Mediaboss Marketing

Dec. 30 (UPI) -- The French government on Thursday lifted its block on British citizens seeking to transit through France to return to their homes in the European Union.

France implemented the restriction earlier this month as COVID-19 cases ballooned to record numbers in the country. On Dec. 18, British citizens without French residency were no longer allowed to travel to or through France with few exceptions.

Such British citizens were considered "third-country nationals" and were thus unable to travel through France by road or train, including through the Channel Tunnel.

BBC News reported that Britons were surprised to learn there were no exemptions in place to allow citizens to cross France to reach their homes in EU countries. This was particularly problematic for Britons attempting to return to their EU homes after visiting Britain over the holidays.

The Eurotunnel, the train that carries passengers and their vehicles through the Channel Tunnel, turned away many British nationals due to the new rules this week, Politico reported.

The French Interior Ministry announced Thursday that the rules would be relaxed since many Britons traveled to Britain for the holidays "in good faith" and are now finding themselves unable to return home in the EU.

"Faced with this situation, instructions of tolerance have been sent to police officers at the borders with the United Kingdom, in order to allow these nationals to transit through France to reach their residence in a country of the European Union,after this Christmas and New Year period" the ministry said Thursday.

The new rules will allow Britons living in the EU to travel through France if they originally made their trip to Britain before Tuesday.

Continued here:
France relaxes ban on British travelers trying to return to EU homes - UPI News

London, United Kingdom Kiasi Sandrine Mputu has worked from the bedroom of her London flat since the pandemic struck in March 2020. Like legions of crisis-minted remote workers the world over, she says the arrangement has its pros and cons.

I love working remotely, the 30-year old told Al Jazeera. I dont think Ill ever be able to come back [to] the normal routine.

An assistant manager at a London-based import-export firm, Mputus home office is a testament to how personal and professional spaces can become quickly entangled by remote work: a desk with a company-provided computer monitor nestled next to a drawer full of clothes thats adjacent to her bed.

Though shes adjusted to the flexible sleep-work space, Mputu still struggles with feeling isolated from colleagues.

I [sometimes] spend all week by myself, she said.

Mputu says her employer occasionally organizes virtual social gatherings. But she wants the British government to follow Europes lead and do more to support the mental wellbeing of remote workers like herself.

But workers advocates want Europe to go even further by ensuring new laws addressing remote work arrangements cover all employees, no matter where they earn their living.

In a major victory for better work-life balance, Portugal last month rolled out new regulations for the remote-work era, including granting workers the right to disconnect by forbidding firms from contacting employees outside of working hours except in cases of emergencies.

The new rules designed with an eye towards attracting more tax-paying digital nomads to the country also require firms to help pay for home gas, electric and internet bills; forbid them from surveilling their remote workforce; and require them to allow parents of young children to work from home without getting prior approval.

But Portugal stopped short of granting workers the right to turn off their devices and ignore messages from their bosses outside of working hours a rule Italy enacted earlier this year.

Strides are also being made in France and Germany, where employers are required to have a valid reason for turning down employee requests to work from home.

Trade unions and experts in the European Union and the United Kingdom welcome the momentum to advance the rights and wellbeing of remote workers, but they want the new rules to go even further.

Experts say the explosion in remote work during the pandemic has laid bare how obsolete some labour laws have become.

The right to disconnect, for example, is a hot-button issue that predates the pandemic, with France putting a pioneering law on the books back in 2017. While other European countries followed suit, the European Parliament is still pushing the EU Commission to give workers throughout the bloc the right to power down their devices when they are not at work.

Heejung Chung, a researcher on overtime and work-life balance at the University of Kent and author of The Flexibility Paradox told Al Jazeera employers have been contacting workers outside of formal working hours more frequently as the boundaries between home and office are obscured, leading employees to work around the clock a growing problem the right to disconnect is designed to correct.

