well as some large operating companies.

Many types of banks and other financial services businesses don’t need to file, according to FinCEN. Some other types of businesses, such as many sole proprietorships, are also exempt, it noted. (A list and Q&A on exemptions can be seen here.)

What may happen next in the CTA case?

It’s unclear, but its possible that groups fighting against the regulation could seek relief from the U.S. Supreme Court or ask for the 5th Circuit for additional review, according to the National Law Review. 

contributed to this report.



Source link

Ants prove superior to humans in group problem-solving maze experiment

0
Ants prove superior to humans in group problem-solving maze experiment


Ants vs. humans: Putting group smarts to the test
Ants and humans compete in maneuvering a T-shaped load across a maze. Credit: Weizmann Institute of Science

Anyone who has dealt with ants in the kitchen knows that ants are highly social creatures; it’s rare to see one alone. Humans are social creatures too, even if some of us enjoy solitude. Ants and humans are also the only creatures in nature that consistently cooperate while transporting large loads that greatly exceed their own dimensions.

Prof. Ofer Feinerman and his team at the Weizmann Institute of Science have used this shared trait to conduct a fascinating evolutionary competition that asks the question: Who will be better at maneuvering a large load through a maze? The surprising results, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, shed new light on group decision making, as well as on the pros and cons of cooperation versus going it alone.

To enable a comparison between two such disparate species, the research team led by Tabea Dreyer created a real-life version of the “piano movers puzzle,” a classical computational problem from the fields of motion planning and robotics that deals with possible ways of moving an unusually shaped object—say, a piano—from point A to point B in a complex environment.

Instead of a piano, the participants were given a large T-shaped object that they had to maneuver across a rectangular space divided into three chambers connected by two narrow slits.






Credit: Weizmann Institute of Science

The researchers created two sets of mazes that differed only in size, to match the dimensions of ants and humans, as well as groups of different sizes. Recruiting study participants was easier in the case of humans, who volunteered simply because they were asked to participate, and probably because they liked the idea of a competition. Ants, on the other hand, are far from competitive. They joined because they were misled into thinking that the heavy load was a juicy edible morsel that they were transporting into their nest.

The ants chosen to compete against Homo sapiens were Paratrechina longicornis. They are called this because of their long antennae, though they are sometimes referred to as “crazy ants” for their tendency to dash around. This familiar species of black ant, about 3 mm long, is common around the world. In Israel they are particularly prevalent along the coast and in the south of the country.

The ants tackled the maze challenge in three combinations: a single ant, a small group of about seven ants and a large group of about 80. Humans handled the task in three parallel combinations: a single person, a small group of six to nine individuals and a large group of 26.

To make the comparison as meaningful as possible, groups of humans were in some cases instructed to avoid communicating through speaking or gestures, even wearing surgical masks and sunglasses to conceal their mouths and eyes. In addition, human participants were told to hold the load only by the handles that simulated the way in which it is held by ants. The handles contained meters that measured the pulling force applied by each person throughout the attempt.

The researchers repeated the experiment numerous times for each combination, then meticulously analyzed the videos and all the advanced tracking data while using computer simulations and various physics models.

Unsurprisingly, the cognitive abilities of humans gave them an edge in the individual challenge, in which they resorted to calculated, strategic planning, easily outperforming the ants.

In the group challenge, however, the picture was completely different, especially for the larger groups. Not only did groups of ants perform better than individual ants, but in some cases they did better than humans. Groups of ants acted together in a calculated and strategic manner, exhibiting collective memory that helped them persist in a particular direction of motion and avoid repeated mistakes.

Humans, on the contrary, failed to significantly improve their performance when acting in groups. When communication between group members was restricted to resemble that of ants, their performance even dropped compared to that of individuals. They tended to opt for “greedy” solutions—which seemed attractive in the short term but were not beneficial in the long term, and—according to the researchers—opted for the lowest common denominator.

“An ant colony is actually a family,” Feinerman says. “All the ants in the nest are sisters, and they have common interests. It’s a tightly knit society in which cooperation greatly outweighs competition. That’s why an ant colony is sometimes referred to as a super-organism, sort of a living body composed of multiple ‘cells’ that cooperate with one another.

“Our findings validate this vision. We’ve shown that ants acting as a group are smarter, that for them the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. In contrast, forming groups did not expand the cognitive abilities of humans. The famous ‘wisdom of the crowd’ that’s become so popular in the age of social networks didn’t come to the fore in our experiments.”

