WTF?!

NR Narayana Murthy: Why Indians are debating a 70-hour work week

PublishedShare

IMAGE SOURCE,GETTY IMAGES

Image caption,

The coronavirus pandemic made many people re-evaluate their relationship with work

By Meryl Sebastian

BBC News, Kochi

How many hours should a person work in a week?

That's the question being asked in India over the past few days after software billionaire NR Narayana Murthy - the father-in-law of UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak - said that young people should be ready to work 70 hours a week to help the country's development.

"India's work productivity is one of the lowest in the world," he said on a podcast recently. "Unless we improve our work productivity... we will not be able to compete with those countries that have made tremendous progress."

"So, therefore, my request is that our youngsters must say, 'This is my country. I'd like to work 70 hours a week'," he added.

After the comments went viral, Mr Murthy received both support and criticism as people on social media and the opinion pages of newspapers debated "toxic" work cultures, and what employers can expect from the people they hire.

Some of the criticism came from people who pointed out the starting salaries - typically on the low end - for engineers in Indian technology companies including Infosys, which Mr Murthy co-founded.

Others focused on the physical and mental health issues that could arise from working without a break.

"No time to socialise, no time to talk to family, no time to exercise, no time for recreation. Not to mention companies expect people to answer emails and calls after work hours also. Then wonder why young people are getting heart attacks?" Dr Deepak Krishnamurthy, a Bengaluru-based cardiologist, wrote on X (formerly Twitter).

And some pointed out that most women worked much more than 70 hours a week - at both the office and their homes.

JACK MA'S WORK FORMULA FOR ANT/ALIBABA WORKERS

The debate comes at a time when around the world, the Covid-19 pandemic has made people re-evaluate their relationship with work. Many felt that they were more productive when they worked from home while others advocated for a healthy work-life balance.

Experts say there are benefits to this, not just for employees.

"Companies that implement work-life balance policies benefit from increased retention of current employees, improved recruitment, lower rates of absenteeism and higher productivity," said the International Labour Organization (ILO) in a report released last year, citing a study of 45 companies in the US.

IMAGE SOURCE,GETTY IMAGES

Image caption,

Mr Murthy's remarks set off a heated debate

Indians already work long hours - according to the ILO report, Indians worked an average of more than 2,000 hours every year before the pandemic, much higher than the US, Brazil and Germany.

"Boosting productivity isn't just about working longer hours," Indian entrepreneur and film producer Ronnie Screwvala wrote on X. "It's about getting better at what you do - upskilling, having a positive work environment and fair pay for the work done. Quality of work done > clocking in more hours."

The topic is a sensitive one in India - the country has strong labour laws but activists say officials need to do more to implement them strictly.

Earlier this year, protests from workers and opposition leaders forced the Tamil Nadu state government to withdraw a bill that would have allowed working time in factories to increase to 12 hours from eight.

Mr Murthy had earlier faced criticism in 2020, when he suggested that Indians work for a minimum of 64 hours a week for two to three years to compensate for the economic slowdown caused by the coronavirus lockdown.

Last year, another Indian CEO was criticised for suggesting that young people work 18 hours a day at the beginning of their careers.

But some business leaders in India agree with the advice.

CP Gurnani, CEO of IT company Tech Mahindra, said that Mr Murthy might have intended for the comment to be taken in a more holistic way.

"I believe when he talks of work, it's not limited to the company. It extends to yourself and to your country. He hasn't said work 70 hours for the company - work 40 hours for the company but work 30 hours for yourself. Invest the 10,000 hours that makes one a master in one's subject. Burn the midnight oil and become an expert in your field," he posted on X.

"A five-day week culture is not what a rapidly developing nation of our size needs," said Sajjan Jindal, chairman of the JSW Group of companies.

While India debates longer working hours, some developed countries have been experimenting with four-day work weeks.

In 2022, Belgium changed laws to give workers the right to work four days a week without a salary reduction. The country's prime minister said that the intention was to "create a more dynamic and productive economy".

Last year, several companies in the UK participated in a six-month trial scheme, organised by 4 Day Week Global which campaigns for a shorter week - at the end of the trial, 56 of the 61 companies that took part said they would continue with the four-day week, at least for now, with 18 saying they would make it a permanent change.

