United front

first_img Comments are closed. Previous Article Next Article John McNamara, chairman of the newly launched Federation of Awarding Bodies,sets out his reasons for shaking up the NVQ system and championing vocationaleducationThe first quarter of 2001 has seen NVQ registrations fall by around 10 percent. While an element of this must be attributed to nervousness about the newfunding arrangements under the Learning and Skills Councils, it has alsooccurred to many of us in the business of awarding NVQs that unwieldyregulation is having a damaging effect on our ability to deliver. This was the premise on which we founded the Federation of Awarding Bodies,an organisation launched in May to encourage improvements in the system. A year ago, City & Guilds invited NVQ awarding bodies sharing commoninterests to function as a united front to champion vocational training issues.The first meeting went well, with attendees agreeing that a collaborativeapproach to raising common issues related to NVQs could not fail to make animpact. City & Guilds, with OCR, Edexcel, LCCI and HAB (Hospitality AwardingBody), established the secretariat to bring the group to fruition. One of our first concerns was that with a number of other groupsrepresenting awarding bodies, we should not be covering already-trodden ground.I am confident that FAB is distinct in that it represents generic awardingbodies of any size, as well as a number of industry-specific bodies. We will tackle issues concerning all groups, establishing ourselves as theonly logical point of contact for those seeking the views and expertise of allawarding bodies. By taking an active, collaborative approach, we hope to work on manyimportant areas, but there are three fundamental issues to be addressed: – The problematic system of accrediting NVQs – Funding as a primary concern – Effectively contributing to the NTO Review and the National OccupationalStandards Review The accreditation of NVQs has at times become frustrating to say the least.Regulation can be slow, bureaucratic and inconsistent across the sectors. Wewill work with regulators to minimise the impact that highly necessary qualityprocedures have on getting new or revised qualifications on to the market. Meeting demands If NVQs are to continue to prove their worth to individuals and business, wemust demonstrate that the system is flexible and able to meet the demands oftoday. We will also encourage reviews of policy and service. Funding will always be of primary concern in the qualifications sector. But we need to focus on ensuring that the vocational sector continues to getits fair share, and this must then be distributed across all sectors. Furthermore, there is work to be done in ensuring that adults and youngpeople get access to funded qualifications, in order to upskill the population.We need well-funded, high-quality and relevant qualifications for all. With regard to the NTO Review and the National Occupational StandardsReview, we will be using the federation to contribute effectively to theseimportant projects. The importance of assessing occupational competence in the workplace cannotbe underestimated as a vital component in driving forward industry andovercoming our growing skills deficit. Positive shift But our aim is not simply to complain to the regulators. We intend to usethe federation to support a positive shift in the vocational education market –a single voice focused on work-based education. Our overriding aim must be to encourage a positive, two-way relationshipbetween awarding bodies and other key organisations, such as the QualificationsCurriculum Authority, NTO National Council and the Adult Learning Inspectorate– we all have the common aim of ensuring vocational qualifications and trainingworks. But we all recognise that individual representation and communicationremains important. The Federation of Awarding Bodies is all about finding common themes andcontributing to the debate. It won’t be just another talking shop. We are allhere to work for a more consistent, speedier and effective vocationalqualifications system. Related posts:No related photos. United frontOn 1 Jul 2001 in Personnel Todaylast_img read more

Better conditions cannot halt call centre staff loss

first_imgBetter conditions cannot halt call centre staff lossOn 25 Sep 2001 in Personnel Today Comments are closed. Previous Article Next Article Related posts:No related photos. Call centre managers continue to struggle to recruit and retain employees,despite measures to improve pay and conditions. The annual Incomes Data Services survey, which covers 139 organisations and100,000 staff, reports that despite greater efforts to invest in call centres,more managers are having difficulties with recruitment and retention. Nicola Allison, researcher at IDS, explained, “Call centres have anincreasing problem finding people with the relevant skills and experience, anddespite measures to reduce staff turnover, it’s still increasing. “The problems are about a much tighter labour market, but some managersare worried about the image of call centres.” The report showed that among the industry’s 400,000 workers the averagesalary was £11,900, which represented an increase of 6.5 per cent on last year.Despite this, staff turnover was 22 per cent – a 4 per cent rise on 1999. Managers who responded to the survey cited the intensity of the workingenvironment as the main reason for staff leaving. But the report also reveals a range of measures being introduced to helpimprove the tightening market. “Many firms are making moves to improve training and development withthings like flexible working hours, a better career structure and improvedsalaries,” added Allison. Cheryl Clifford, HR director at outsourcing specialist Merchant, said theindustry needs to move forward. “Employees in call centres need to be offered more permanent contractsor they will continue to move on,” she said. www.incomesdata.co.ukBy Ross Wighamlast_img read more

