Haryana chief minister, BS Hooda has claimed Robert Vadra, the son-in-law of Congress president Sonia Gandhi is a small farmer from the state. Here are some reactions in twitter to Mr Hooda’s comment
Following the uproar over IAS officer Ashok Khemka’s 100-page submission to Haryana government on the Robert Vadra-DLF deal, the state chief minister has given a clean chit to the son-in-law of Congress president Sonia Gandhi. In an interview to The Hindu, Bhupinder Singh Hooda, chief minister of Haryana has said, "He (Vadra) is a landowner. If he owns land designated as an agricultural zone, then he is a farmer. This uproar (over 3.53 acres) is only because he is the son-in-law of the Congress president. Thirty-five to 40 per cent of our licences are given to such small farmers who enter into collaboration agreements with developers. It is not illegal."
However, the social media is abuzz with this clean chit given by the Haryana chief minister to Mr Vadra over the land transactions.
Here are some interesting tweets...
@SujnanNayak #IfRobertVadraIsASmallFarmer then Mukesh Ambani is small time grocery shop owner & Anil a mobile repairer.
@rsyashasvi #IfRobertVadraIsASmallFarmer hope he stands in the ration shop queue to get 25 KG free grains now that #FoodSecurityBill bill is passed!
@sonalchainani #IfRobertVadraIsASmallFarmer then Gurgaon should be renamed as JAMAICA... because half of the Gurgaon land is actually JAMAI KA!
@sharmarohitraj #IfRobertVadraIsASmallFarmer Then he probably grows 20 feet potato in his fields.
@Prakash_Sharma #IfRobertVadraIsASmallFarmer then Dawood Ibrahim is a small time pick pocket!
@gajender00 #IfRobertVadraIsASmallFarmer we can proudly say to the world,Look here guys we give Z security to even a small farmer & #FoodForAll
@bharatmodi_ #IfRobertVadraIsASmallFarmer then al-Qaeda is an elite peace keeping force
@Alllahdin #IfRobertVadraIsASmallFarmer KRK is NASA's chief, MMS is a Rock Artist,Udai Chopra is 5-times Oscar Winner,n Twitter is fr losers..Ohh Wait.
@KartikDayanand #IfRobertVadraIsASmallFarmer and so is Amitabh Bachchan, remember? And yes, Sachin Tendulkar is an actor and I am your next Prime Minister!
@PrateekShah #IfRobertVadraIsASmallFarmer Arnab Goswami is a great listener, Mayawati is Miss India, Nitin Gadkari runs faster than Milkha Singh
@indiantweeter IfRobertVadraIsASmallFarmer Barack Obama is president of Somalia
@fakingnews #IfRobertVadraIsASmallFarmer Amitabh Bachchan is a struggling actor.
Emeritus Senior Living, the largest assisted living company in the US, has agreed to pay as much as $2.2 million to settle a suit that the company routinely underpaid workers
Emeritus Senior Living, the country’s largest assisted living company, has agreed to pay up to $2.2 million to settle claims that it routinely underpaid workers at dozens of its California facilities.
Hands-on workers at Emeritus facilities – the non-salaried aides and support staff who state-wide help care for hundreds of often frail seniors – alleged in a lawsuit that the company had not only short-changed them in their pay, but also violated state laws concerning mandated meal times and rest periods. Workers were denied overtime and not properly compensated for days during which they underwent training sessions, according to the lawsuit.
A recent investigation of Emeritus by ProPublica and PBS Frontline showed that the company’s top executives saw controlling labor costs as critical to sustaining the publicly traded company’s financial success and maintaining its appeal to investors on Wall Street. The investigation found evidence that the zeal of senior Emeritus officials to cut costs had led to understaffing at many facilities and considerable disgruntlement among remaining staff about their workload and wages.
Emeritus, both in interviews and court papers, has said its close to 500 facilities across the country are adequately staffed and that its workers are properly compensated.
Under the settlement, which needs to be approved next month by a state judge, Emeritus will compensate workers who were employed in its facilities in California from 2007 to 2013. The workers can range from the men and women who bathed and fed the elderly residents to those who administered their medications to those who cleaned the hallways and restrooms of the facilities.
