March 27, 2012: Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) head Joe Main testified at a Capitol Hill hearing about the Upper Big Branch Mine disaster, the April 5, 2010 explosion that killed 29 miners 1000 feet underground in Montcoal, Raleigh County, West Virginia. Republican lawmakers questioned Main about the negligence of inspectors, and US Representative Nick Rahall, D-WV, along with his fellow Democrats, demanded that laws be introduced to give the MSHA greater powers.

A recent report concluded that federal investigators either failed to see problems that existed or failed to examine areas where there were problems a year-and-a-half prior to the blast, but stated there was no evidence that such negligence caused the disaster.

But last week, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) inspectors, issuing their own report, stated that if regulations had only been enforced, the chances of the explosion occurring would have been minimized. The blast could even have been averted. Rep. John Kline, R-Minn, Chairman of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, said it was almost impossible for him to believe that the inspectors did not notice how explosive coal dust had accumulated, and why certain administrative tools were either misused or not used at all.

Joe Main has embarked on a safety program that more closely inspects mines with a history of problems and uses other methods to make mining safer. As he puts it, “(I’m) on a path to really fix MSHA.” But as he told lawmakers, he needs their help through legislation in providing federal subpoena power for investigators, harsher penalties for negligent mine operators, and greater protection for miners who report dangerous working conditions.

Although they had listed 684 violations during the one-and-a-half years before the explosion occurred, inspectors reportedly did nothing about eight of them that fit in the “flagrant” category, which is the most serious. And at least six times, they neglected to conduct special investigations to determine whether managers had intentionally violated safety standards.

Monica Risam Nicklin

President Obama has a new way of acquiring the votes of women: by pitching the benefits of free preventive health care services. Speaking at a Texas fundraiser, he warned women of the prospect of having to pay, and dearly too, for certain health care services that now come free, if a Republican presidency should come into being. And he has a new, aggressive method of getting his message across to his female constituents, also.

The Democratic National Committee, because of the edge Obama enjoys over Republican Mitt Romney with the female population, has spread a million fliers with Obama’s message on them in different states. Some flyers say, “You may now get many of your preventive care services for FREE. Without co-pays, thanks to America’s New Heath Care Law.” The second sentence is highlighted. Other flyers state, “3 WAYS America’s New Health Care Law is Helping You and Your Family.”  They dangle before their intended audience the prospect of future parity for women with insurance premiums, the stopping of lifetime benefits caps, plus the ability of children to remain on their health plans up to age 26. The flyers will be distributed to women in areas crucial to election success.

For the first time, during a speech last week at a fundraiser in Houston, Texas, President Obama pitched money-saving health care benefits specifically for women. He said, “So when you see politicians trying to take us back to the days when this care was more expensive and harder to get for women—and I know you’re seeing some of that here in Texas—you just remember we can’t let them get away with it.”

But even after he has defended the law for several months in debates, the President does not seem much closer to convincing the public. Or Republicans for that matter, who have said they will repeal the law if and when they take office.

Up to 72 percent of voters in a USA Today/Gallup poll conducted in 12 states last month felt early provisions of the law did not make a difference in their health care, and 42 percent said that when the law is fully implemented after 2014, it would make matters even worse.

Monica Risam Nicklin

It all started on February 16 of this year, at a hearing of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. It concerned president Obama’s new mandate that all employers with religious affiliations provide their employees with health insurance plans covering contraception. Republicans at Capitol Hill convened a panel of religious leaders, all men, to testify on whether religious freedom had been violated.

Senior committee member Rep. Elijah Cummings D-Maryland had invited Georgetown University third-year law student Sandra Fluke to testify, but she was barred from doing so. Rep. Carolyn Maloney D-New York asked Rep. Darrell Issa, “Where are the women?” adding that the exclusion of women witnesses from the hearing was a throwback to the “primitive era” when “the government thought that what happens in the bedroom was their business.” Irked, Issa responded that since the hearing concerned religious freedom and not specifically contraception, his panel was entirely made up of clergy, of which Fluke was not a member. In protest, Fluke sat quietly behind the witness table.

But Democrats were determined to give Sandra Fluke a chance behind the microphone. The exclusion of women from the previous hearing sparked protests from women’s groups, and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi held an unofficial hearing on February 23, with Fluke as the sole witness. Three other democrats besides Pelosi were there and several dozen supporters, mainly young women, applauded Fluke as she spoke on how important reproductive health care is to women. No Republicans were sent to attend the hearing. Rep. Carolyn Maloney displayed an image of last week’s hearing showing the five male panelists with Fluke sitting in the background behind them.