Despite all the challenges of human cooperation, several authors successfully joined forces in this study. They included Dr. Ehud Fonio from Feinerman’s group in Weizmann’s Physics of Complex Systems Department, Prof. Nir Gov of Weizmann’s Chemical and Biological Physics Department and Dr. Amir Haluts, then a Ph.D. student supervised by Gov and Prof. Amos Korman of the University of Haifa.

More information:
Tabea Dreyer et al, Comparing cooperative geometric puzzle solving in ants versus humans, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (2024). DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2414274121

Citation:
Ants prove superior to humans in group problem-solving maze experiment (2024, December 23)
retrieved 23 December 2024
from https://phys.org/news/2024-12-ants-superior-humans-group-problem.html

This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no
part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.





Source link

Solar geoengineering could save 400,000 lives a year

0
Solar geoengineering could save 400,000 lives a year


Solar geoengineering could save 400,000 lives a year
Regional mortality rate impact with income growth and climate adaptation. Credit: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (2024). DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2401801121

When it comes to finding solutions to climate change, there’s no shortage of technologies vying for attention, from renewable energy to electric vehicles to nuclear energy. One such contender, solar geoengineering, is favored by proponents who say it could quickly cool the planet and give the world time to fully implement efforts to limit emissions and remove carbon from the atmosphere.

But that promise comes with risks, which include potentially poorer air quality or depleted atmospheric ozone—both of which can cause serious health issues of their own.

A new Georgia Tech School of Public Policy-led study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences suggests that while those risks deserve further consideration, solar geoengineering could save as many as 400,000 lives a year through a reduction in temperature-related deaths attributable to climate change.

“An important question is how the reduction in climate risks from solar geoengineering compares to the additional risks its use entails,” said lead author Anthony Harding of the School of Public Policy.

“This study offers a first step in quantifying the risks and benefits of solar geoengineering and shows that, for the risks we considered, the potential to save lives outweighs the direct risks,”

Harding co-authored the PNAS article with Gabriel Vecchi and Wenchang Yang of Princeton University and David Keith from the University of Chicago.

The researchers studied a climate change mitigation strategy called stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI), a type of solar geoengineering that involves spraying tiny reflective particles into the upper atmosphere. Those particles would then redirect some sunlight back to space and help cool Earth.

The authors used computer models and historical data on how temperature affects death rates to see how much solar geoengineering might affect death rates, assuming a 2.5-degree Celsius increase in average temperature from pre-industrial levels and similar approaches to climate change as seen in the world currently.

They found that cooling global temperatures by 1 degree Celsius with solar geoengineering would save 400,000 lives each year, outweighing deaths caused by solar geoengineering’s direct health risks from air pollution and ozone depletion by a factor of 13. This means that the number of lives saved due to solar geoengineering-caused cooling would be 13 times the number of lives potentially lost from solar geoengineering’s known risks.

Many of those deaths would be avoided in hotter, poorer regions, the study notes. Cooler, wealthier regions could actually face increased cold-related deaths.

Solar geoengineering has generated millions of dollars in funding and a recommendation by the National Academies of Science that the federal government should provide millions more toward research and the development of a risk-risk analysis similar to what Harding’s team produced. But the tech has also drawn concern, including from the Union of Concerned Scientists. That group says there’s too much environmental, ethical, and geopolitical risk to proceed without much more research.

The authors caution that their study is an important starting point in better understanding solar geoengineering’s promise and peril but is far from a comprehensive evaluation of the technology’s risks and benefits.

They say their models are based on idealized assumptions about aerosol distribution, population and income growth, and other factors. They also can’t capture all of the real-world complexities that solar geoengineering would entail.

They note their study also does not address all of the potential risks of solar geoengineering, such as possible impacts on ecosystems, global politics, or the possibility governments will rely on the technology to delay politically difficult emissions cuts.

Still, the researchers say, the study suggests that for many regions, solar geoengineering could well be more effective at saving lives than emissions reductions alone and is worth keeping in the mix as the world searches for the optimal ways to cool our warming planet.

“There’s no perfect resolution to the climate crisis,” said Harding. “Solar geoengineering entails risks, but it could also alleviate real suffering, so we need to better understand how the risks compare to the benefits to inform any potential future decisions around the technology.”

More information:
Anthony Harding et al, Impact of solar geoengineering on temperature-attributable mortality, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (2024). DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2401801121

Citation:
Solar geoengineering could save 400,000 lives a year (2024, December 23)
retrieved 23 December 2024
from https://phys.org/news/2024-12-solar-geoengineering-year.html

This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no
part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.





Source link