Letter Request Reconsideration Template

on twitter, summer movies and Lily Cole.

and was completed in May and did not write anything here. I write this today because I do not want me to go another month without posting.

The reasons, or perhaps excuses for not writing are the same: many things to do and little time to write. To these I add one that I consider a bit more original: Twitter.

Those who have little time reading the blog know that my posts rarely have a central theme. In fact, I dare say that even rarely have a common thread. Speak on an issue and usually switch to another without any connection. And so every time I write I do three or four different things.

And though rarely planned what I would write on the blog, every time I sat down to write about the things that I had been in recent days that it considered appropriate to share in this space.

Now Twitter allows me to do that just when things come to mind or, failing that, to mind.

addition, although I can be wrong, I think most people I see here is me on twitter.

If you look at the past paragraphs will notice that I'm getting too much to write in paragraphs less than 140 characters. Not if they bother, I do. But apparently I can not do anything about it.

Those who do not follow me on Twitter, I invite you to do so in @ ricardoeflores .

Leaving aside the twitter and the reasons for not updating the blog, I tell them that long ago I finished the third semester of doctoral studies. Definitely the heaviest of the three I have attended and also the worst performance I have ever had. Those who take time reading the blog know that I usually share my skills. This time I will not, so bad was the matter. Just tell them that I spent all the materials and I have not gotten into trouble with the scholarship department for reasons of my average.

I am now in the summer period. I'm not studying art, I am dedicated solely to the work of the research chair in which I participate. I use the summer to advance the research topic of my thesis, although I must confess that I have not used the time as it should and I'm quite late to the objectives that I planted in early summer.

semester exchange to Japan and tell them that there is an invitation, Tohoku University in Sendai. I have reviewed the curriculum, but apparently there is a teacher with whom he could working on my doctoral research. I have yet to discuss the matter with my advisor and program director. And inform them that developments arising on the issue.

Anna continues in Vancouver. He changed his flight back from June 29 to September 6 so missing just over two months for his return. Last week we were in Las Vegas. We spent some days there. From there she returned to Vancouver and I subsequently Laredo and Monterrey.

By the way, if you go to Las Vegas, do not go to the show Criss Angel Imagine. It is a waste. I saw David Copperfield a couple of years, Angel's tricks are the same but simpler. Furthermore, I personally prefer the Copperfield sarcastic humor to roll "believe in your dreams and achievements" of Angel.

De film

tell them that I saw The A Team.

dominguera
is, nothing more. Jessica Biel expected to have a greater role and screen time. And although I was never a fan of the series, The A Team can not conceive without Mr. T.

also saw The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus.

of this film reviews had been found. For me the film is too slow and it is quite obvious that the script was rewritten and patched by the death of Heath Ledger. I felt the end was irrelevant to the development of the film. Only one thing was saved from total disappointment.

Lily Cole.

I guess they expect a turn like that in the post. Vi also

Date Night with Tina Fey and Steve Carell. Highly recommended.

And I think I saw more movies but I remember at the moment.

Finally, I tell them that today was my first yoga class. I found it quite heavy but I liked it. I will enroll, pay one month and then see what happens. I will keep you informed.

And why not? More Lily Cole.

Why Do Women Retain Water When On Their Period

DEVELOPMENTS: THE SEVERANCE PAYMENTS FROM

1. If the legislature intended to facilitate business redundancy, you can do this in several ways: you can define more flexible because you can reduce the compensation would ease procedural requirements. In this recent labor reform has been chosen all these tracks at once .

2. As we saw in the previous post, the system allows the employer to terminate the contract so unilaterally, without the employee, solely on their own interest. However, in these cases, the law requires it to compensate the worker for an indemnity of 20 days salary per year of service.

3. To reduce the compensation paid by the employer that the employee has chosen to not see their compensation reduced, but some of it is paid by a public fund. For now, the Wage Guarantee Fund will pay 8 days of salary per year of service (so that employers only pay 12) . This rule is temporary. Subsequently, it is supposed to be to create a capital fund, will pay an undetermined amount to be deducted from severance payments. Little can be said of this fund future whose regulation is left for the moment, in the darkness of uncertainty.