Fluke testified that Georgetown’s health plan did not cover contraception the cost for which she said could go as high as $3,000 during a student’s law school career.

On her being barred from testifying at the previous hearing, she said, “I felt not insulted for myself, but for the women I wanted to represent, women who were silenced.” She added that she felt the matter was not about church and state, but about women’s health.

Seven-year-old Maria Ridulph of Sycamore, Illinois, was abducted from right outside her home while waiting for her playmate to return on December 3, 1957. Her eight-year-old friend Cathy Sigman had been playing with her but went home for a while. When she got back, Maria was gone. Then 18-year-old John Tessier was questioned by the police but denied it was possible he could have taken her, claiming he had left for Chicago to get a medical exam for the Air Force. He had befriended the girls and was giving Maria piggyback rides when Cathy left to get mittens from her home.

53 years later, Tessier, having changed his name to Jack Daniel McCullough, is again being questioned by the police about Maria. According to them, his alibis have fallen apart with new evidence having been uncovered. The evidence does lead one to cast a suspicious eye on him, though we must remember that one is innocent until proven guilty.

But the new evidence only came after the revival of the case. What piques my curiosity is what exactly prompted the police to reopen the investigation in 2008. They have refused to say just what it is.

I certainly hope this finally brings closure to the Ridulph family, Cathy Sigman, and their community in Sycamore. Waiting 53 long years for an answer to why the seven-year-old girl disappeared is a terrible kind of suffering that nobody should ever have to take. But Charles Ridulph, the older brother of Maria, says that he and his family are worried about the emotional stress of having to deal with all the reopened wounds, and that there never is any closure. When his daughter heard from him a suspect was in police custody, she said it was a pity his parents are no longer around to hear of it. He replied he thanked God that they are no longer around to relive the pain, adding they would not have been able to take it.

But if McCullough is not proven guilty, this leaves the nearly 54-year-old question unanswered. The suffering of the Ridulphs and the Sigmans, eased by the passage of time will continue afresh, intensified by the revival of emotions past. This is the kind of suffering those who truly loved Caylee Anthony, and now the family of Meredith Kercher, have only just embarked on.

Posted 05 October 2011 by Monica Risam, corporate lawyer and daughter in a loving family

Business Secretary Vince Cable said the $2.3 billion rogue trading loss of UBS confirmed the need for the passage into law of the recommendations of the Independent Commission on Banking (ICB). The ICB has pushed for tighter government controls in the banking industry and has called for the mandatory ring fencing of the banks’ investment and retail operations.

A lone employee’s rogue transactions that went unchecked for three months cost USB, Switzerland’s largest bank, $2.3 billion in losses. It is expected to bring down the bank’s quarterly results into the red. Doubts have been cast over the bank’s risk-management policies.

ICB Chair John Vickers said UK banks should be compelled to isolate their consumer units from their volatile investment banking operations. Cable voiced his support for the plan, saying taxpayers should not be held liable for the banks’ risky investment trading schemes which he described as “casino banking.” The law ought to be changed to protect the public, he added.

UK-based financial giants like Barclays, HSBC, Standard Chartered Bank, and the RBS Group have opposed the ICB proposal. They will incur higher costs once the recommendations are signed into law.

The ICB, created by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in June 2010, has been tasked to formulate and put forward legal and structural reforms to the UK banking sector to promote financial stability. The points mentioned in its final report are now the subject of vast debate among members of parliament.

Aviva set to launch European panel as new GC joins from GE

Ivory Wave, the so-called “legal high” recreational drug, is to become a class B controlled drug. The ruling comes after the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) advised it should be banned for having the potential to cause harm. An order making the substance illegal will be put before Parliament this autumn.

The substance, often described as bath salts, has been linked to the death of a man from the Isle of Wight. Michael Bishton, a 24-year-old chef, was reported to have showed “bizarre and paranoid” behavior in the days before he died. His mother called it a “self-induced madness.”

Bishton was taken to the hospital after he became delusional and started running around the house with a knife. Mental health doctors said he had a psychotic reaction to the Ivory Wave drug. A few days after, Bishton’s body was found in the sea. Isle of Wight coroner John Matthews said: “The ingestion of this legal high may have been a very strong contributory factor to the behavior which was out of character.”

Baroness Angela Browning, Minister for Crime Prevention and Antisocial Behavior Reduction, said the ADMC only highlighted what is already known. Drugs touted as “legal high” may contain dangerous substances. But because they are called legal, people think they are absolutely safe, making these harmful substances more dangerous, Browning explained.

