Showing posts with label Rules. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rules. Show all posts

Sunday, March 17, 2013

New Punctuality Rules Give Law Firm A Totalitarian Feel

One of the nice things about being a Biglaw lawyer is that you’ve got some autonomy over your schedule. You know how much work you have to do, and you know when it’s due, and within those borders you can manage your own time. If you want to come in a little bit later and stay a little it later, so be it. If you want to come in super early… well, you’re probably still going to end up staying late because of some BS that happens at 4:30 p.m., but after you bill 100 hours in a week, you can probably take it really easy once your matter closes.

The point is, Biglaw lawyers have the expectation of being treated like adults when it comes to their own time management.

So it’s a little bit surprising that a Biglaw firm is treating associates in one office like little children who need to be present when attendance is taken….

A tipster forwarded us an email from Hogan Lovells partner Andrew McGinty. He’s the partner in charge of Ho-Love’s Shanghai office. His email is strict, he wants all the associates to be at their desks by 9:15 a.m., unless they have prior approval from a partner. It was sent over the summer, so here’s the pertinent part:

We are still experiencing major issues with staff punctuality. The Shanghai partners have decided that we will continue to operate the daily report system as before but will not circulate the report to all members of the Shanghai Office but will circulate the record to all the partners and

View the Original article

CHP Posts Rules for Motorcycle Lane-Splitting

February 13, 2013Email ThisPrintNewslettersTweetArticle2 Comments

The California Highway Patrol and other statewide traffic safety groups have created a set of written guidelines on motorcycle

View the Original article

Friday, January 18, 2013

FDA Proposes New Food Safety Rules

January 4, 2013Email ThisPrintNewslettersTweetArticleCommentsU.S. regulators proposed new food safety rules on Friday that aim to make food processors and farms more accountable for reducing foodborne illnesses that kill or sicken thousands of Americans annually.

The new rules, required by the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) that was signed into law two years ago, were announced by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration on Friday.

“These proposed regulations are a sign of progress,” said Caroline Smith DeWaal, food safety director at the Center for Science in the Public Interest, who has been a critic of the FDA. “The new law should transform the FDA from an agency that tracks down outbreaks after the fact to an agency focused on preventing food contamination in the first place.”

Roughly one in six Americans suffers from a foodborne illness each year, and about 3,000 die, the FDA said. The United States has had numerous outbreaks from foodborne illnesses tied to salmonella, E. coli and listeria.

Food sickness has been linked to lettuce, cantaloupe, spinach, peppers and peanuts.

“We’re taking a big step for food safety by proposing the standards that will help us prevent food safety problems rather than just reacting to them,” said Michael Taylor, FDA deputy commissioner for foods and veterinary medicine.

Under the new rules, makers of food to be sold in the United States, whether produced at a foreign- or domestic-based facility, would have to develop a formal plan for preventing their products from causing foodborne illness.

The rule would also require them to have plans for correcting any problems that arise.

Companies will be required to document their plans and keep records to verify that they are preventing problems. Inspectors will be able to audit the program to enforce safety standards, which should “dramatically” improve the effectiveness of inspections, Taylor said.

Though many food processors already have documented food safety plans, the new rule sets requirements for “all firms across all commodities,” he said.

A second rule proposes safety standard requirements for farms that produce and harvest fruits and vegetables. Farms would be required to meet national standards for the quality of water applied to their crops, as water is often a pathway for pathogens.

Implementing the new rules will add costs for some food companies and farms, Taylor said. As well, the FDA will need money to retrain inspectors and implement the rules, Taylor said.

The Food Safety Modernization Act was the first food safety overhaul in over 70 years in the United States and was signed into law in January 2011.

The proposals followed a series of meetings between FDA officials and consumer groups, corporate interests, researchers, and others.

Critics have charged FDA with dragging its feet in implementing the requirements of the new law. Last August, the Center for Food Safety sued the FDA for missing several deadlines set under the law.

The standards for analyzing and documenting hazards were due last July, and the standards for safe production and harvesting of fruits and vegetables were due last January.

Within the next few months, FDA hopes to issue a proposed rule on preventative controls for animal feed as well as proposed regulations related to importer accountability for food safety.

The FDA is also setting requirements for the safe transport of food, and to set standards for trying to prevent intentional contamination of food.

 

 

Copyright 2013 Reuters. Click for restrictions.Email ThisPrintNewslettersTweetCategories: National NewsTopics: FDA, federal food safety rules, Food and Drug Administration, food safety, foodborne illnessesHave a hot lead? Email us at newsdesk

View the Original article

Wednesday, November 28, 2012

Massachusetts Court Rules on Scope of Independent Contractor Exclusion

September 25, 2012Email ThisPrintNewslettersTweetArticleComments

A Massachusetts court recently ruled in favor of insurer Lloyd’s in a dispute over a commercial property and general liability policy excluding coverage for independent contractors.