4. The benefit currently provided applies only to new contracts and contracts that have lasted over a year . also accumulates that small businesses perceive and . Thus, a company with fewer than 25 workers, the social fund would pay 40% of compensation to certain limits, in addition to these 8 days of salary per year or about-not exactly, 16 days of the 20 planned by the Statute of Workers. Thus, the business redundancy you would a small business for about 4 days' salary (not exactly), per year of service.

5. This measure would not be especially shocking if it had been limited dismissals from , although some may consider controversial issues from the perspective of funding and, secondly, we must take into account some perverse effects, especially in conjunction with relaxation of the cause.

6. As for funding, we must consider whether the Fund Wage Guarantee has enough resources to contribute to the general lowering of the dismissal of all companies, whatever their economic situation, I have no idea, but it seems that right now there dough to spend. From the bottom

"Austrian" we know nothing, except a mysterious message written in code in the Royal Decree Law states that not involve an increase in employers' contributions ; do not know if that means will get the money from a magic cornucopia, if you end up going to manage the bank as a sort of compulsory private insurance or pension plan ( think wrong and be right) if you are to be financed government deficit or are the workers who will be paid directly your own dismissal in convenient installments.

7. I believe this uncertainty is a reflection of an inherent contradiction in this policy decision. As I tried to argue above, the reduction of severance pay does not affect significantly to job creation . However, an increase in employer contributions to fund future job losses themselves that most clearly affect the company's decision to hire , since, at first, more expensive and regular the immediate cost of labor.

long term, yes, even employers who pay, it is normal that these payments are completed to impact on wages (as part of what economists call "indirect wages"). So, ultimately, in some ways yes they are the workers who will finance their future dismissal. But even so, the contributions can be seen as restricting the use (a kind of tax on labor).

8. There is a fact that could be positive for the establishment of this fund (not yet implemented, therefore). portion of the compensation paid does not depend on the age in the company, but seniority in the market, since it would accumulate, even if the worker go from one company to another . In this way, yes that is partially addressed some of the negative effects on productivity caused by the fact that our system of employment protection is based solely on seniority. To the extent that the compensation does not depend on seniority, eliminating disincentives for workers seeking employment in other companies to improve their situation, and incentives for employers to get rid of their employees before they reach a certain age.

In any case, so that the effect was significant, would affect a significant portion of compensation, greatly increasing employer contributions (those who say they will rise), which significantly hamper job creation.

9. The main side effect of this reduction in the cost of dismissal from the new relationship established between the dismissal and alternative measures (working or not) for dealing with situations of inefficiency of the company, especially when the cause had been relaxed . Compensation not only serves to compensate the employee for damages caused by the unilateral breach of contract. If the dismissal leaves cheaper, provide an attractive solution for the entrepreneur , in particular when undertaking significant changes to working conditions or transfers, workers may decide to leave the company with a compensation of 20 days salary per year of service ; to this compensation does not contribute any funds . So, to dismiss a worker can go for 12, or even, for about 4 days' salary per year, while trying to shift it can cost 20 days per year, without public subsidy, if the employee does not accept the change. This effect contradicts the rhetoric of the preamble, showing a preference for internal flexibility on decisions extinct.

10. Sometimes it requires that the regulation of "notice" also affects the cost of dismissal for objective reasons. The law requires the employer to the worker is some time before the decision to terminate the contract, and even forced him to grant paid leave to seek employment. For various reasons, this notice is not met rarely, automatically replaced by financial compensation. With labor reform, the notice is reduced from 30 to 15 days, implying a reduction of 15 days wages absolute perception that the worker receives the dismissal, this action also affects the pre-reform contracts.

11. There is no doubt therefore that the business redundancy has greatly facilitated. The logic in this case would have been more severely deal with unfair dismissals, which are those that determine the core of the (im) balance of power between employers and employees. As discussed in the next post, not only has not properly fought arbitrary dismissal, but also has helped in a way aberrant.

Can I Take Cut Flowers Through Airport Security?