A report assessing the scheme's impact in the UK found that it had "extensive benefits", particularly for employees' well-being.

Its authors argued it could herald a shift in attitudes, so that a mid-week break or a three-day weekend would soon be seen as normal.

A similar experiment is now being held in Portugal.

Young Indians should work 70 hours a week, says billionaire tech founder

Diksha Madhok, CNN
Thu, November 2, 2023 

Aparna Jayakumar/Bloomberg/Getty Images

One of India’s most revered entrepreneurs believes that young people need to put in exceptionally long hours at work if they want to see the country become a global economic powerhouse.

N.R. Narayana Murthy, co-founder of the software behemoth Infosys, said India needs “highly determined, extremely disciplined and extremely hardworking” youngsters, who should put in 70 hours a week at work.

“You know, this is exactly what the Germans and Japanese did after the Second World War,” Murthy told Mohandas Pai, the former CFO of Infosys, in a chat published on YouTube Thursday.

Murthy, whose wealth is estimated at over $4 billion by Forbes, co-founded Infosys in 1981. It went on to become one of the world’s biggest outsourcing firms.

He is also the father-in-law of British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak.

“Somehow our youth have the habit of taking not so desirable habits from the West and then not helping the country,” Murthy said. “India’s work productivity is one of the lowest in the world.”

He added that Indians should learn from policies that helped other emerging markets, particularly China.

The tech tycoon said that corporate leaders in India should motivate young people to “work very hard” by telling them that “for the first time India has received certain respect (globally). This is the time for us to consolidate and accelerate the progress.”

India, one of the fastest growing major economies in the world, is projected to expand 6.3% this year, according to the International Monetary Fund.

Murthy’s comments on putting in longer hours professionally come at a time when there has been a drastic shift in the way people think about work in the West and in China.

For a few years now, many young people in China have embraced a new philosophy they’ve called “lying flat,” to fight against the country’s “996” excessive work culture‚ or the practice of working from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. six days a week.

In the United States, quiet quitting became a workplace trend last year, in which people decided to stop doing work that is beyond what they were hired to do.

Murthy’s comments were slammed on social media. Over the past few years, several surveys have shown that Indians feel they are among the most overworked and underpaid people in the world.

CNN has reached out to Infosys for comment.

Boris Johnson and his party felt Covid was just 'nature's way of dealing with old people', inquiry told


Mason Boycott-Owen
Wed, 1 November 2023 

In this article:

Boris Johnson
Prime Minister of the United Kingdom from 2019 to 2022


Dominic Cummings
British political strategist who served as chief adviser to UK prime minister from July 2019 until Nov 2020


Former chief adviser to Prime Minister Boris Johnson, Dominic Cummings arrives to give a statement to the UK Covid-19 Inquiry at Dorland House in London. (Photo: James Manning)

Yesterday extracts from notebooks written by Sir Patrick Vallance, the Government’s then-chief scientist, examined by the official inquiry recalled scepticism and resistance to protecting the elderly in Downing Street.

Sir Patrick wrote in August 2020 that Mr Johnson was “Obsessed with older people accepting their fate and letting the young get on with life and the economy going.”

A second note from December that year said that the then prime minister had noted that his party thought “the whole thing is pathetic and Covid is just nature’s way of dealing with old people,” and that Mr Johnson had added that he “not entirely sure I disagree with them”.

The evidence seen by the inquiry into the handling of the coronavirus pandemic on Tuesday saw Dominic Cummings, Mr Johnson’s former advisor, and Lee Cain, the former director of communications in No 10, lay bare the chaos surrounding decision-making at the heart of government.

Mr Cummings told the inquiry that vulnerable groups were “appallingly neglected” during this time, and that more should have been done, including stricter controls over borders and the rapid expansion of testing capabilities, to reduce the death toll.

Government data suggests that as of the end of September almost a quarter of a million people have died with Covid-19 listed on their death certificate.

Mr Cummings, who worked as an advisor to Boris Johnson from July 2019 until November 2020 has repeatedly been outspoken about his time in Downing Street, repeatedly insisting that Boris Johnson, along with many ministers and areas of government, was overwhelmed and not up to the task of leading the pandemic response.