Despite the settlement, Emeritus rejects the accusations made in the lawsuit.
“At Emeritus, we strive to be the employer of choice,” the company said in a statement to ProPublica. “We are competing to hire the very best staff that we can, and we are committed to our community teams. We work to be competitive in terms of total compensation within our industry, and we conduct wage analyses in markets in an effort to stay at or in line with the competition.”
Assisted living, conceived two decades ago to offer older Americans the chance to avoid nursing homes and retain greater degrees of independence and dignity, has become a multibillion-dollar industry, dominated by large chains such as Emeritus. Today, some 750,000 people are housed in assisted living facilities in the U.S., with increasing numbers of them suffering from dementia and other serious medical issues.
Experts in the assisted living industry say the low wages paid to workers by companies like Emeritus have produced a workforce that often is poorly trained and beset by poor morale. The lawsuit, initially brought by two caregivers at a single California facility, alleged that the company customarily cheated its modestly paid workforce of what it was legally owed. The lawsuit was granted class-action status, and the proposed compensation is available now to hundreds of workers at Emeritus’s more than 50 facilities in California.
“When it comes to the direct caregivers, you need to hire people who are dedicated to their work,” said Sally Clark Stearns, a professor of health policy at the University of North Carolina Gillings School of Global Public Health. “To do that, you need to pay people sufficient wages to have a stable workforce.”
J. Kevin Eckert and Erin Roth, researchers from the Center for Aging Studies at the University of Maryland who have studied the assisted living industry for more than a decade, noted that the quality of care delivered by large assisted living companies is intimately tied to how well the company pays its workers.
“I am always amazed by the commitment of direct care workers,” Eckert said. “But many of the problems in assisted living stem from the fact these workers earn minimum wage.”
“Many direct care workers haven’t graduated high school, are often immigrants, and earn roughly $20,000 a year,” Eckert added. “Many are single parents that have complicated lives. And they’re often leaving one job because they can earn fifty cents more somewhere else. That’s very disruptive. This is not the way to provide care in one of the fastest growing industries in the country.”
If you have sensitive skin, you may look for products with the words ‘hypoallergenic’ or ‘allergy tested’ or even ‘dermatologist tested’ on the label. But what do these terms really mean? Not much, according to the FDA
What does the law say?
In 1974, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) proposed regulation on the term hypoallergenic in cosmetics, saying that the term would only be allowed if manufacturers could provide competent and reliable scientific evidence that their hypoallergenic products caused fewer allergic reactions than similar non-hypoallergenic products. Cosmetics companies complained that the testing involved in following this regulation would pose an undue economic burden on them (i.e., they didn’t want to shell out the cash for it). The regulation passed, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia eventually struck it down after Almay and Clinique challenged it.
Thus, there is no standard definition for the terms hypoallergenic, allergy tested, dermatologist tested, or dermatologist recommended. No standard definition = cosmetics companies can say it means whatever they want it to mean. After all, there is someone (or something, cue Twilight Zone music) out there, theoretically, who won’t react to a nice plutonium-based cleanser (the results on your pores are absolutely nuclear, darling!).
Why is it so hard to define?
Part of the difficulty with the term hypoallergenic is that people can have skin sensitivity for very different reasons. What irritates someone with rosacea may be very different from what irritates someone with acne, or very different from an ingredient that can irritate someone with ragweed allergies. The American Academy of Dermatology has a great guide to ingredients that may trouble people with certain skin conditions.
What can you look out for?
If a specific product seems to be consistently bothering you, check the ingredients list. Is there a particular ingredient in that product that is not in other non-irritating products? Eliminate that product from your regimen for a while, and try another product with the same suspect ingredient (but no other suspect ingredients). Did you suffer the same reaction again? Hello, science! You might have found the culprit.
Here are a few common ones you may want to pay attention to…
“Hypoallergenic” is meaningless on a label, but it may mean something for you. The Environmental Working Group and The Cosmetics Cop are two good places to begin researching specific cosmetics ingredients, and from there you just have to proceed by trial and error.