# data[].attributes.headline
Google Walkout Organizers Say They Faced Retaliation

# data[].attributes.subject
Google Walkout Organizers Say They Faced Retaliation

# data[].attributes.body
A number of Google employees paid the price for a walkout they did against injustices and retaliation within the company.

Why were these people fired or depromoted? What is googles motives as a result of this?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
For many women, speaking out about sexual harassment issues is a double-edged sword. Women motivated to see real change, especially after #MeToo, realize they need to point out injustices for change to occur. Unfortunately, most are held back due to a legitimate fear they will suffer retaliation. That's exactly what two of the Google walkout organizers say happened to them.

Last November, over 20,000 Google employees walked out to protest the handling of sexual harassment allegations at the tech giant. The walkout successfully brought about change in the organization, and after the demonstration, Google ditched their mandatory arbitration policy. Claire Stapleton and Meredith Whittaker helped organize the walkout, but now they say they are paying a price.

Stapleton, a marketing manager at YouTube (owned by Google), and Whittaker, an artificial intelligence researcher, wrote an email to co-workers at Google, where they lay out the retaliation they have suffered since planning the walkout. Stapleton explains that she was demoted as a result of her participation in the organizing of the walkout. Whittaker said in the same letter that she had been "informed my role would be changed dramatically."

Stapleton describes in the email, published in , "After five years as a high performer in YouTube Marketing (and almost twelve at Google), two months after the Walkout, I was told that I would be demoted, that I'd lose half my reports, and that a project that was approved was no longer on the table. I escalated to HR and to my VP, which made things significantly worse. My manager started ignoring me, my work was given to other people, and I was told to go on medical leave, even though I'm not sick."

The other email author, Whittaker describes how she was told she would be forced "to abandon my work on AI ethics and the AI Now Institute which I cofounded." The two women express that they found a common theme among the stories they collected from the walkout, "People who stand up and report discrimination, abuse, and unethical conduct are punished, sidelined, and pushed out."

It's important to note that a Google spokesperson told the New York Times that there was no retaliation. She explained, "We prohibit retaliation in the workplace, and investigate all allegations. Employees and teams are regularly and commonly given new assignments, or reorganized, to keep pace with evolving business needs. There has been no retaliation here."

Interestingly, when Stapleton hired a lawyer her demotion was reversed.

Studies have found that only 6% to 13% of all sexual harassment cases are reported. Why? Because employees fear retaliation. As the female Google employees explain in their email, retaliation isn't always as obvious as a demotion. In fact, it's typically more subtle. The two describe how those who speak out at Google typically experience "icy conversations, gaslighting, and project cancellations."

I regularly speak to women about sexual harassment, and a common theme that I hear is that victims absolutely don't want to report the harassment. The women don't want to be labeled as troublemakers, and they fear retaliation. The women want to hear strategies and solutions in which they can deal with these situations themselves, without the involvement of their organization.

Here's the dilemma. If women report harassment, they fear retaliation. If they don't report, then no lasting change will occur. The Harvey Weinstein and other Hollywood cases that launched #MeToo are a perfect example of how this issue plays out. Because victims feared repercussions, and nobody spoke up for such a long time, the rampant harassment was able to continue for years.

Given what many women must endure after reporting, I absolutely understand their hesitance to come forward. Post-#MeToo, the idea was to listen to women who speak out-appreciate them for coming forward. If organizations retaliate against employees who are trying to make the workplace more hospitable for women, then #MeToo means nothing. We need women to be free to call out bad behavior without repercussions if we expect women to reach parity with men in the workplace.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Google Walkout Organizers Say They Faced Retaliation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
For many women, speaking out about sexual harassment issues is double-edged sword. Women motivated to see real change want to point out injustices. However, most are held back out of fear they will suffer retaliation. That's exactly what two of the Google walkout organizers say happen to them.

# data[].attributes.headline
Supreme Court Immigration Case Could Be Bad For Business

# data[].attributes.subject
Supreme Court Immigration Case Could Be Bad For Business

# data[].attributes.body
There are immigrants that do and do not have the legal documentation to allow them to work in the US.

What will be done to companies or franchises if they are found with undocumented immigrants working?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The U.S. Supreme Court will soon hear a case (Kansas v. Garcia) that legal analysts warn may empower state and local prosecutors with political ambitions to go after businesses on immigration grounds. A decision in favor of Kansas may open the floodgates to legal actions against restaurants, landscapers, factories and construction firms, putting businesses at great risk even if under federal law they did not knowingly hire someone without work authorization.

Would a decision in favor of Kansas make it easier for zealous prosecutors to investigate the hiring of unauthorized immigrants at Trump properties or any other business more associated with either political party? To better understand the case and its implications, I interviewed Paul W. Hughes, a partner in Mayer Brown's Supreme Court & Appellate practice in Washington, D.C.