End of employment law as we know it?

first_imgEnd of employment law as we know it?On 9 Oct 2001 in Personnel Today Related posts:No related photos. A more sane approach to settling disputes is to look to the workplace foranswers, says Mike EmmottDeregulation has been on the UK political agenda now for two decades. Whatis there to show for it in relation to the employment relationship? Most employers would say little or nothing. While both major politicalparties have pledged to tackle the issue, and the present Government hasirritated the trade unions with its claims to be “business-friendly”,the last few years have seen an increase, not a reduction, in the rate at whichnew employment law has reached the statute book. Is deregulation simply anempty slogan? Nobody is arguing against minimum legal standards for employees on issuessuch as pay and safety. But employment law has gone well beyond this. The European Commission has enthusiastically promoted legislation on issuesincluding part-time, fixed-term and agency work, “posted” workers andhours. But even the Commission may be starting to run out of steam in finding newareas of the employment relationship to legislate about, focusing instead onpromoting flexibility, social inclusion and full employment. There are some encouraging signs that the Government is looking for ways toavoid imposing unnecessary further obligations on employers. Secretary of Statefor Trade and Industry Patricia Hewitt has appointed a task force to recommendways of promoting flexible working with a “light touch”. This partlyreflects the Government’s stated preference for adopting solutions that employersand unions can both support. But another answer is that people are beginning to question how effectiveemployment law has been in achieving its objectives. UK legislation has neverbeen noted for its clarity of purpose, preferring to require or outlaw specificbehaviour, rather than adopt broad declarations of intent. In general, however, employment law is generally seen to operate byprotecting individual employees and/or promoting good practice by employers. How far has the law succeeded in these two ambitions? By and large, it isremarkable how little we know about the answer to this question. In practice, the provision for enforcement through employment tribunals hasproduced a curiously lopsided result. Three-quarters of claimants withdrawtheir claim or are “bought off” by an offer of compensation from theemployer. But what about the majority of staff who don’t bring tribunal claims or seekadvice from their union or Citizens’ Advice Bureau? The short answer is we have little idea how far their rights are respected.The answer may be that in many instances employers are either unaware of thelaw or choose to ignore it. Take as an example the current working time regulations. Research by the DTIand by the CIPD confirms that they have had little impact so far on the numberof hours worked, which was clearly one of the key intentions underlying the EUdirective on which the regulations were based. Many employees have agreed to”opt out” of their legal entitlement, others see the regulations as athreat to their overtime earnings. Most managers who voluntarily work longhours are probably not covered by the regulations. The net effect on workers’health seems likely to have been insignificant. The current enforcement machinery in the UK fails to protect individualemployees from bad managers. It is an unlikely tool for promoting “goodpractice” among employers, who are forced instead into adopting a”compliance” mentality. Taken with the efforts to establish a non-legalistic form of individual arbitrationfor unfair dismissal claims, the recent consultation paper on employmenttribunals appears to reflect a sea change in Government thinking. It looks likean implicit acceptance that piling up new employment rights has a limitedfuture unless more cost-effective ways can be found to implement those rights. One way towards a more sane system may be to accept that workplace issuesare primarily about resolving differences between employers and employees, andrely less heavily on legal process and precedent. Other countries with a commonlaw background, including the US and New Zealand, have been ready to followthis route: why not us? Mike Emmott is the CIPD’s employee relations adviser Comments are closed. Previous Article Next Articlelast_img read more