A sole focus on home working rights would create new inequalities for those in jobs where home working isnt possible

Frances O Grady, General Secretary for the Trades Union Congress

She also said that remote workers are often burdened with the flexibility stigma, where working from home is looked down upon as less productive than in-office arrangements. That negative perception, she said, can lead employees to work longer hours to compensate.

Many workers rights advocates say the right to disconnect is just a start, and that companies need to grant workers the power to determine their own work schedules to promote a healthier work-life balance.

A lot of the boundaries that were afforded by labor laws about [working] overtime [became] obsolete, said Chung.

Data cited by the European Trade Union Institute found that 27 percent of European remote workers were worried about their jobs when they were not actually doing them, and that 29 percent felt too tired after work to do some domestic chores.

Not interrupting employees outside of working hours will not prevent these workers from suffering stress when they are back to work, Ignacio Doreste, an adviser to the European Trade Union Confederation, told Al Jazeera.

While Mputu feels fortunate her boss does not contact her outside work hours, she said she would prefer to set her own work schedule, rather than be tethered to one her employer determines.

At the end of the day, we are at home, so if I can do my job at night or in the morning, that wouldnt really make a big difference, she said.

While many workers rights activists welcome the drive to empower remote workers, some are concerned that the relentless focus on work from home could leave behind a vast swath of the workforce.

A sole focus on home working rights would create new inequalities for those in jobs where home working isnt possible, said Frances O Grady, General Secretary for the Trades Union Congress (TUC), Britains largest trade union.

A poll conducted by TUC in June found that people in the United Kingdom who worked higher-paid jobs were much more likely to have worked from home during the pandemic than those in working-class jobs.

All workers need stronger rights to the full range of flexible working options like flexitime, predictable shifts and job shares, OGrady told Al Jazeera, otherwise there will be a new class divide, with some people getting the flexibility they need and others excluded.

Go here to read the rest:
As Europe leads on remote worker rights, will others benefit? - Al Jazeera English

SPANIARDS EAGERLY tuned in on December 22nd to watch the annual Christmas lottery, nicknamed el gordo (the fat one). Punters were hoping for a share of 2.4bn ($2.7bn) in prizes. The European Union, meanwhile, had placed a bet of its own. It hoped Spains politicians might go out of their way to win a national jackpot of 70bn, the countrys share of the EUs 750bn covid recovery fund. The grants were conditional on reforms, especially in two worrisome areas: pensions and the jobs market. The government met the EUs deadline of December 31st. Whether its reforms merit the name is another matter.

Your browser does not support the

Enjoy more audio and podcasts on iOS or Android.

Spains government, made up of the Socialists and the far-left Unidas Podemos grouping, entered office in 2019 on a misguided pledge to repeal an earlier reform from 2012. Those changes had made layoffs cheaper and let unions strike wage deals within individual firms, rather than in industry-wide negotiations. This is thought to have aided Spains strong recoveries from the euro crisis and the pandemic. The package the government announced on December 23rd stopped short of repeal, but took no great steps forward either.

The governments goal was to make the labour market less unequal. Some Spaniards have good jobs and are nearly unsackable; others have temporary contracts and little security. The new proposal curbs time-limited contracts and tries to stop companies from evading the law by subcontracting. Promisingly, it would make permanent a pandemic-era measure in which the state pays temporarily furloughed workers. Both the unions and the employers organisation blessed the deal. But it contains no creative solutions to Spains high structural unemployment.

The other big missed chance was fixing pensions. Spaniards retire young (at 60.7 on average), live long (83.5 years on average) and get generous pensions (80% of pre-retirement earnings against an average of 62% in the OECD, a club mostly of rich countries). Spain has yet to feel the full strain of these promises because its baby boom came late. But the crunch will come. A reform passed earlier this year merely offered inducements to postpone retirement and increased contributions slightly (by 0.1 percentage points of salary paid by workers, and 0.5 paid by employers). That is not nearly enough.