Stuart Anderson: What are the facts of the case?

Paul W. Hughes: Local police officers in Kansas stopped three individuals, at different times, for ordinary traffic offenses. The officers came to suspect that the individuals lacked lawful immigration status. Officers began to investigate their immigration and employment status.

Ultimately, a local Kansas prosecutor charged the three individuals with making false statements, including on the I-9 (a federal document showing work authorization) and on the K-4 (a state document used, in part, for tax withholdings). The state trial court dismissed the charges relating to the I-9 but allowed the K-4 theory to proceed.

The Kansas State Supreme Court - in agreement with the Iowa Supreme Court - held that this sort of criminal prosecution is barred by federal law. No state supreme courts have ever allowed such a prosecution theory to proceed.

Anderson: What is the key immigration policy question in Kansas v. Garci a that could affect businesses?

Hughes: Federal law determines the categories of immigrants who are authorized to work - and, conversely, those who are not. Because this is an exclusive federal prerogative, courts have long held that only the federal government can prosecute employees and employers for alleged violations of this work-authorization scheme.

The question posed here is whether Kansas can circumvent that law by proceeding with effectively identical prosecutions - but framing them as turning on the state K-4 tax form. If Kansas is able to do so, local city and county prosecutors could engage in mass prosecutions of employees and employers that are, in substance and effect, designed to target the employment of immigrants who lack work authorization.

Kansas has not done any of the things that one would expect in a prosecution focusing on taxation. The state did not introduce tax returns as documents, nor did the state prosecute individuals for underpayment or non-payment of state income tax.

Anderson: What do you think would be the impact on businesses of a decision in favor of Kansas?

Hughes: If state and local prosecutors can proceed with this sort of prosecution of employees, they can likewise prosecute employers. Since many state and local prosecutors are elected officials - or individuals who eye elected office - high-profile prosecutions against employers would result.

Anderson: What position has the Trump administration taken on the case?

Hughes: The Trump administration has altered the position of the federal government. Previously, in similar cases, the federal government has argued for federal preemption, arguing that this sort of immigration prosecution is uniquely federal. This administration, however, has changed longstanding federal policy and now argues against federal preemption.

Anderson: If the case is decided in favor of Kansas, then wouldn't it be easier for local or state prosecutors to investigate past or present cases of hiring unauthorized immigrants at Trump country clubs and other properties? And couldn't Republican prosecutors today or in the future go after companies aligned with Democrats?

Hughes: Politically-minded prosecutors could certainly use this theory of state criminal law to bring numerous sorts of charges against a diverse array of employers. Federal preemption is critical to ensure calibrated law enforcement that is responsive to the appropriate use of immigration resources and that maintains a uniform national policy towards immigration.

Anderson: When do you expect the case to be heard and a decision issued?

Hughes: The Supreme Court is likely to hear oral argument in October or November 2019. A decision will likely be reached before the Court recesses for the term in June 2020.

Anderson: What do you think is at stake in Kansas v. Garcia?

Hughes: Regulating employment aspects of immigration has long been a core federal function. It brings uniformity and consistency to a crucial area of immigration law and policy. The issues at stake here are whether states can directly enter the immigration enforcement arena, prosecuting individuals and businesses for violations of state law. If Kansas succeeds, that would fundamentally upset the balance of immigration-related criminal prosecutions in the United States and put many businesses in great jeopardy at the hands of politically ambitious prosecutors.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Supreme Court Immigration Case Could Be Bad For Business

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The U.S. Supreme Court will soon hear a case (Kansas v. Garcia ) that legal analysts warn may empower state and local prosecutors with political ambitions to go after businesses on immigration grounds.

# data[].attributes.headline
This tiny electric car is made for the city

# data[].attributes.subject
This tiny electric car is made for the city

# data[].attributes.body
This new soon to be released 2022 all electric 2 passenger car by hyundai is amazing. It holds a whole new experience, and will give people the introduction to the future technology of cars.

How long does the battery last? Miles per battery charge?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
this tiny electric car is made for the city - cnn video

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
This tiny electric car is made for the city - CNN Video

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
At the 2019 New York Auto Show, Hyundai-owned Genesis unveiled an all-electric two-passenger concept car.

# data[].attributes.headline
Tesla may turn to 'alternative' funding sources

# data[].attributes.subject
Tesla may turn to 'alternative' funding sources

# data[].attributes.body
The Tesla CEO Elon Musk said that he must discover and take into consideration new methods in order to expand capital growth. His company has undergone a great amount of money loss already.