Is Thomson breaking the law? Consumer rights advocate Which? says the TUI Travel-owned travel firm, one of UK’s largest, may be engaging in a deceitful promotion of some of its deals.

A customer complained to the BBC about being misled by Thomson’s advert. Mike O’Keefe, a businessman from Bristol, said he booked two seats for a flight to Florida in early August to fly later this month. He paid £496 per person after seeing the text “Hurry, only 3 seats left” next to the price.

Because his sister-in-law wanted to come too, O’Keefe returned the next day to see if the last seat was still there. He found that more seats were available—all selling at a cheaper price. O’Keefe said he could book up to eight seats at £411 per person on the same plane to the same destination.

TUI Travel’s legal counsel explained that the availability of seats change because most holidays are sold on seven- and 14-night durations. He said: “When the initial booking was made we had very limited availability on the specific duration chosen. After the booking was made, our seat availability was reviewed and it became apparent that whilst we had no availability on shorter durations, we did however have greater availability on longer durations and were in a position to be able to amend the durations against some seats.”

Which? lawyers still believe it is against the law to pressure customers into making immediate decisions based on information that is not true. The Association of British Travel Agents (ABTA) said it would help all parties if there were more clarity in the way advertisements are presented.

Celebrity gay right supporters like Lady Gaga, Ellen Degeneres, and Ricky Martin celebrated the milestone law just passed in New York which gives room to same sex marriage, together with gay communities.

Lady Gaga is all fanfare as she tweeted her exuberance after the same sex marriage law was passed in New York. Common law partners can now be legally binded together as lawfully married couples in the state with the new law. Lady Gaga advised gays to propose now that they have the right to marry those of the same gender in the state.

The Israeli gay community expresses their pleasure with the passing of the bill into law but lamented that their country may take a long time to follow suit, with Israeli gays opting to travel abroad to escape discrimination and to be socially accepted. Before New York, the popular destination was Toronto where they could have rightful status. In a statement of one of the group’s members, the organization saw the passing of such laws as an international trend, although they identified religion and politics as hindrances to a similar law in their native country.

MK Nitzan Horowitz who leads the unicameral legislature of Israel, Knesset, had introduced a bill against homophobia, but it was rejected twice already during preliminary reading. But according to Itai Pinkas, chairman of the Municipal Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgendered Center of Tel Aviv, the passage of the same-sex marriage law made an important statement to the international community.

Monica Risam Nicklin

Aviva Europe Adds New GC, Pan-European Legal Panel Alerts – “Aviva PLC “

The Collective Bargaining Law was upheld by the Wisconsin Supreme Court after being ruled to have been passed improperly by a lower court.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court’s overturning of the decision of a lower court on the Collective Bargaining Law had saved a lot of work for Republican lawmakers who had vowed to add the same measure to the state’s pending budget bill. The legal issue with the passing of the Collective Bargaining Law began in the voting wherein 14 Democrat lawmakers weren’t present, giving the floor under the control of Republicans. The Democrats complained they weren’t given the 24-hour notice as specified in the Wisconsin Constitution’s requirements for open meetings.

In its written decision, the state Supreme Court stated that the Legislature did not violate the state Constitution when it gave less than two hours notice before the voting. The insufficient notice time was seen as a move which led to the failure of 14 of the state’s Democrats to make attendance, thus favoring Republican representatives who supported the bill.

The Republicans had won the Legislature and the governor’s office in the 2010 November elections and now wish to move forward after the Supreme Court decision. Senator Christopher Larson, a Democrat, said the decision of the justices was merely a reminder to voters. On the other hand, Gov. Scott Walker said the ruling gave the opportunity for the state to get to work again.

Monica Risam Nicklin

Aviva set to launch European panel as new GC joins from GE

In Massachusetts, there is an existing anti-discrimination law, but women are reportedly still paid less for doing the same work as men. An update of the Equal Pay Law may change that soon.

Massachusetts legislators are considering amending the existing Equal Pay Law to ensure that it is more specific. The present law prohibits employers from paying male and female workers with different wages for the same kind of job, described as “work of like or comparable character.” This definition has been deemed vague by supporters of the amendment.

Two Democrats have sponsored the law update: Rep. Alice Wolf of Cambridge and Sen. Patricia Jehlen of Somerville. Through the bill, the definition of “same kind of job” will be based on whether two positions require similar skill, effort, responsibility, and working conditions for two employees of opposing gender. The bill is part of State House hearings with the Committee on Labor and Workforce Development.

Monica Risam Nicklin law blog: E-Verify Law Still Challenged

Aviva Europe Adds New GC, Pan-European Legal Panel