Matt Hancock, the former health secretary who has swapped front-line politics for appearing on celebrity television programmes such as I’m a Celebrity, Get Me Out of Here, was among those, alongside civil servants and departments such as the Cabinet Office, who Mr Cummings said were not fit for the job.

Mr Cummings claimed that Matt Hancock had “killed people” as health secretary during the pandemic, according to WhatsApp messages shared with the inquiry.

In one message sent in May 2020, Mr Cummings wrote to the then-prime minister: “You need to think through timing of binning Hancock. There’s no way the guy can stay. He’s lied his way through this and killed people and dozens and dozens of people have seen it.”

Critics have questioned Mr Hancock’s record on Covid testing, nursing homes and other crucial issues from the period.

However, when pressed to take responsibility for his own role as an advisor during the pandemic, such as his now-infamous trip to Barnard Castle, and role in installing Boris Johnson in Downing Street, Mr Cummings did not offer a personal apology.

He told the inquiry that he had decided to “roll the dice” and back Boris Johnson to be prime minister even though he believed he was “unfit” for power.

Asked if he was sorry, Mr Cummings said “no”, adding: “Politics is about choices.

“And the choice that we had in summer 2019 was do we allow the whole situation, this once-a-century constitutional crisis to continue, meltdown and possibly see Jeremy Corbyn as PM and a second referendum on Brexit – which we thought would be catastrophic for the country and for democracy, for faith in democracy – or to roll the dice on Boris and to try and control him and build a team around him that could control him."

In response to questions about his trip to Barnard Castle during the pandemic, he said: “In terms of my actual actions in going north and then coming back down I acted entirely reasonably and legally and did not break any rules.”

Was Rishi Sunak really so stupid?

 

Richard Murphy on developing a fairer and sustainable economy


Posted on November 1 2023

Amongst the evidence from Lee Cain, Boris Johnson's press secretary, to the Covid inquiry was this:



The particular line I am referring to is the last, which says:

Rishi says bond markets may not fund our debt etc. He's back to Jaws mode wank.

What is clear as a result is that on 19 March 2020, Rishi Sunak did not want to close down the county to save people's lives because he was frightened that bond markets would not fund the UK's debt.

Not only was that callously indifferent, it also showed he neither understood how government funding via money creation works, or understood how QE had worked even though he was about to use it again (or have its use imposed on him, more likely).

Ignorance coupled with indifference is a scary combination. Sunak had both, by the bucket load, by the look of it.

 The Value of Clothing and Commodity Fetishism

Posted on March 26, 2022 by Editor /

By Lu M. GomezdelaTorre

Clothing has the ability to act as a language. It has the powerful capability to convey a message, and express the ideas and feelings of designers and wearers. In fact, clothing can even showcase the cultural codes that represent the identity of a society. In addition, it is fascinating how an object, such as a garment, can have a history behind its production, and also the power to acquire a wearers’ emotional memory over time. However, clothes could easily become objects of fetishism when consumers use them to gain power and social mobility.

In his essay “Marx’s Coat,” Peter Stallybrass argues that objects, such as clothes, and the act of consumption were fetishized with the development of capitalism in the 19th century. As Stallybrass explains, this idea of fetishism in relation of objects and consumption was proposed by the German philosopher and economist Karl Marx. According to Stallybrass, Karl Marx talks about the issue that emerges when the labour and the labour conditions of a commodity are forgotten, and how only the value of a commodity seems to exist within itself. He calls this “commodity fetishism.” For Marx the word fetishism is used to describe how modern society “worships” or expresses a type of irrational devotion to objects, which, at the same time, erases the value of human labor, the history, memory, and love behind the production of objects that are worn by people (Stallybrass 186-187). For instance, when a garment, such as the Marx’s coat, is pawned, it is stripped of its memory and sentimental value and becomes a commodity that can be traded in exchange of power and social status (Styallybrass 195). Therefore, clothes exist as objects of economic value that are separated from the social relationships between the people who participated in their production. In respect to this, I think that consumption without consciousness becomes part of the phenomenon of commodity fetishism. This is because if a consumer carefully chooses a product based on what it is made of, and how it was made of, that person is able to understand the labour process and mechanisms behind the production of this particular object. In this case, the consumer is able to understand a product beyond the idea of trading value. This connection is important, if not fundamental, to establish a close link between production and consumption and to break free from the vicious cycle of work, consume, and repeat. It also allows consumers to value the interpersonal relationships of the humans that are behind the creation and production of a product or garment.