DEVELOPMENTS: THE FLEXIBILITY OF THE CAUSE OF DISMISSAL

As explained in the previous post , the key to this labor reform is the relaxation of dismissal . The rest are ornaments, although in some cases, these ornaments are of some importance. But I think the most important policy change is one that has reached us by surprise as amended ("anyway?) Of Royal Decree Law on the labor reform is implemented. I refer to the regulation of business reasons for dismissal under the new Article 51 of the Statute of Workers, seems to have changed significantly in the last minute compared to earlier drafts. I think the press is too busy with the definition of "economic reasons" which are a mere vestige of the past little operant We can sidetrack well. The important thing is the definition of "technical reasons, organizational and productive", that is where the tomato. It is immaterial what the definition of "negative economic situation" if in any case the employer may carry out the dismissals, although this situation does not exist (this has some nuances, but we will not enter them.)

As is known, the Workers' Statute allows the employer to amend or terminate the employment contract without the consent of the workers, based on the interests of the company. This does not mean that it can carry out these ups and downs when you want, because the system requires you there cause enough. Initially, the case definition was very strict, so that the company had to be really going down for the employer could unilaterally alter or terminate contracts. But the successive labor reforms (in particular the 1994 and 1997) were more flexible this initial stiffness.

For various reasons, the drafting of legal provisions dealing with this topic was quite cumbersome and complicated. In this context, there are many different interpretations by judges and academic literature and, indeed, employers were developing a level of uncertainty. But I think a careful reading could unravel an outline of these rules pretty clear, coherent and logical. The cause was a relationship between the measure of fitness business and overcoming a particular situation of ineffectiveness or inefficiency of the company. If the contract changes or layoffs were reasonably designed to overcome this situation, had to be considered appropriate. The most serious was the situation of inefficiency of the company, the more I allowed the law to the employer, following three steps: 1) whether the effectiveness of the company was "better" could be carried out substantial changes to transfers and conditions work. 2) If the company was "difficult" or had a "negative economic situation" could be conducted, in addition to the above, some redundancies (or suspensions, if these difficulties were short-term. 3) If the company's very existence was threatened, could be carried out, in addition to previous redundancies, ie, a significant number of layoffs in connection with the company payroll. 4) If the company was not viable, it could dismiss the entire workforce.

However, the labor reform of 2010 not limited to clarifying the description of the case incorporating the jurisprudence, it definitely dynamite this scheme, allowing the employer carry out collective redundancies simply to "improve the situation of the company" as well as to prevent future situations. is, puts the point 3) directly to 1). And see what happens with point 4). The consequences of this change are very important:

a) The employer may dismiss any number of employees, except, probably, to the entire workforce, if it proves that this profit. In the case of collective redundancies, the record of employment regulation may limit this effect, but ultimately, if no bargaining agreement, the Administration is supposed to resolve the case by applying legal expected.

b) This removes any uncertainty for employers regarding the origin of the business reasons, unless their decision is irrational in economic terms. This gives carte blanche to any place of employment in technology, outsourcing any process of employment (dismissal of workers to outsource the activity) and surely relocation processes of production facilities domestically, and international community.

c) The fact that the most important alteration (collective redundancies) can be carried out at the lowest level of seriousness of the situation (which the company makes something with the restructure) causes a significant knock-on effect on other vicissitudes. Of course, may be carried out individual dismissals. Also substantial changes, transfers, suspensions, reduced working hours (covered in a new way) and sags wage (again with a new regulation more clear.) Although the preamble states rhetorically that internal flexibility is provided to avoid layoffs, making layoffs is also easier and nowhere does the law operate as a last resort. Moreover, as discussed below, the flexibility also affects compensation, making the choice for dismissal is much easier and more attractive.

d) As mentioned in previous post , regulation of firing determines the position of power of the parties. So significantly increases this flexibility to the operator position, which is increasing due to the enormous levels of unemployment that we suffer. From the individual standpoint, workers will be more compliant, it will be easier and cheaper to dismiss. From the collective perspective, the representatives agreed in all kinds of lowering wages and substantial changes, threatened by the possibility of redundancies , which is regarding the cause easy and inexpensive compared to costs.