What are some ways in which Tesla can promote its company to help increase financially?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Electric automaker Tesla on Monday said it could decide to explore new financing sources, according to a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

While the automaker indicated that its "core operations" should generate enough cash to cover near-term obligations, it may "choose to seek alternative financing sources."

"As always, we continually evaluate our capital expenditure needs and may decide it is best to raise additional capital to fund the rapid growth of our business," the documents said.

The company noted it should have adequate liquidity over the next year, but its operations and prospects could be "negatively affected" if it cannot raise additional funds when it needs or wants to do so.

Shares of Tesla were trading lower during Monday's session and are down more than 30 percent so far this year.

In financial results released last week, the automaker posted a loss of $702 million in the first quarter and said it may need to raise capital, reversing CEO Elon Musk's earlier position that it would not need to do so. Tesla doesn't expect to turn another profit until the third quarter.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX BUSINESS APP
Meanwhile, over the weekend, Musk reached a deal with the SEC regarding his Twitter usage. The agreement lays out new terms governing what the CEO is allowed to post without pre-approval, which largely include a list of items pertaining to financial details about the company.

Musk's Twitter habits came under fire last year, when he wrote a post about potentially taking the automaker private at $420 per share - for which he and the company were both fined $20 million.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Tesla may turn to 'alternative' funding sources

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Electric automaker Tesla on Monday said it could decide to explore new financing sources, according to a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). While the automaker indicated that its "core operations" should generate enough cash to cover near-term obligations, it may "choose to seek alternative financing sources."

# data[].attributes.headline
How VR is helping flyers and dental patients calm down

# data[].attributes.subject
How VR is helping flyers and dental patients calm down

# data[].attributes.body
Dentists and spas are using Virtual Reality to help there patients calm down and help reduce pain and anxiety while preforming procedures.

Should ever patient undergoing a procedure have the access to VR?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
virtual reality is coming to planes and the dentist's office - cnn

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How VR is helping flyers and dental patients calm down

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Some businesses, from dentist offices and airlines to spas, are using virtual reality to help people chill out.

# data[].attributes.headline
Top 25 fastest-disappearing jobs in the US

# data[].attributes.subject
Top 25 fastest-disappearing jobs in the US

# data[].attributes.body
There are a number of jobs that are decreasing due to an increase of technological advancements in various industries.

Are more jobs going to disappear in the future?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
If you're searching for the perfect career or thinking about switching fields, you may want to do your homework first.

While U.S. employers added 196,000 jobs in March - the 118th month of straight gains - and average hourly earnings rose by 4 cents ($27.70), that doesn't mean all occupations are seeing success.

In fact, some industries are actually seeing a rapid decline in terms of employees. And some states, in particular, are being hit harder than others. According to a study released earlier this month by personal finance website GoBankingRates.com, West Virginia, Alaska, New Mexico, Wyoming and Louisiana are among the worst states for job hunting.

Since 2016, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics has been projecting the fastest-declining occupations in the U.S. by 2026. Earlier this month, the agency updated its statistics to give job seekers a more recent look at how certain industries are doing - in terms of salary and projected growth.

Overall, the Bureau of Labor Statistics estimated that employment will be up more than 7 percent in 2026. The agency previously said health care, health care support, construction and personal care fields would be amongst the fastest-growing occupations from 2012 to 2022.

Of the 818 occupations the bureau tracks, the agency found that locomotive firers, which receive an average annual salary of $63,820, will decline by -78.6 percent by 2026. Respiratory therapy technicians, which earn around $51,000, will also see a rapid dip of about -56.3 percent over seven years. Parking enforcement workers, averaging $39,840 per year, will also flounder - with the agency expecting a -35.3 percent decline in 2026.

Here's a list of the 25 occupations (in order) that will be hit the hardest by 2026.

1. Locomotive firers

2. Respiratory therapy technicians

3. Parking enforcement workers

4. Word processors and typists

5. Watch repairers

6. Electronic equipment installers and repairers, motor vehicles

7. Foundry mold and coremakers

8. Pourers and casters, metal

9. Computer operators

10. Telephone operators

11. Mine shuttle car operators

12. Electromechanical equipment assemblers

13. Data entry keyers

14. Postmasters and mail superintendents

15. Electrical and electronic equipment assemblers

16. Coil winders, tapers, and finishers

17. Grinding and polishing workers, hand

18. Timing device assemblers and adjusters

19. Switchboard operators, including answering service

20. Prepress technicians and workers

21. Drilling and boring machine tool setters, operators, and tenders, metal and plastic

22. Textile knitting and weaving machine setters, operators, and tenders

23. Milling and planing machine setters, operators, and tenders, metal and plastic

24. Forging machine setters, operators, and tenders, metal and plastic

25. Legal secretaries

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Top 25 fastest-disappearing jobs in the US

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
If you're searching for the perfect career or thinking about switching fields, you may want to do your homework first. While U.S. employers added 196,000 jobs in March - the 118th month of straight gains - and average hourly earnings rose by 4 cents ($27.70), that doesn't mean all occupations are seeing success.