There are countless examples of commodity fetishism in the history of fashion and how garments were traded for social mobility and power. We can find some of them, even long before Marx was born. For instance, we can talk about the case of the grand habit, designed by Louis XIV, which was the most formal dress in all European courts during 17th century. This gown was a mandatory requirement for all female courtiers at the French court who sought to gain the king’s favor. During that time, women were willing to pay lots of money to buy this style of gowns that used more than 20 yards of fabric for their elaborated production. I tried to find information on the production of grand habits during the baroque period, and very little information came up on the search engine results. It seems as though the stories behind the textile workers, designers, seamstresses, and all the artists involved in the production of garments had little or no value once gowns were taken to the market to become a commodity. Thus, they were easily forgotten by society. In addition, we could also talk about the close relationship between Marie Antoinette and couturier Rose Bertin, who created the queen’s outfits. Bertin’s ostentatious and expensive gowns were fetishized by the French aristocracy as they represented a way to obtain and display power, wealth, and social status. However, enemies and friends of the French court criticized Rose Bertin’s friendship with Marie Antoinette, focusing more on the Bertin’s high prices and the queen’s frivolous lifestyle than on the designer’s herself, her labour, the construction and originality of her designs, and impact on the future of Parisian haute couture.

We can also find more contemporary examples of commodity fetishism. For instance, we have the case of Victoria’s Secret, which is a popular brand that specializes in selling clothing and underwear. Thorough their aggressive advertisement campaigns, especially during the first decade of the 21st century, Victoria’s Secret promoted a new ideal type of oversexualized feminine body and image. In their ads and fashion shows, it was very usual to see slim models living a luxurious life style while wearing the brand’s lingerie and swimwear. Moreover, women were subtly induced to purchase products that promised to make their lives better. As a result, the value of the Victoria’s Secret garments was displaced from the labour time that went into creating them and became fetishized by consumers. In addition, a report published by Bloomberg in 2011 makes us think about the human stories behind the production of Victoria’s Secret garments. The Bloomberg report documents the life of a 13-year-old-girl, who was abused while working on a cotton field in Burkina Faso. It was reported that Victoria’s Secret thorough its parent company Limited Brands purchased the cotton picked by this and other female workers at Burkina Faso to produce their clothing line. Indeed, in these cases, one cannot help but to wonder how many consumers take some time to value the human stories and labour involved in the production of the garments they purchase?

In conclusion, there are many examples of the use of clothing as a trading commodity in the history of humanity and fashion. However, with the emergence of fast fashion and mass production, customers are more than ever encouraged by marketing strategies to buy more frequently. The constant innovation of products in the market motivates customers to buy more often by making recent styles old or outed. In addition, people need to purchase more often in order to continually satisfy their desire to display their social and economic status. Thus, by doing so, a disassociation between consumers and all the workers involved in production occurs, delineating the case of commodity fetishism.

“Habit de cour de satin cerise”, 1779, fashion plate from Gallerie des Modes.

Marie Antoinette with a dress designed by Rose Bertin. Bertin made poufs for the Queen which were three feet high. Source: Yann Caradec from Paris, France - Marie-Antoinette en grand habit de cour - 1778 - Elisabeth Louise Vigée Le Brun, CC BY-SA 2.0 via Wikimedia Commons.

Rose Bertin

Child labor in Burkina Faso -Source:https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2011-12-15/victoria-s-secret-revealed-in-child-picking-burkina-faso-cotton

---

Works Cited Bennahum, Judith. The Lure of Perfection: Fashion and Ballet, 1780-1830. Routledge; October 18, 2004.

Stallybrass, Peter. “Marx’s Coat.” Spyer 183–207

https://thefabricofcultures.com/

COMMODITY FETISH

Rare Monet painting anticipated to surpass $65 million at auction


 Le bassin aux nympheas by Claude Monet was on display for the 20/21 Fall Marquee Week press preview at Christie's in New York City on Friday. 

Photo by John Angelillo/UPI | License Photo

Oct. 30 (UPI) -- Art lovers will have the chance to bid on a Claude Monet artwork that has never been publicly displayed at Christie's 20th Century auction in New York in November.