e) Thus, the change in the wording of the case, it is not, as is suggested in the preamble, a simple explanation of the cause, but a very favorable to business interests. Employers, therefore, are in luck with this reform. In contrast, no benefit at all workers. is false as to help create jobs , for the reasons mentioned in previous post. But is that also the relaxation of the cause does not only affect new hires, as also applies to contracts currently in force . Contibuirá, thus destroying the existing employment in the current context of economic crisis. When you return to work there, people will be hired through building new contracts with reduced compensation. The economic crisis is the excuse and the appropriate situation more precarious working conditions and backtrack on the social gains achieved so far.

f) Beyond the interest of workers, from legal logic, the relaxation of the cause may be, however, some positive effects if considered in isolation. So far, the business demands for more power within the employment relationship had not specially dedicated to the cause or severance pay from, as would be more logical, but compensation for unfair dismissal, they are ignoring the penalty for an illegal. In this context, unfair disciplinary dismissal had become the normal way to adjust the templates to changing market conditions. In this reform is a clear interest in eliminating this evil practice, easing the cause, subsidize payments and shortening the notice period. Formally, the dismissal is still causal. But what probably will happen is that arising from arbitrary firings and layoffs as economic rather than disciplinary dismissals. Because now appear to for cases of arbitrary pure business, it promotes economic unfair dismissal , which has much less logical than simply more flexible and lower compensation because the dismissal appropriate. From this we will in the next post.

g) What happens is that this is achieved without any security for workers . The penalty of temporary contracts has a very very limited, as I shall try to exhibit in future entries. He could have agreed a relaxation of the grounds for dismissal that would affect not only collective redundancies, or to incorporate precautions against the relocation of companies in exchange for strengthening the safeguards against arbitrary dismissal, for example, making compensation for unfair dismissal was not entirely predictable, could be graduated according to different factors (severity of business conduct, company size, economic capacity of the company , damage) and had a few stops but the minimum age of workers was small.

Ultimately, this change of wording is significant, perhaps the most important modification of this labor reform and if sustained, will produce a significant power imbalance in a labor market that is already unbalanced by the high levels of unemployment.

How To Make A Cozy Cup

REFLECTIONS: THE LABOR REFORM AND THE CRISIS

Ah, but the labor reform is not an event at the cutting edge? No doubt. But before starting to analyze it, it must be some forethought. Because in this subject heading there are some errors that may distort the understanding of the problem.

is said to address the crisis it must be a "labor reform" , this is practically forced, in this way will invigorate the labor market. is also said that this reform has to involve a lowering of dismissal to facilitate recruitment. Two lies. And fat. At one point, at the beginning of the crisis, these lies have been spread by people and organizations interested in broadcast and have been repeated so many people they have been believed.

The second claim is more controversial. But the truth is that the first statement, that is to do a labor reform to address the crisis, was taken as indisputable. Some critics have complained, it must be said, but the truth is that almost everyone has believed in the media, on the street, in institutions, in organizations. Or, to be exact, there are people that you know is a lie, but believe it was fake because which moves not in the photo.

All this has much to do with a problem of politicking in general and our industrial relations system in particular which I can not stop now. What matters is not what it is, but what it seems. The ritual, symbol, creates a magical reality made up of words that are projected on the conflicts and anxieties of material reality. A labor reforms, among other things, they are attributed a role thaumaturgical in job creation, although this was not underpinned by sound arguments and statistics that demonstrate the limited role, if there are any building- use of the subsequent amendments. In the present context, it seems that if the Government makes a labor reform is doing something against the crisis and it seems that if welfare reform does not doing anything. seems . That is what matters.

the end, the second statement hides lurking inside the first. Everyone certainly has to do a labor reform to end the crisis and the lowering of dismissal flapping under water the first mantra and ends up at our door, but we have not called. Because, for those who propagated the first lie, "labor market reform" is a euphemism for lowering of dismissal. " There will be some things to say.

1. In our society, not labor law who creates employment, but the companies that produce goods or services. If business network, if there is real economy, if demand for goods and services, as there employment. If there are no companies that produce things, because there are no jobs. This is a truism, but you have to say more.

2. It is clear that the crisis has not led to labor market regulation, which was the same in good times, but in any case, the progressive deregulation of financial markets has been conducted worldwide since the 80's. The financial turmoil over the economy to blow illusory speculators who had built, but this has made banks turn off the tap of financing the real economy companies, which have finally sunk. This is what must be addressed if we want to address the crisis. Sure, it would then have to annoy the banks, which are those who finance political parties.