The insured, a property development firm called Cable Mills LLC, and its insurance agency argued that the exclusion shouldn’t apply in its case involving a injured subcontractor who worked at the construction site and later filed a personal injury lawsuit against Cable Mills.

Cable Mills argued that because the injured worker was retained by a contractor and not directly by Cable Mills, the independent contractor exclusion isn’t applicable and that Lloyd’s is obligated to indemnify and defend Cable Mills in the personal injury lawsuit.

However, Appeals Court of Massachusetts in Middlesex rejected Cable Mills’ narrow definition of the independent contractor and ruled that the injured worker is subject to the coverage exclusion. The ruling, announced earlier this month, affirmed a lower court finding.

View the Original article

Saturday, October 20, 2012

N.M. Court Rules Against Residents Suing Oil Company

October 5, 2012Email ThisPrintNewslettersTweetArticleComments

New Mexico’s Court of Appeals has ruled against a group of current and former Hobbs residents who sued an oil company because of illnesses and other damages.

The court on Tuesday upheld a Lea County District Court decision not to grant a new trial in the case against Shell Oil Co. and Shell Western Exploration and Production Inc.

The Hobbs residents alleged there was environmental contamination from oil and natural gas production in an area that became a housing subdivision in the southeastern New Mexico community.

A jury in 2007 ruled in favor of Shell, which had oil storage tanks in the area from 1946 until 1993. There also was an unlined storage pit for oilfield wastes that was buried in the 1960s. Housing development in the area started in the 1970s.

A lawyer for the residents, Michael Newell, said Wednesday that no decision has been made on whether to appeal the ruling to the state Supreme Court.

Copyright 2012 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Email ThisPrintNewslettersTweetCategories: West NewsTopics: damages, lawsuit, New MexicoHave a hot lead? Email us at newsdesk

View the Original article

Tuesday, August 28, 2012

Ohio Legislators Consider New Drilling Rules

May 25, 2012Email ThisPrintNewslettersTweetArticleComments

Rules regulating oil and gas well construction, water handling, and the disclosure of chemicals used in drilling were ready to clear their final legislative hurdles on May 24 and head to Gov. John Kasich.

The Ohio House was scheduled to vote on the new regulations governing hydraulic fracturing in the Utica and Marcellus shale formations running under sections of the state. They are part of a wide-ranging energy bill that also addresses Ohio’s clean energy standard and makes dozens of other changes.

Barring further amendments to the bill, the Ohio Senate was prepared to concur on House changes later in the day. That would send the bill to Kasich, who is expected to sign it.

Some environmental groups turned against the bill after a provision was added limiting who can sue energy companies for chemical trade secrets. Among them were the Ohio Environmental Council and the Sierra Club, which had previously been neutral.

The Kasich administration said it fought to guarantee that owners and adjacent neighbors of well properties could file trade secret challenges. Environmentalists argued, however, that the language requires all others to show current or potential harm from the secret chemicals before a lawsuit would be allowed.

The language could also preclude the environmental groups themselves from waging legal battles against drillers over their trade secrets, though they could sue on behalf of an affected person.

Other provisions of the bill are being touted as among the toughest in the nation.

Well operators would be required to disclose within 60 days the chemicals they used to initially drill and hydraulically fracture, or frack, a well. Fracking is a high-pressure drilling technique that involves blasting thousands of gallons of water into the earth to fracture shale formations and release gas, oil and natural gas liquids.

The bill also would require chemical reporting when operators first drill through underground drinking water sources. Chemicals used to service or plug a well could be requested by state regulators.

The legislation also would allow doctors treating people injured during well construction and production to share proprietary information with not only other medical providers but with public health agencies and the patient.

Well operators would face mandatory daily fines of up to $20,000 for safety and environmental violations.

 

Copyright 2012 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Email ThisPrintNewslettersTweetCategories: Midwest NewsTopics: drilling rules, Energy, fracking, Ohio, oil & gasHave a hot lead? Email us at newsdesk

View the Original article

Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Church Protests Insurance Rules For Sex Offenders

June 26, 2012Email ThisPrintNewslettersTweetArticle5 Comments

An Oregon church is challenging requirements set by its insurance company for how it treats sex offenders who attend services.

Pastor Chad McComas of Set Free Christian Fellowship in Medford told Mail Tribune the church disclosed that known sex offenders were in the congregation. He says the church received a letter from Church Mutual insurance company demanding that the church disclose the identity of all sex offenders.

The insurance company also says the church must limit offenders to one predetermined service each week and assign them an escort.

McComas says the church is careful but that the requirements lump all offenders together and will encourage abusers to go underground.

Church Mutual vice president of marketing Patrick Moreland says the rules are designed to protect churches and potential victims.

Copyright 2012 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Email ThisPrintNewslettersTweetCategories: West NewsTopics: insurance company, sex abuseHave a hot lead? Email us at newsdesk

View the Original article