The painting "Le bassin aux nymphéas" (1917-1919) is guaranteed for sale and is estimated to be worth roughly $65 million.

The artwork, which measures 2 meters wide and 1 meter high, depicts Monet's beloved Giverny gardens. The piece remained in Monet's estate until his passing in 1926 and has since been in the possession of the same private collector since 1972.

The piece has had no known public exhibitions, which has only further preserved its exceptional condition, as noted by Max Carter, Christie's vice chairman of 20th and 21st Century Art, in an interview with the Financial Times.

Christie's said that many of Monet's late Impressionist masterpieces depict his Giverny gardens, notably the lily pond.

In 1883, Monet found solace in Giverny, where he transformed a pink stucco house into his permanent home and studio. His dedication to the garden provided endless inspiration for his art, the lot essay explains.

"Le bassin aux nymphéas... is a striking example of his renewed exploration during this period, marked by vibrant brushwork and large-scale compositions," Christie's said.

"Though initially met with mixed reactions, these works later gained favor among younger artists and collectors. The painting has been in the same family collection for half a century, encapsulating Monet's enduring creative vision."

ArtNews reports that in 2018, "Nymphéas en fleur" (1914-17), a similar painting of the artist's gardens, sold for $84.7 million at Christie's New York.

Christie's 20th/21st Century Art Sale will begin Nov 7.

Second pig heart transplant recipient dies at 58


Lawrence Faucette, shown at the University of Maryland Medical Center days before receiving a genetically modified pig heart, has died. Photo courtesy of University of Maryland School of Medicine

Nov. 1 (UPI) -- Six weeks after an experimental transplant operation, the second living person to receive a genetically modified pig heart has died, doctors reported Tuesday. Lawrence Faucette was 58.

His heart disease and other pre-existing health conditions made him ineligible for a traditional human heart transplant.

"My only real hope left is to go with the pig heart, the xenotransplant," Faucette told the hospital in an internal interview several days before the surgery.

The University of Maryland Medical Center, where the experimental procedure was performed, said a month after the operation that Faucette had been doing well and was showing signs of significant progress, spending time with family and undergoing physical therapy.

Related

Doctors report second successful genetically modified pig heart transplant
Gene-edited pig kidneys show promise for human transplants
New transplant method could expand supply of donor hearts

His doctors reported his heart function was excellent and they had withdrawn drugs typically used to support heart function.

"We've had no evidence of infections and no evidence of rejection right now," Dr. Bartley Griffith, clinical director of the Cardiac Xenotransplantation Program, who performed the surgery, said then.

But Faucette's body began to show signs of rejection in recent days and he died Tuesday.

"Mr. Faucette's last wish was for us to make the most of what we have learned from our experience, so others may be guaranteed a chance for a new heart when a human organ is unavailable," Griffith said.

"He then told the team of doctors and nurses who gathered around him that he loved us. We will miss him tremendously."

Faucette was initially admitted to UMMC on Sept. 14 after experiencing symptoms of heart failure and underwent the modified pig heart transplant six days later.

"We have no expectations other than hoping for more time together," his wife, Ann Faucette, said at the time. "That could be as simple as sitting on the front porch and having coffee together."

Doctors say organ rejection is the most significant challenge with traditional transplants involving human organs and can be even more prominent with animal-to-human organ transplants like the one Faucette underwent.

Doctors treated Faucette with an experimental antibody to suppress his immune system and attempt to prevent rejection, according to UMMC.

In a statement on her husband's death, Ann Faucette thanked those involved in his care.

"Larry started this journey with an open mind and complete confidence in Dr. Griffith and his staff. He knew his time with us was short, and this was his last chance to do for others," she said.

The University of Maryland also performed the first modified pig heart transplant in 2022. David Bennett, 57, died two months after the experimental procedure.

The hospital reported that there were no signs of organ rejection at the time of his death, but an autopsy eventually determined that Bennett died of heart failure from "a complex array of factors," including his health condition prior to the surgery.

British medical journal the Lancet also reported that there was evidence of pig virus that had not been identified previously.

There are more than 113,000 people on the organ transplant list, including more than 3,300 people in need of a heart, according to U.S. health and transplant officials. The group Donate Life America says that 17 people die each day waiting for a donor organ.