3. Labour Law does not serve to create jobs, but to produce social cohesion channeling the conflicting interests between employers and workers through the generalization of expectations . That said, its effective implementation can have side effects of all kinds, positive and negative, on various aspects of the economy and society. Employment could be affected, at least theory, among other things: we must look at these effects in all their complexity, not isolate them so scrawny. In any case, these possible effects on employment levels will not be miraculous, but rather modest. Broadly speaking, the Labour Law does not set the number of jobs but, above all, the conditions under which it operates.

4. Anyway, is true that labor costs may adversely affect, at least in theory, investment or decision to hire . Especially if labor productivity is low (ie, if the production model is based on the mundanity) and if it is particularly profitable to speculate rather than invest in the real economy. If starting a business is very expensive and unprofitable, while putting the capital in an investment fund in a tax haven comes far more benefits, but of course, there is little appetite to invest in companies that produce goods and services and need to hire people . Here

should be sought a delicate balance between, on one hand, the business need to limit costs to maximize profit and, on the other hand, the interests of workers. This is not surprising the Labour Law, which specifically deals with channel conflict, searching for equilibrium points. However, the volume of employment not confined to individual decisions of the employer to hire or more workers. As mentioned above, the level of employment depends on demand for goods or services, which in turn derives from consumption. Thus, the employer crappy interest that disqualified workers are "cheap", but at the same time we can agree that its customers are workers "expensive" in companies less crappy. Because if people takes a good salary, can consume more goods and services, creating a demand for the market. If incomes are low, people consume fewer goods and services and in any case, lower quality, generalizing the trend of mundanity (because the things of higher quality are those that require workers skilled and therefore more expensive to hire).

5. In any case, reduce costs if we want to influence the business decision to hire is LIE that these effects is important to control the high costs of dismissal . This is obvious. During the years of economic boom created a HUGE amount of employment with the regulation we had. I would go even further, it created a huge amount of precarious employment, something for nothing impossible in our system. It is completely untrue that the costs of unfair dismissal would constitute a significant disincentive to hiring. First, because we live in a country with the lowest unused temporary and lots of precarious contractual arrangements available to entrepreneurs. Second, because under the illusory surface of contractual arrangements, the true separation of our labor market does not refer to the type of contract, but rather old, so it is very easy to get rid of an employee without cause when it takes little time in the company, regardless of whether their contract is indefinite. Workers become "expensive" to fire (without cause and "face") when many years pass, but that's as far from the initial decision to hire.

When deciding whether it is worthwhile to establish a business or hire more people, the employer shall account of wages, social contributions and administrative costs and bureaucratic, but not the eventual dismissal may be produced within 20 years, much less if the contract is temporary. It is true that there are failures due to excessive role of old, but that's another story.

6. As is another story, some concerned voices sell the lowering of dismissal as a tool for overcoming the segmentation of our labor market. It is true that this segmentation exists, but the solutions given are inconsistent. First, not matter the type of contract used, because the real segregation is given by the length company. Most temporary contracts are "legal fraud" and extinction can be considered unfair dismissal, but the award amount is too small to who has little time in the company, in any case, add additional complications to multiply the terms , but the segmentation is still there anyway. Second, because to provide new hires, which is usually done to encourage new forms of contract is indefinite, such as 33 days. Now we have workers compensation throughout the life of 45 days, employment support workers 33 days, others 45 days after the contract because the tap 33 days opened and closed temporarily, new workers for employment with 33 days and additional benefits of social fund and temporary workers of all kinds, with different compensation depending on the date, whether they are the years of service and wage that determines the actual amounts. What you do with these measures is to multiply the types of workers, increasing their division into castes with different rights. To say that this is anti-dualization of the labor market is an exercise in cynicism.

7. And if the costs of dismissal are not a disincentive to the recruitment of why so much effort then the firing and not something else? Really easy, I'll tell you, because the cost of dismissal is the true measure of the balance of power between the parties in the employment relationship . That is, difficult to dismiss a worker has a certain power over the employer and therefore a certain amount of autonomy and assertion of rights and interests. In contrast, easy to fire a worker is completely defenseless against the social and legal power unfolds before him their employer. If the dismissal is easy, the rest of labor rights, individual and collective, are worthless. There is the keystone of the entire labor law, so the dismissal is always a sensitive issue.