first_imgPeopleOn 2 Apr 2002 in Personnel Today The Learning and Skills Council, responsible for all post-16 education otherthan the university sector, has appointed Rob Wye as interim director oflearning programmes. Wye joins the national team based at Coventry from the Northampton office,where he has been executive director for the past two years. The LSC, which has an annual budget of £7.3bn and 47 local offices, dealswith planning and funding Further Education colleges; work-based learning foryoung people; workforce development; adult and community learning; informationand advice for adults and building links between education and business. Wye’s brief is to develop the LSC’s strategic role with the aim of meetingthe targets set out in the latest corporate plan. He will be responsible for expanding key areas including adult learning,funding and development, skills development and young people’s programmes. “I’m enjoying working with the other directors, council members andlearning programmes team to fulfil this extensive remit,” he says. “The learning programmes team has a massive role to play and I amthrilled to be heading one of the council’s key directorates. I am well awarethat there are some tough targets to be met and we will play a large part inachieving these.” Wye is a graduate from Cambridge University and has worked in a range ofhigh-level jobs, including the Employment Minister’s private office. CV2002 Interim director of learning programmes, LSC2000 Executive director, Northampton LSC1997 Finance directorate, DfEE 1981 Divisional Manager Manpower Services CommissionOn the moveVernon Everitt has been promoted todirector of HR at the Financial Services Authority. He will report to chiefoperating officer Paul Boyle with a remit to improve the FSA’s peoplemanagement capabilities. His role will include ensuring the FSA attracts andretains a mix of staff with the appropriate skills and experience; improvingtraining to develop staffs skills, knowledge and flexibility; and developingthe people management skills of all FSA managers.Christopher Duff has been appointedthe first chief executive of the Sector Skills Development Agency (SSDA). Thenew UK-wide body will oversee the Government’s drive to improve skills andproductivity across business and industry. Prior to this Duff was chiefexecutive of the South Yorkshire Learning and Skills Council. He has alsoworked for KPMG and London Docklands Development Corporation. The chair of theorganisation has also been named as Margaret Salmon.Iris Software has recruited ChrisMorley as associate director of HR. The firm employs around 130 staff, but itaims to double this by 2005 through a growth programme. Morley takes up therole on a part-time basis and has been charged with recruiting and retainingthe highest calibre talent for the accountancy software developer. He hasprevious experience of operational HR, especially in the field of mergers andacquisitions. Comments are closed. Previous Article Next Article Related posts:No related photos.last_img read more

Ford rethinks cull of its lowest performers

first_img Previous Article Next Article Motor giant Ford has dropped the practice of ‘managing out’ the lowestperforming 10 per cent of staff because of the negative reaction fromemployees. The company used the 10/80/10 approach to performance management championedby organisations such as US energy company GE, but found it did not fit withthe Ford culture. “Boy, did it get a bad reaction,” John Walker, vice-president ofHR for Ford Europe, told delegates at the Winning the Global Talent WarConference. “It turned a lot of staff against the company just by themanner in which it was done.” Ford even had to face legal action in the form of ‘class action’ lawsuitstaken in the US as a result of the policy. “We’ve moved away from thatnow,” Walker said. “If you put in a performance management approach,make sure it fits the company culture.” The company now uses a wide range of measures to evaluate performance andboost employee engagement in the business. Performance development committees assess the leadership potential ofemployees, for example. These include line managers and an HR professional. It uses business score cards and all staff are assessed against performancemetrics. Walker said changing social values had led the company to drop itsauthoritarian approach to leadership and to introduce new methods, such ascoaching. All its HR professionals will have gone through coaching training by the endof the year, delegates heard at the Pearn Kandola conference, held inassociation with Personnel Today. As part of its European transformation strategy, Ford has increasedproductivity in its plants from 63 per cent two years ago, to 98 per cent now. By Noel O’Reilly Ford rethinks cull of its lowest performersOn 6 Aug 2002 in Personnel Today Comments are closed. Related posts:No related photos.last_img read more