"We mourn the loss of Mr. Faucette, a remarkable patient, scientist, Navy veteran and family man who just wanted a little more time to spend with his loving wife, sons and family," Griffith said of Faucette.

 

WAIT, WHAT?!

Jury acquits Tesla Autopilot in fatal crash

Tesla's driver-assist technology has been at the center of several lawsuits stemming from fatal crashes in which the carmaker's software was being used. 

The popular Model 3 is shown on display in Beijing on Sunday, January 5, 2020. 

Photo by Stephen Shaver/UPI | License Photo

Nov. 1 (UPI) -- A California jury ruled Tuesday that Tesla and its driver-assistance software were not responsible for a 2019 crash that killed a Model 3 owner and seriously injured two passengers.

The jury's decision could presage how other juries decide on similar cases, in which Tesla's technology has been blamed for fatal crashes.

In this case, decided in California a lawsuit was filed by Lindsay Molander and her son, Parker Austin. In June 2019, they were passengers in a Tesla Model 3 car driven by Micah Lee, who died after the car suddenly veered off a highway, smashed into a palm tree and burst into flames. Lindsay Molander and her son were severely injured.

Lee was using Tesla's Autopilot system, a name which can create the perception that the car is driving itself, much like an airplane that is on autopilot. But Tesla's system is merely driver- assistance technology, which allows the car to operate with a degree of autonomy but has been criticized as unreliable.

This is the first verdict involving a fatal crash in which lawyers for the victims have blamed Tesla's Autopilot system. Lawyers for Molander blamed a software malfunction for the crash. Attorney Jonathan Michaels argued Tesla was aware of a defect in the technology that could cause the Tesla to veer suddenly, which is what happened in the accident that killed Lee.

Molander's lawyer blamed a malfunction by the car's driver-assistance software for the crash. During closing arguments in the trial, Jonathan Michaels, who is representing Ms. Molander and her son, cited Tesla internal documents, which he said showed the company was aware of a defect in the software that could cause the car to veer suddenly.

Lawyers for Tesla argued human error caused the deadly crash and said the software was not even capable of causing the Model 3 to veer suddenly as it had in this case.

Michael Carey, a lawyer representing Tesla, blamed Lee who he said had consumed several alcoholic beverages at a restaurant near Disneyland just prior to the accident.

Carey told jurors Lee had alcohol in his blood several hours after the accident, though it was below the threshold for legal intoxication in California.

"When someone gets in a crash after they have had a few drinks, we don't accept their excuses," Mr. Carey told jurors.

"This product is doing a really good job," Mr. Carey added of Tesla's technology. "Autopilot is helping people and making the world safer for all of us."

While it was the first to focus on the Autopilot technology, that was Tesla's second victory in a series of cases arguing that the company should be held liable when its vehicles crash while using advanced driver-assist systems. Earlier this year, a jury ruled against plaintiff Justine Hsu, who sued Tesla after his vehicle hit a median while using Autopilot.

While juries have ruled in Tesla's favor so far in cases involving driver-assist technology, the deadly crashes could color consumer perceptions and confidence about the quality of the vehicles and the safety of the technology.

Half of electric car sales in the United States are Teslas, often touted for their technology, even though driver-assist safety and reliability remain an open question given the spate of lethal accidents involving the company's software.

Tesla chief executive Elon Musk has told Wall Street that self-driving technology will be a lucrative revenue stream for the company. It charges $199 per month for the top of the line driver assistance package called Full Self-Driving.

Despite their names, Tesla recommends drivers remain engaged with the steering wheel while operating the vehicle using Full Self-Driving and with the less expensive Autopilot option, suggesting that, despite the names, drivers must remain fully prepared to regain full control of the vehicle at a moment's notice.

Tesla remains under criminal investigation by the US Department of Justice for its self-driving features. In 2021, the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration launched an investigation into the Autopilot system following collisions with parked emergency vehicles.

California's Department of Motor Vehicles has accused Tesla of making false claims about the capabilities of its Autopilot and Full Self-Driving systems.

Musk has been flippant about accepting liability for crashes involving the company's driver-assist technology. "There's a lot of people who assume we have legal liability judging by the lawsuits," Musk quipped.