The European Commission is now in theory to judge whether Spains reforms are sufficient to release the next tranche of money. No one expects a thumbs-down: the commission does not want to deliver a shock to the EUs fourth-biggest economy in the midst of a pandemic. The money will be put to some good uses, primarily greening and digitising the economy. But the chance to use it to fund bigger reforms has been lost, at least for now. Like punters who bet on el gordo, the EU must hope future years bring more luck.

This article appeared in the Europe section of the print edition under the headline "A bad bet"

Visit link:
Spain's reforms in 2021 were only tiny steps - The Economist

The news comes as the Northern Ireland Protocol is yet to be resolved, and with the resignation of the former Brexit Minister, Lord David Frost, the talks are set to continue into the new year under the instructions of Foreign Minister, Liz Truss. Taking to Twitter to discuss the right of sovereignty following Brexit, Conservative peer, Lord Daniel Moylan said: I can think of no higher definition of political integrity than seeking to free your whole country from foreign laws and restoring democracy to that part of it living under laws made with no say by them.

Sparking the row, Lord Moylan then went on to say: The people of Northern Ireland have no electoral say in how laws are now made for them by the EU.

Replying to Lord Moylan, "Patti Fordyce" said: Couldn't agree more, but spending the last nearly two years being virtually ruled by decree hasn't persuaded that we have reached where we want to be yet.

The debate continued with LordMoylan reiterating: But if youre dissatisfied you have the precious right to vote the Government out.

He added: How do the people of Northern Ireland vote if theyre dissatisfied with EU law-making? No democracy for them. Its a scandal in 21st century Europe.

The European Union however has remained highly critical over the ongoing talks.

London has breached a great deal of trust with Europe, the blocs chief negotiator has claimed.

European Commission vice president Maros Sefcovic told German news website Der Spiegel that problems with the Northern Ireland Protocol a way to maintain a free-flowing land border on the island of Ireland after Brexit meant the UK broke international law in trying to get around the arrangement.

But he said he is still confident that a compromise can be found between the two sides, although he admitted it will not be easy.

READ MORE:British farmer hails EU split as bloc tries to hamstring them

Mr Sefcovic told Der Spiegel he is pragmatic about Foreign Secretary Liz Truss taking on responsibility for post-Brexit negotiations with the EU, after Brexit minister Lord Frost resigned earlier this month.

The commissioner warned that if Ms Truss was to trigger Article 16, a move that would effectively unilaterally suspend the treaty agreed between the UK and the EU, it would throw into jeopardy the foundation of the entire deal reached between the two sides.

Ms Truss has said she remains prepared to invoke Article 16 if issues are not resolved.

But Mr Sefcovic said: This is a very distracting element in the discussions. You try to achieve something together and bam theres the threat of Article 16 again."

DON'T MISS:SNP produces outrageous scorecard' on Boris Johnson[REPORT]7 hurt in 'serious collision' five-vehicle smash closes major road[REVEAL]Doctor forced to close practice after refusing vaccine[INSIGHT]

The situation was also discussed in the Republic of Ireland.

Irish Foreign Minister, Simon Coveney said: We all know that we need to bring this discussion and negotiation to an end.

He added: We have elections in Northern Ireland in May. Those elections will begin in earnest really from the end of February. So this cant drift on for months.

Since Brexit, Northern Ireland has remained within the EUs single market for goods because the alternative a hard customs border on the island was ruled out as a threat to the 1998 peace deal that ended three decades of sectarian conflict known as the Troubles.

However, that meant implementing customs checks between Great Britain and Northern Ireland instead.

These were set out in the part of the Brexit agreement known as the Northern Ireland protocol, which is being renegotiated.

The UK had made no concessions all year; the EU has made multiple concessions and continues to do so.Mr Coveney said. Lets not pretend that both sides have compromised here... Now both sides need to compromise a little bit more.

The concessions London has extracted from Brussels would halve customs checks and slash health checks on British products destined for Northern Ireland by 80 per cent, according to Maros Sefcovic, the EUs Brexit negotiator.