The hidden benefits of IT audits

first_imgThe hidden benefits of IT auditsOn 26 Nov 2002 in Personnel Today Previous Article Next Article Related posts:No related photos. Comments are closed. Although the dot.com boom has been and gone, companies still have much togain from the experience. Keith Rodgers investigates how to maximise yoursystem’s performanceChastened by falling sales and the collapse of the internet bubble, theinformation technology industry has done a little soul-searching during thelast year. Looking back at the heady days of the high-tech boom when customers werepromised the earth and more, many in the industry admit that what they actuallydelivered failed to live up to the hype, and that much IT investment missed themark. Ironically, as the dust settles from the explosive growth of the late 1990s,some of that over-exuberance is beginning to bring unforeseen benefits. For onething, it has led to a far more practical approach to IT expenditure. Whilebusinesses continue to invest, they are taking much more care over what theybuy and are typically looking to generate fast, tangible returns from any newprojects. Unused software For another, the slowdown has given firms a chance to review exactly whatthey spent their IT budgets on at the height of the dot.com boom. In many cases, the answer is ‘shelfware’ – individual software modules, oreven entire application packages, that were licensed, but never installed. Even for businesses that have gone through major organisational changeduring the slowdown, these packages can be more relevant today than when theywere first bought. The difference in today’s slower economy is thatorganisations have the opportunity to implement them and enjoy the benefits. Unused software is just one example of what can be unearthed whenorganisations take the time to audit their IT set-up. Compared to new software development initiatives, this is a relativelymundane activity for the IT department. But in an environment where pressure onthe bottom line means every penny must be squeezed out of the business, firmscan make significant gains by maximising their existing investments, from IT‘housekeeping’ projects to business process change and tactical purchases. And with it’s own hefty investment in IT systems, the HR department shouldbe in the thick of that activity. The one rule of thumb that needs to be applied to any IT audit process isthat every action stemming from the review must generate a tangible return tothe business. Giving a group of IT purists carte blanche to review your HRset-up is a recipe for chaos, for the simple reason that no system is ever 100per cent efficient and the scope for endless ‘optimisation’ work will beenormous. Rather than looking for better technology solutions, the organisation shouldlook for better business impact. In practice, that means the review should spanboth the technology infrastructure and the business processes it supports. The initial vision One starting point recommended by consultants and software vendors, is fororganisations to review the business case that drove their initial ITinvestment. As Michael Richards, CEO of Snowdrop Systems, points out, the final outcomeof a systems implementation often doesn’t match up to what was originallyenvisaged. There is a whole host of reasons for that kind of mismatch. Theprogramme may have lost its way after the project sponsor moved on, forexample, or perhaps the scope of the project shifted during a businessreorganisation. Alter- natively, as IT priorities changed, modules that weredue to be installed in ‘phase two’ of an implementation may have been leftuntouched, or systems that were initially planned to be rolled out to linemanagers may not have been extended that far. Whatever the cause, it is worth analysing the cost of resuming that part ofthe project against the return it will generate. The costs of this kind ofexercise should not be underestimated. Although the software itself may alreadyhave been paid for in the original licence fee, any sizeable project is likelyto require implementation expertise, some degree of integration and usertraining. But as long as the original business case was credible, it is quitepossible to realise the anticipated benefits even after these outlays. One important caveat is that business needs may have changed since theoriginal case was proposed, so the review must assess the ongoing relevance ofthe initial plans and pinpoint any new opportunities. Having reviewed their core infrastructure, companies should next look at howeffectively they are leveraging their IT applications on a day-to-day basis. Typically, one of the biggest failure points in HRIT, as in many othersectors, is the poor quality of data input. At one level, cleaning this up is arelatively simple – if sometimes time-consuming – process. Most HR databaseswill contain duplicate and inaccurate data that can be tidied up, along withobsolete files that can be removed and historical data than can be archived toimprove efficiency. What is more difficult, is tackling the fundamental problems that lead todata inaccuracy in the first place. Lluis Solervicens, director of the technology effectiveness group at MercerHuman Resource Consulting, points out that organisations suffer data errors forthree common reasons. First, they may never have had the time to study theproblem – making room to do so is what the HRIT review is all about. Second,they continue to run a significant number of manual processes where data has tobe keyed in, a process that is both time-consuming and prone to mistakes. Andfinally, the integration between core HR systems and other applications may bepoor. Replacing manual processes can be a sizeable investment, and one thattypically falls outside the scope of maximising existing HRIT investment.However, there are exceptions. Organisations that have already invested in aself-service infrastructure, for example, may find that for a relatively smalladditional investment they can extend the functionality to new departments orto cover new processes. As well as saving costs by providing for direct data entry, this alsoimproves accuracy. In many cases, it will be worth extending this review ofmanual processes to all HR business processes. US-based HR specialist JAT Computer Consulting suggests that organisationsshould consider bringing in a third party to conduct this type of audit, as anindependent body will not be influenced by historical perspectives on how andwhy existing processes evolved. Intergrating systems Improving