8. As we have believed the lie that we have to make a labor reform to face the crisis, the Government has taken to change many other things of the Statute. I wanted to change things anyway, following a normal legislative policy and is now trying to sell as a response to the economic crisis, though they were things that were going to do anyway (such as the regulation of private employment agencies). Some of these things are good, some very objectionable, others almost irrelevant. But that's the general tone of any legislative amendment. Labour reforms, can have all kinds, good bad or regular but they never exert a magical power over the labor market. Although some of these measures may be important, for practical purposes are flexible wrap dismissal, which is the real interest has segregated all of this ideology of reform that now afflicts us. why I believe that the most urgent is that I address this issue, the flexibility of firing close-in entries, whether they can later try to analyze the overall effects.

Erectile Dysfunction And Mucinex

INTERESTING TIMES: THE NATION Refoundation CARBONERO

"- Where are we?
" Geographically speaking, the northern hemisphere. Socially, in the margins. And narrative, with way to go "

The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus

Long ago, in an autonomous community far away, I decided to embark on this blog, convinced us that a curse China was sentenced to life (as always) interesting times .

been four years and the times are probably more exciting than ever. However, I see that in recent times, this blog has been getting tired and empty, not because they have nothing to say, but because gives me a huge lazy to do it. I never wanted to blog too much paper, but it is clear that both break him to lose much of its meaning (ie, readers). The truth is that I encourage a lot when people tell me that you know the blog or has read some input (ie, that there is someone on the Other Side), so I do not think it's time to make euthanasia. Unless we kill him instantly to resuscitate him.

laziness Causes are varied, but some relate to the content and therefore can and should be addressed to meet the renewal.

First, once I decided to focus on migration and multiculturalism. I think this has been a good decision, but we must now turn to a powerful belt. The truth is that my core staff remains committed to migrants, it is my way to sit down and see the world from their profit margins and so I will continue, nor have I run out of things to say about the migrations and in fact, I have programmed various work on these issues. But I think now is a time when the concentration is hindering me attention, look at a point from seeing where you are. We must consider the problems of the victims of power, but also explore its causes and contexts. Finally, speaking of both l same subject makes the density of the contents always increase and understanding becomes more difficult. I think now is better to open the wings and simply speak what I feel like, in relation to the social world we live . Migration also, of course.

Second, once I decided to worry about the "very latest", looking more relaxed and free analysis of the vortex of politicking that afflicts us. I think that also has been good, because it has helped the independent thinking, but I think it took me away a bit of "here and now" of the now furious that increasingly is upon us and on the other hand, has influenced my excessive tendency to look at things from above. Now try to write two types of entries: "Reflections" and "events" . The "Reflections" will try to be a bit broader and I hope it is shocking ever get to question some understatement. The "events" are my timid attempts to understand today. Of course, the analysis of these reports will not be "neutral." " " What makes a neutral man. "Gold? Power? Or is born with a heart full of neutrality? ." But try to be "independent", ie dissociated from the organizational interests of parties, unions, NGOs, churches, states, companies, media groups in power, etc., their interests will also be discussed if necessary and perhaps that too is shocking. Or reflections or events illuminate pretend no one: will simply be a dialogue with myself and with anyone, one way to think aloud for understanding the world in which we live. Third

. Each time the blog has become increasingly abstruse and difficult to read and write. I can hardly Elimite length of my posts (as shown in the same) and I can not abandon my academic toniquete, what can we do, we must make the necessary virtue, there are themes and approaches that can only be addressed with a certain amount of abstraction. But I will try to make an effort to be readable and sometimes even short . Advance this effort will be insufficient, but expect to reap some fruits.

I hope that in this way, the blog is a little anime. Although the number of entries will not be great, I hope to avoid these stoppages so important. Also I have revamped a bit, change links and information offered on the cover, but I think I will go gradually. The key is to go gathering pace with the entries. Rebienvenidos, rebienvenidas, to think together about these exciting times which we live.

(And in the next post will discuss the Gob ... labor reform).