Read more:
The people have no say! Brexit row erupts over EU rules dictating parts of Britain - Daily Express

Editors note: Moscows buildup of troops on and near Ukraines borders and bellicose rhetoric have raised the prospect of a major conventional war in Europe.The phone call today between US President Joe Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin underscores the dangers of this Kremlin-manufactured crisis. Below is a statement by twenty-four distinguishedexperts and former senior officials offering their ideas on how to deter Moscow from escalating its current war of aggression against Ukraine and more broadly to discourage Moscow from future provocations. The statement represents the views of the signatories and not of their institutions.

Since President Bidens virtual summit with President Putin on December 7, Russia has increased its troop presence on or near Ukraines borders. Having created this crisis, the Kremlin has demanded security guarantees for Russia that the United States and its allies cannot possibly provide. It has made provocative statements at high levels, including outlandish claims that US private military contractors intend to launch a chemical weapons attack in eastern Ukraine. Moscow wrongly asserts that NATO enlargement has created a military threat to Russia; the Alliance has fully abided by its commitments in the NATO-Russia Founding Act to refrain from deploying nuclear weapons or permanently stationing substantial combat forces on the territory of new member states, despite the fact that Russia has violated many of its own Founding Act commitments, as well as the UN Charter, the Helsinki Final Act, the Paris Charter, and the Budapest Memorandum.

In short, Moscow appears to be setting the stage for launching a major conventional assault on Ukraine, even though the United States and NATO have shown a willingness to sit down and discuss Kremlin concerns.

We believe the United States should, in closest consultation with its NATO allies and with Ukraine, take immediate steps to affect the Kremlins cost-benefit calculations before the Russian leadership opts for further military escalation. This means raising the costs that would ensue should the Russian military launch a new assault on Ukraine, building on the excellent set of measures the Biden administration has already laid out: enacting punishing sanctions on Moscow, sending major military supplies to Ukraine, and strengthening NATOs force posture on its eastern flank.

The administration should continue its good work with the European Union and other partners to ensure agreement on the elements of a response to any Russian assault on Ukraine, regardless of the extent or form of Russias escalation. Such a response would include a package of major and painful sanctions that would be applied immediately if Russia assaults Ukraine. Ideally, the outline of these sanctions would be communicated now to Moscow, so that the Kremlin has a clear understanding of the magnitude of the economic hit it will face. In particular, Washington should consult with Berlin and secure German agreement that it would prevent Nord Stream 2 from going into operation in the event of a Russian attack, making clear that otherwise the administration will not again waive sanctions on the pipeline.

The most important thing that the West can do now is to enhance the deterrent strength of Ukraines armed forces by providing military assistance and equipment on an expedited basis. For the Kremlin, a large invasion of Ukraine works only if Russian forces are able to seize and hold Ukrainian territory without sustaining significant and constant casualties. Western countries should act now to equip Ukraines military and territorial defense units with additional capabilities that can impose such costs.

Western military officials should consult urgently with their Ukrainian counterparts as to what assistance and equipment the Ukrainian military needs and could most quickly integrate into its operations to bolster its defensive strength. Such assistance might include additional Javelin anti-armor missiles and Q36 counter-battery radar systems as well as Stinger and other anti-aircraft missiles. The Biden administration should also encourage NATO allies to do more to enhance Ukraines defensive capabilities, making clear that the entire NATO Alliance stands together in opposing Russian aggression.

We believe that NATO should act now to begin bolstering its military presence on its eastern flank and communicating to Moscow that Russias escalation would bring a substantial number of US and Allied forces and a permanent presence in the Baltic states and Black Sea region. NATO should also signal to Moscow that any additional deployments could be reconsidered if/when the current crisis abates.

The West should also widen its political counteroffensive to retake the initiative from Moscow as it tries to use the threat of force to intimidate Ukraine, Europe, and the United States into acquiescing to its demands, many of which are plainly unjustified and unacceptable. The Biden administration should seek a Group of Seven (G7) statement at the head of state level condemning Moscows threat of wider war against Ukraine and work with allies and partners to use other fora, including the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and possibly the United Nations, to highlight the unacceptability of Russian military action and coercive threats.