integration between systems is also a notoriously complex andexpensive task, although methods to smooth the process are beginning to emerge,and IT integration tools can speed up the process for larger projects. Solervicens suggests that for global organisations and certain verticalsectors such as retail and manufacturing, investment in better integrationprovides measurable benefits where fast data dissemination is critical. Forexample, in the retail sector, real-time data flows from remote stores canalert central HR functions to absenteeism and even attrition problems far moreeffectively than if they rely on batch processing. While those improvements are designed to tackle data input problems, usersshould also take the time to study the data outputs, particularly in terms ofmanagement reporting. Basic reports typically evolve on an ad hoc basis, and itis inevitable that there will be some degree of reporting duplication acrossthe organisation. By the same token, some reports are likely to have becomeobsolete, particularly after periods of major corporate upheaval where jobs androles change. There are also a host of technology ‘housekeeping’ issues that can generatea significant return for the business. First, IT departments should check theyare up-to-date with maintenance releases issued by their incumbent softwarevendors. Typically, HR users will ensure upgrades are implemented when they cater forlegislative changes, but they may be less conscientious about other releases. Vendors expect users to keep up-to-date with these updates, which fix bugsand improve the efficiency of applications. Failing to do so can impact thelevel of support provided by software suppliers when technical problems arise. Reducing in-house maintenance By the same token, IT should take steps to cut internal maintenance demands.Look at the degree of customisation that has been carried out on non-criticalapplications. Bespoke software development inevitably increases the complexityof carrying out upgrades, and it is worth assessing whether the work reallydelivers ongoing value, or if it can be dropped in favour of out-of-the-boxfunctionality. Also look at duplicate websites, which typically emerge in larger firmswhere online initiatives are carried out at a departmental level. These can beaggregated and culled to reduce maintenance costs. In addition, old HR systemsshould be decommissioned where appropriate. Organisations often keep legacy applications running in parallel with newsystems, and it is tempting for users to continue working with familiar toolsfor as long as they can. Shutting these outdated applications down as soon as anew application is proven is an effective way of reducing system complexity. In addition, any audit should include a review of security procedures.Typically, the rules these are based on were designed to meet the businessneeds of the time. As the organisation evolves and roles change, they tend tobe patched up on an ad hoc basis. Tackling these issues not only reducescomplexity, but also allows companies to ensure the integrity of their securityprocedures is intact. Each of these measures potentially brings major benefits in their own right,and as part of a comprehensive system audit, the cumulative impact can besignificant. There is, however, one final caveat. Audit initiatives typicallyaren’t top of the agenda during better economic conditions, and there isusually a sound reason why. As the economy turns, newer, business-criticalpriorities will emerge, and companies will need to refocus on the emergingfrontline business activities. The real test of their desire to maximise theirinvestment will be whether they can keep these projects running in thebackground. Tactical investments or major overhaul?Although maximising IT investment isprimarily about improving the efficiency and effectiveness of existing systems,there are times when tactical purchases make an enormous difference to HRcapability. Sometimes these investments can be in routine process areas – anorganisation that is struggling to handle the higher volumes of jobapplications that are generated in a downturn, for example, may find thatpurchasing a recruitment module can generate tangible resource savings in HRand line management.In these instances, the guiding principles of tacticalinvestment should be:– Tackle immediate pain points for maximum business impact– Generate a measurable, rapid return that is visible to bothsenior management and end-users. This reinforces the likelihood of buy-in tofuture investment proposals– Ensure that the module does not already exist. Manyorganisations own functionality within their existing HRMS systems which ishidden from users as it wasn’t relevant when the system was initially set up– As well as assessing specialist providers, check whatfunctionality your existing software supplier has released since yourapplication was installed. One advantage of sticking with the existing vendoris that bolt-on applications are likely to be tightly integrated– Do not restrict tactical investments to software. Memory, forexample, is relatively cheap and can create tangible system improvement– Even in a downturn, organisations should also keep an openmind about making more significant HRIT investments. Introducing HRself-service, for example, is a major initiative, but it can generate tangiblecost savings and demonstrable return on investment (ROI) in an acceptabletimeframe– Users should even be prepared to consider a full systemreplacement, although budget constraints will be a major inhibitor. Mercer’sSolervicens, who recently completed research into the cost of upgrading, sayssmall and midsized companies often don’t dare to look at new systems because ofthe perceived outlay. However, an organisation of up to 500 employees with fiveto 10 HR users can buy a system with basic functionality for around £6,500. Fora larger outlay of around £15,000 upwards, a company can buy into the next tierof application, offering robust reporting tools, standard interfaces to themain payroll providers, workflow, limited self-service functionality, and otherfeatures– Finally, organisations may also consider the business casefor outsourcing their applications through an application service providermodel. It is important to note that this is not a way of purchasing software onthe cheap. But, as Snowdrop’s Richards points out, it is an effective way ofremoving the HRIT system burden at a fixed cost – a particularly attractiveproposition to the finance function in a downturnlast_img read more

