Connect with us

Business

Bloomberg Launches Linked Open Data Website to Help Firms Derive Value and Enterprise-wide Efficiencies

Published

on

Bloomberg Launches Linked Open Data Website to Help Firms Derive Value and Enterprise-wide Efficiencies

Enterprise clients, developers and data scientists can easily discover and act on ‘ready-to-use’ datasets now available via Bloomberg’s Enterprise Access Point

Bloomberg today announced the launch of Enterprise Access Point, an online Open Data and Linked Data Platform that provides normalized reference, pricing, regulatory and historical datasets for Bloomberg Data License clients.

Available through the new website, clients can now browse quality data online, examine the metadata, trial sample datasets prior to acquisition, and immediately put them to use within their organization, executives announced at the Bloomberg Enterprise Tech and Data Summit.

Enterprise Access Point creates a seamless online experience for financial organizations looking to leverage data for critical business decisions. For the first time, Data License clients can directly program against Bloomberg’s comprehensive historical data, servicing the growing needs of data science.

As users of financial data increase in sophistication, they expect a self-service model for discovering and browsing data catalogs, and connecting their data tools directly to data publishers. Enterprise Access Point allows users to connect their enterprise systems directly to Bloomberg’s publishing platform, through a RESTful API, and receive complete and comprehensive data. By delivering data in clean standardized formats through one source, integration costs for customers are reduced, if not completely eliminated.

“Data fragmentation creates inconsistencies and misalignment across the enterprise, ultimately exposing organizations to unnecessary risks and costs,” said Gerard Francis, Global Head of Enterprise Data at Bloomberg. “Having a single access point for trusted data not only creates a new standard for quality, it also accelerates the client’s ability to realize bottom-line value across the enterprise.”

Data for Developers & Data Scientists

For data scientists, the information provided via Enterprise Access Point is available as CSV data frames and supports multiple technologies including Jupyter and Python Pandas. For professionals leveraging artificial intelligence (AI), the Linked Data is also available in a graph format. Web developers using Enterprise Access Point also benefit from Bloomberg’s RESTful Hypermedia API, which allows URL consistent data to feed directly into an enterprise’s software components, including machine-learning tools, with minimal friction or delay.

“Having access to deep data history is critical for any investing or business governance strategy based on data science insights,” said Matthew Rawlings, Chief Data Officer for Bloomberg’s Enterprise Data department. “By providing consistent data feeds along with history through API protocols, Enterprise Access Point allows scientists to apply data models with greater confidence and efficiency.”

Enterprise Access Point is part of Bloomberg’s Enterprise Data business, which produces high-quality pricing, reference and regulatory data sets, real-time market, event and news data, liquidity analytics along with data management and distribution technologies. For more information about Bloomberg’s Enterprise Access Point, please visit: eap.bloomberg.com.

Business

Is it legal for an employer force an employee to have the COVID vaccine?

Published

on

Is it legal for an employer force an employee to have the COVID vaccine? 1

By Amanda Hamilton, CEO, National Association of Licensed Paralegals

Can you force your staff to have the vaccine before they return to work? Quite simply, no, not legally!

Despite the claims of some of the anti-vaxxers, there is no law in the UK which requires mandatory vaccination. The Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984 devolves powers to Parliament to legislate in order to protect UK Citizens. The law enables Parliament to intervene in an emergency situation, such as the pandemic, and impose lockdowns and restrictions to protect citizens, but it cannot impose mandatory vaccinations.

In other words, there is no power to make vaccinations mandatory. This raises a whole host of issues – from human rights to equality – and balances them against the rights of others to be safe in their workplace. In addition, it raises issues around the possible criminal implications of forcing someone to be vaccinated against their will.

Potential criminal implications: The Offences Against the Persons Act 1861 s20 states that an unlawful wounding would occur if a person were forced to have a vaccination against their will. A wound means ‘a break of the skin’. This statute still remains in force today.

Human Rights and Equality: Compulsory medical treatment or testing is contrary to Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights meaning that it is a human right to refuse medical treatment if you wish to do so. Refusing medical treatment could be because of deeply held religious or other beliefs, and this brings into play the Equality Act 2010. This statute states an individual is protected from discrimination from nine possible characteristics including: age, disability, gender re-assignment, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief and sex.