The Biden administration should consult with NATO, the European Union, Ukraine, and key allies such as Poland on extensive preparations for dealing with the humanitarian crisis that a major Russian invasion would create.

Finally, the United States and its allies should continue to make clear their readiness for dialogue with Russia, to include concerns of NATO and other parties about Russian military and other aggressive activities. They have indicated that some elements in the Russia-proposed US-Russia treaty and NATO-Russia agreement may offer a basis for discussion and possible negotiation. The United States and NATO should make clear to the Kremlin that it must de-escalate the threatening military situation around Ukraine before there can be any substantive negotiation, and any negotiation must involve all parties whose security interests will be affected. These issues cannot simply be resolved in a bilateral US-Russia channel. Moreover, any negotiation should be consistent with the principles agreed to by all NATO members, Russia, and Ukraine, such as those in the Helsinki Final Act and the Charter of Paris.

Signed,

Dr. Stephen Blank

Senior Fellow

Foreign Policy Research Institute

General Philip Breedlove, USAF ret.

17th Supreme Allied Commander Europe

Distinguished Professor, Sam Nunn School, Georgia Institute of Technology

Ian Brzezinski

Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Europe and NATO Policy

Senior Fellow

Atlantic Council

Debra Cagan

Former US State and Defense Department official

Distinguished Energy Fellow

Transatlantic Leadership Network

General Wesley K. Clark

US Army (ret.)

12th Supreme Allied Commander, Europe

Senior Fellow, UCLA Burkle Center

Dr. Larry Diamond

Senior Fellow, Hoover Institution

Mosbacher Senior Fellow in Global Democracy

Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies

Stanford University

Ambassador Paula Dobriansky

Former Under Secretary of State for Global Affairs

Vice Chair, Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security

Atlantic Council

Senior Fellow, Harvard University Belfer Center

Dr. Evelyn Farkas

Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Russia, Ukraine, and Eurasia

Ambassador Daniel Fried

Former Assistant Secretary of State for Europe and US Ambassador to Poland

Weiser Family Distinguished Fellow

Atlantic Council

Dr. Francis Fukuyama

Olivier Nomellini Senior Fellow

Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law

Director, Ford Dorsey Masters in International Policy

Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies

Stanford University

Melinda Haring

Deputy Director, Eurasia Center

Atlantic Council

John E. Herbst

Former US Ambassador to Ukraine and Uzbekistan

Senior Director, Eurasia Center

Atlantic Council

Lieutenant General (Ret.) Ben Hodges

Former Commander US Army Europe

Dr. Donald N. Jensen

Director, Russia and Strategic Stability

United States Institute of Peace

Andrea Kendall-Taylor

Center for a New American Security

Ambassador John Kornblum

Former US Ambassador to Germany

Senior Adviser (Non-resident), Europe, Russia, and Eurasia Program

Center for Strategic International Studies

Ambassador Michael McFaul

Former US Ambassador to Russia

Director, Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies

Stanford University

Ambassador Steven Pifer

Former US Ambassador to Ukraine

Willian Perry Fellow

Stanford University

Herman Pirchner, Jr.

President

American Foreign Policy Council

John Sipher

Former Officer and Chief of Station, CIA Clandestine Service

Nonresident Senior Fellow, Eurasia Center

Atlantic Council

Strobe Talbott

Former Deputy Secretary of State

Distinguished Fellow

The Brookings Institution

Ambassador William Taylor

Former US Ambassador to Ukraine

Vice President for Strategic Stability and Security

United States Institute of Peace

Ambassador Alexander Vershbow

Former US Ambassador to Russia

Former Deputy Secretary General of NATO

Distinguished Fellow, Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security, Eurasia Center

Atlantic Council

Ambassador Kurt Volker

Former US Ambassador to NATO and US Special Representative for Ukraine Negotiations

Read the rest here:
How to deal with the Kremlin-created crisis in Europe - Atlantic Council