HR can rise to challenges of an aggressive society

first_img Previous Article Next Article HR can rise to challenges of an aggressive societyOn 15 Jun 2004 in Personnel Today Taking on the role of editor of Personnel Today has been very enjoyable. Ithas given me the luxury to think about the issues affecting HR professionals ina far more reflective way, which has determined the content of this issue. A major concern for me is that society is becoming more aggressive. Thisposes a number of problems for employers, especially those whose staff are inthe front line of customer service. I explore this in the feature ‘When isenough, enough?’, which looks at how organisations draw the line on aggressivecustomer behaviour, so that employees know when to say no in order to protectthemselves. Linked to this aggression are the increasingly adversarial systemsindividuals rely on for support. As is argued in the feature ‘Bully boytactics’, tribunals have drifted away from their original purpose of resolvingdisputes to become a forum for lawyers to flex their legal muscles. Added tothis is the growth in employment legislation, which relies on procedure andencourages the ‘have-a-go’ culture of the aggrieved, but somehow fails totackle real injustice. Exploring the issue of aggressive customers and the tribunal system, I havebeen struck by the reluctance of employers to be open about their experiences.Denying such aggression exists is not the way forward. As a practitioner, I know that increasingly prescriptive legislativepolicies, procedures and codes deliver checklist compliance but not fundamentalchanges in corporate behaviour. Some of the news stories this week underlinethis sharply. Bullying at work is a big issue, and I have no doubt that some of theaggression and abuse my front-line staff encounter, from a minority ofcustomers, is the same behaviour they exhibit at work, or they are meting outthe same treatment they experience at work. Abusive customers are someone’semployees. Leadership comes from the example set at the top. Wouldn’t it be great if,as strong, assertive and courageous HR professionals, we could campaign tobreak the vicious circle of society’s aggression and bad behaviour, allowingthe vast majority of great people to know that their company – from the verytop all the way through – will not tolerate the bully boy culture? By Beverley Shears, Guest Editor, HR Director,South West Trains Comments are closed. Related posts:No related photos.last_img read more

Comment on I am a bad, BAD listener. How about you? by Greg Savage

first_imgRelated posts:No related photos. Comments are closed. Comment on I am a bad, BAD listener. How about you? by Greg SavageShared from Greg Savage on 31 Mar 2016 in Personnel Today Happy for you to quote it. Those are my own words, regards GregRead full article Previous Article Next Articlelast_img