So, an employer cannot force an employee to be vaccinated. But can that employer dismiss an employee for refusing the vaccine?

Again, simply no. If they did, then it would amount to an unfair dismissal and the employee could justifiably take the employer to an employment tribunal for discrimination. The case would be brought under the Equality Act 2010 in that the claimant’s refusal to be vaccinated is founded on a fundamental belief or on religious grounds. It would of course, be for the claimant to prove that she/he has such beliefs.

And it would be exactly the same if the claimant felt that they were being victimised, because of their belief, to such an extent that they felt that they could not continue being in the employ of the employer, and consequently, resigned. This would amount to constructive dismissal. The result being the same as if the employer had dismissed the employee – an employment tribunal case could ensue for unfair dismissal.

So how on earth can an employer manage such a situation if there is a statutory duty to provide a safe environment for employees in the workplace? The Health & Safety at Work Act 1974 places the responsibility on employers to protect the ‘health, safety and welfare’ at work of all employees and includes others on the premises such as temps, contractors and visitors.

This appears to be in contradiction to the premise that it is an individual’s right to refuse the vaccine. The only way to manage this is to impose certain guidelines on employees such as those we are all asked to follow during the current pandemic, e.g. social distancing, mask wearing and sanitising/hand washing etc.

It may also be prudent to find alternative work for the employee until it is safe for them to return. A reasonable solution such as this should be acceptable to an employee. If not, and the employee brings an unfair dismissal case against the employer for constructive dismissal on the basis of discrimination, then a Tribunal, hearing such a case would weigh up the rights of the claimant to refuse the vaccine, with the nature of the work they do, the alternatives offered to them, and how many others would be put at risk, if they were to continue in their role without vaccination. In other words, they would look at the situation and apply a test of reasonability.

Lastly, can an employer insist that their staff tell them whether or not they have been vaccinated?

If you can demonstrate that asking them to be vaccinated is a reasonable management instruction, then asking them for this information will also be reasonable. However, just as you can’t force them to be vaccinated, you also can’t force them to reveal their vaccination status. Again, equality laws will come into play if there is a risk that revealing their vaccination status will result in discrimination within the workplace.

If they do agree to tell you then this will constitute sensitive personal health data and you’ll need to comply with GDPR. The same applies to information about who has not been vaccinated and why.

Generally, the best policy is one of unambiguous communication. Explain why you’d like staff to be vaccinated and why you’d like the information about their status. Give them an opportunity to discuss this privately with you or your HR department, and look at ways to mitigate the risks and offer alternative working options.  This way you have done your best to provide the right working environment, have kept staff informed and engaged in the process and ultimately reduced the chances of a successful Tribunal claim.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Amanda Hamilton is Chief Executive of the National Association of Licensed Paralegals (NALP), a non-profit Membership Body and the only Paralegal body that is recognised as an awarding organisation by Ofqual (the regulator of qualifications in England). Through its Centres, accredited recognised professional paralegal qualifications are offered for a career as a paralegal professional.

See: http://www.nationalparalegals.co.uk

Twitter: @NALP_UK

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/NationalAssocationsofLicensedParalegals/

LinkedIn – https://www.linkedin.com/in/amanda-hamilton-llb-hons-840a6a16/

Continue Reading

Business

UK’s Taylor Wimpey sees recovery building in 2021 after good start

Published

on

UK's Taylor Wimpey sees recovery building in 2021 after good start 2

By Aby Jose Koilparambil

(Reuters) – Britain’s third-largest homebuilder Taylor Wimpey reported a strong start to the year on Tuesday and forecast a recovery in sales and margins in 2021 after a slump in 2020.

The group also earmarked 125 million pounds ($174 million) for fire safety work on its developments amid a nationwide drive to improve building safety following a deadly tower block fire in London in 2017.

The FTSE 100 firm said it expected to develop fewer affordable homes than usual this year, with a higher proportion of more profitable private homes, which would help improve its operating margin.