New Zealand court finds final defendant in Whakaari White Island volcano case guilty


The final defendants in the deadly 2019 Whakaari White Island eruption were found guilty Tuesday. File Photo by Michael Schade/EPA-EFE

Oct. 31 (UPI) -- A New Zealand court ruled on Tuesday against a company that managed tours on a volcanic Whakaari White Island when a deadly eruption in 2019 occurred, saying it failed to mitigate and minimize the risk for tourists.

Judge Evangelos Thomas, based in Auckland, ruled that Whakaari Management Limited, owned by brothers James, Andrew and Peter Buttle, failed to "manage and control" the volcanic island as a workplace.

"The interaction between WML and GNS was not enough to amount to taking the necessary expert advice on the risk of permitting tours to Whakaari," Thomas said.

The company had been licensing other businesses to run tours on the island and Thomas added the interaction between them was "ad hoc, infrequent, unstructured, informal and incomplete when much more was required."

"It was fundamental that it engaged the necessary expertise to assess risks arising from the conduct of commercial tours on its active volcano," Thomas said.

"This was critical to it ensuring tours could be conducted safely. While that was the expert evidence, it is also common sense."

The White Island eruption on Dec. 9, 2019, killed 22 people.

Last month, Thomas threw out safety-related charges against the brothers individually, citing a lack of evidence that they were personally liable, but allowed the charges against their company to move forward.

WorkSafe originally charged 13 parties following its investigation of the eruption, which injured 25 others. Six entered guilty pleas while six more had their charges dismissed. Whakaari Management Limited was the last case involving White Island.

U.N. demands release of two Afghan women human rights campaigners


Afghan human rights activist Neda Parwan has been held in detention at an unknown location without charge or access to legal counsel since being arrested along with her husband in Kabul on September 19. 

Photo courtesy Jinha Women's News Agency

Oct. 31 (UPI) -- The United Nations Human Rights High Commissioner demanded Tuesday that Afghanistan's Taliban regime immediately release two women human rights campaigners from "unjustified" detention.

Experts at the U.N. said they believed that Neda Parwan, who has been held since she was arrested on Sept. 19, and Zholia Parsi, who was taken into custody on Sept. 27, were arrested for exercising their "fundamental right to engage in peaceful protests."

"We urge the de facto authorities to also release the women rights defenders and their family members without further delay, as there is no justification for their detention," the experts stated.

Parwan's husband and Parsi's adult son are also being held under arrest. None of the four have been charged, appeared in court, or been permitted access to a lawyer.

Related

U.S. renews, expands protected status for Afghanistan

U.N.: Afghanistan human rights in 'state of collapse'

Taliban's war on women in Afghanistan must be recognized as gender apartheid

The U.N. said it was growing increasingly worried about the welfare of the women who are both affiliated with the Women's Spontaneous Movement and whom the U.N. describes as "human rights defenders."

"The release of Ms. Parwan and Ms. Parsi and their family members from detention is an urgent matter. After more than a month in detention, we are increasingly concerned about their physical and mental wellbeing," the experts said.

The U.N. experts stressed right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association was at the core of international human rights law, warning that it was critically important to defend and that expressing dissenting views and exercising legitimate rights were not grounds for detaining people.

Women human rights activists' gender placed them at even higher risk of being singled out.

"The Taliban seem to be continuing to intensify their restrictions on civic space, especially through silencing of the voices of women and girls, thus creating a chilling effect," the experts said.

"We urge the de facto authorities to demonstrate respect for freedom of expression, freedoms of movement and association including the right to engage in peaceful protest, in line with Afghanistan's international obligations under human rights instruments ratified by the State."

The freeing of women's education campaigners Mortaza Behboudi and Matiullah Wesa was welcomed as a positive step. The pair were arrested for speaking out on girls' rights to attend school and calling on the Taliban-led government to end its prohibition on female education.

Wesa was freed from prison Friday after being detained for seven months, Pen Path, the education equality civil society group he founded said in a post on X.

A Kabul court ordered Behboudi's release after acquitting him of all charges on Oct. 18 after more than nine months in detention.

In September, U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Turk told a meeting of the U.N. Human Rights Council in New York that Afghanistan was guilty of grave rights violations, warning that human rights in the country were in a "state of collapse."

"Violations of human rights in the country are not new: decades of armed conflict mean that Afghanistan has known violence and injustice for much of its recent history," said Turk.