Drug smuggler pardoned by Trump sued by All Year over high-interest loans

first_imgThe lawsuit involves drugs, Trump, and 11 million dollars. (Getty, Facebook, Pexels)UPDATED, March 3, 2021, 8:31 a.m.: As Yoel Goldman desperately tries to keep his Brooklyn-based real estate firm afloat, a new court filing alleges that Jonathan Braun, who pleaded guilty to drug smuggling and money laundering in 2011 but was recently pardoned by President Donald Trump, made loans to some of Goldman’s companies while in prison.Braun was allegedly behind at least $11.5 million in high-interest rate loans to the developer, according to a lawsuit filed in New York State Supreme Court by All Year Management and a web of companies tied to Goldman.The complaint alleges that the loans are part of a “larger loan-sharking scheme,” and that Braun and his affiliates made short-term loans to Goldman and All Year with “criminally usurious interest rates” that sometimes exceeded 200 percent.When Goldman and his firm refused to repay the loans, the defendants allegedly refinanced those into other short-term loans while illegally collecting additional lender fees and jacking up the interest rate.The complaint seeks to vacate a $9.2 million judgment filed this week by Braun’s alleged firm, MapCap Funding, against Goldman, All Year and over 100 other firms tied to the developer. Since then, two more judgments have been filed against Braun for $3 million and $3.5 million, with additional interest accruing.Ariel Bouskila, who is representing MapCap Funding in the judgment, said, “Mr. Braun did not have any involvement in any of the relevant transactions and our filings will speak for themselves.” He declined to comment further.Commercial Observer first reported the news.The lawsuit alleges that Braun directed the operation from federal prison in Otisville, New York. Braun was serving a 10-year prison sentence for a billion-dollar drug ring that prosecutors allege smuggled marijuana from Canada through a Native American reservation in New York. He was sentenced in 2019.The FTC and the New York Attorney General’s office have separate investigations into Braun and companies tied to him for making predatory loans to small businesses, then allegedly threatening the owners with violence to make them pay.A lawsuit filed by New York Attorney General Letitia James in June alleges that Braun warned one business owner not to “fuck with” him. He allegedly threatened to “destroy” the business owner and make his life a “living hell.” He then allegedly said, “I know where you live. I know where mother lives,” and “I will take your daughters from you,” according to the complaint.The suit filed by Goldman’s companies claims that the judgment is invalid due to these ongoing investigations in Braun’s business.In the complaint, the developer says Braun and his company are a “ticking time bomb to file yet another confession of judgment… that Goldman was unauthorized to sign.”All Year is facing the loss of its trophy asset: a massive apartment complex in Bushwick known as Denizen. Last week, All Year filed a last-minute lawsuit to stop a UCC foreclosure sale for an interest in Denizen after it defaulted on its mezzanine loan.In January, trading on All Year’s bonds was suspended after the company missed its bond payments and delayed its quarterly financial reporting.CORRECTION: This story has been updated to clarify that All Year alleged Braun had connections to MapCap Lending. Tags all year managementCommercial Real EstateFraudReal Estate Lawsuits Share via Shortlink Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on LinkedinShare via Email Share via Shortlinklast_img read more

New York restaurateurs decamp to South Florida

first_img Share via Shortlink Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on LinkedinShare via Email Share via Shortlink Full Name* Message* “I’ve had clients who have abandoned projects in Brooklyn and Manhattan because it makes more sense for them to come here and open right away, while in New York they don’t know if they will be open from one day to the next,” Felix Bendersky of F+B Hospitality Leasing told the publication.Celebrity chef Marcus Samuelsson opened an outpost of his popular Red Rooster restaurant in Miami’s Overtown neighborhood in December. The hotspot Carbone, operated by Major Food Group, opened in Miami Beach earlier this month, and the hospitality group plans to open three other restaurants in the future. Michelin-starred Korean steakhouse Cote also made the move to Miami.Garry Kanfer of Kissaki called the city his “second home,” but said the pandemic sped up his plans to open two new locations there.“People want to go to Miami because if something happens in the future, there is always good weather and you can always sit outside,” he told the Post. [NYP] — Sasha JonesContact the author Tags Marcus Samuelsson and his Red Rooster restaurant in Miami’s Overtown (Getty, Google Maps)It’s not just New York City residents who have migrated to South Florida in the past year. Business owners, including restaurateurs, are following suit.Part of the reason? South Florida’s relatively relaxed Covid-19 restrictions, the New York Post reported.New York’s dining restrictions have changed frequently and sometimes abruptly. Indoor dining was forbidden in December as confirmed coronavirus cases rose, and then allowed again — at 25 percent capacity — just last week. In contrast, restaurants in Miami have had the green light to operate at 100 percent indoor capacity, as long as things stay socially distant.Read moreNew Yorkers snap up high-end rentals in Miami BeachNew York restaurateur Major Food Group to open three concepts in MiamiParadise found: Can Francis Suarez make Miami the next Big Tech mecca? Email Address* Commercial Real EstateNYC RestaurantsRetail Real Estatelast_img read more

Older Posts »