Its shares were trading 2.2% higher at 1000 GMT.

“The key news is that they are talking better on the operating margin for 2021, recent trade has been resilient … and all looks in pretty good shape,” said Canaccord Genuity analyst Aynsley Lammin.

Taylor Wimpey said it expected 2021 operating margin to rise to between 18.5% and 19% after it tumbled to 10.8% in 2020 from 19.6% a year earlier.

Britain is expected to extend a tax break on home purchases by three months and unveil a mortgage guarantee scheme in Wednesday’s budget, moves that could bolster the housebuilding sector after Prime Minister Boris Johnson unveiled an exit plan from coronavirus lockdowns.

Taylor Wimpey, which has operations in Britain and Spain, joined rivals Barratt and Persimmon in setting aside funds to meet new fire safety regulations introduced after a deadly fire at London’s Grenfell Tower in 2017.

The group made pretax profit of 264.4 million pounds ($367 million) last year, down 68.4% from a year earlier and just below analysts’ average forecast of 267 million in a company-provided poll. Revenue fell about 37% to 2.79 billion pounds.

It resumed dividend payments, with a final payout of 4.14 pence per share.

($1 = 0.7202 pounds)

(Reporting by Aby Jose Koilparambil in Bengaluru. Editing by Tomasz Janowski and Mark Potter)

Continue Reading

Business

Boohoo defends supplier practices after report of possible U.S. import ban

Published

on

Boohoo defends supplier practices after report of possible U.S. import ban 3

LONDON (Reuters) – Britain’s Boohoo defended its supplier practices again on Tuesday after a Sky News report said the online fashion retailer faced the possibility of a U.S. import ban due to allegations over the use of slave labour in supplier factories.

Sky News said U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has seen sufficient evidence to launch an investigation after petitions from lawyer Duncan Jepson, who runs Liberty Shared, a campaign group against modern-day slavery.

It quotes Jepson as saying Boohoo is not doing enough to stop forced labour in the factories in Leicester, central England, which supply many of its clothes.

Shares in Boohoo were down 5.7% at 0907 GMT.

Last September Boohoo accepted all the recommendations of an independent review which found major failings in its supply chain in England after newspaper allegations about working conditions and low pay, and set out steps to tackle the problems.

The group, which sells own-brand clothing, shoes, accessories and beauty products targeted at 16- to 40-year-olds, said that over the past eight months it has been working closely with UK enforcement bodies.

“It is important to note that auditors and investigators who are forensically examining suppliers in Leicester have found no evidence of modern day slavery,” it said in a statement.

Boohoo said it has not been notified of any investigation by U.S. CBP.

“We are confident in the actions that we are taking to ensure that all of the group’s products meet and exceed the CBP criteria on preventing the product of forced labour entering the U.S.,” it said.

“We will work with any competent authority to assure them that products from our supply chain meet the required standard.”

In November Boohoo appointed retired judge Brian Leveson to independently check its “Agenda for Change” programme, which implements the recommendations of the independent review.

“The group continues to make excellent progress as it works to implement the review’s recommendations and improve our supply chain in Leicester,” it added.

(Reporting by James Davey)

Continue Reading
Editorial & Advertiser disclosureOur website provides you with information, news, press releases, Opinion and advertorials on various financial products and services. This is not to be considered as financial advice and should be considered only for information purposes. We cannot guarantee the accuracy or applicability of any information provided with respect to your individual or personal circumstances. Please seek Professional advice from a qualified professional before making any financial decisions. We link to various third party websites, affiliate sales networks, and may link to our advertising partners websites. Though we are tied up with various advertising and affiliate networks, this does not affect our analysis or opinion. When you view or click on certain links available on our articles, our partners may compensate us for displaying the content to you, or make a purchase or fill a form. This will not incur any additional charges to you. To make things simpler for you to identity or distinguish sponsored articles or links, you may consider all articles or links hosted on our site as a partner endorsed link.

Call For Entries

Global Banking and Finance Review Awards Nominations 2021
2021 Awards now open. Click Here to Nominate

Latest Articles

Newsletters with Secrets & Analysis. Subscribe Now