# data[].attributes.headline
U.S. Bank Regulatory Easing Is Negative For Investors And Taxpayers

# data[].attributes.subject
U.S. Bank Regulatory Easing Is Negative For Investors And Taxpayers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In a disappointing decision, the Federal Reserve Board yesterday that effective this year, it will limit its use of the "qualitative objection" in Dodd-Frank's Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review (CCAR). Under Dodd-Frank's Title I, banks that are designated as systemically important are required banks to design a model using stress scenarios from the Federal Reserve. In order to pass the stress test, banks need to demonstrate that they would be able to meet Basel III capital and leverage requirements even in a period of stress. It is in the qualitative portion of CCAR, that the Federal Reserve can identify and communicate to the market if a bank is having problems with its internal controls, model risk management, information technology, risk data aggregation, and whether a bank has the ability to identify, measure, control, and monitor credit, market, liquidity and operational risks even during periods of stress. Easing this requirement, in combination with all the changes to Dodd-Frank that have been taking place since last year, is dangerous to investors, not to mention taxpayers, especially so late in the credit cycle.

According to the Federal Reserve's press release "The changes eliminate the qualitative objection for most firms due to the improvements in capital planning made by the largest firms." Yes, there have been improvements in capital planning precisely, because there were consequences to banks which failed the qualitative portion of CCAR. Banks were prohibited from making capital distributions until they could rectify the problems the Federal Reserve found in the CCAR exercise. This decision essentially defangs the CCAR qualitative review of banks' capital planning process.

"It is absolutely reckless of the Fed to relinquish its regulatory authority in such a manner, rather than retain the option of qualitative oversight, which has turned up red flags in the past," said former international investment banker. "We are after all, talking about what the banks deem a reporting burden versus necessary oversight that could detect signs of a coming credit or other form of banking related crisis from a capital or internal risk management perspective. Why take that risk on behalf of the rest of our country or the world?"

In writing about the Federal Reserve's decision, the Wall Street Journal wrote that "Regulators dialed back a practice of publicly shaming the nation's biggest banks through "stress test" exams, taking one of the biggest steps yet to ease scrutiny put in place after the 2008 crisis." It is not public shaming. It is called regulators doing their job, that is, providing transparency to markets about what challenges banks may be having. Without transparency, the bank share and bond investors cannot discipline banks.

Just last month, the Federal Reserve Board announced that it would be "providing relief to less-complex firms from stress testing requirements and CCAR by effectively moving the firms to an extended stress test cycle for this year. The relief applies to firms generally with total consolidated assets between $100 billion and $250 billion."

Investors in bank bonds, especially, should be concerned about recent easing of bank regulations. Immediately after the Federal Reserve decision was announced yesterday, Christopher Wolfe, Head of North American Banks and Managing Director at Fitch Ratings stated that "Taken together, these regulatory announcements raising the bar for systemic risk designation and relaxed standard for qualitative objection on the CCAR stress test reinforce our view that the regulatory environment is easing, which is a negative for bank creditors." Fitch Rating analysts have written several reports about the easing bank regulatory environment being credit negative for investors in bank bonds and to counterparties of banks in a wide array of financial transactions.

Also, a month ago, the Federal Reserve announced that it will give more information to banks about how it uses banks' data in its model to determine whether banks are adequately capitalized in a period of stress. In commenting on the Federal Recent decisions, Better Markets President and CEO Dennis Kelleher stated that "Stress tests and their fulsome disclosure have been one of the key mechanisms used to restore trust in those banks and regulators. By providing more transparency to the banks in response to their complaints while reducing the transparency to the public risks snatching defeat from the jaws of victory in the Fed's stress test regime."

Gregg Gelznis, Policy Analyst at the Center for American Progress also expressed his concern about the Federal Reserve's recent changes to the CCAR stress tests. "While Federal Reserve Chairman Jay Powell and Vice Chairman for Supervision Randal Quarles have spoken at length about the need for increased stress testing transparency, this transparency only cuts in one direction." He elaborated that the Federal Reserve's decision "benefits Wall Street at the expense of the public. The Fed has advanced rules that would provide banks with more information on the stress testing scenarios and models. At the same time, they have now made the stress testing regime less transparent for the public by removing the qualitative objection-instead evaluating capital planning controls and risk management privately in the supervisory process."

Mayra Rodríguez Valladares is managing principal of MRV Associates, which provides consulting, research and training services on capital markets and financial regulation. @MRVAssociates.

I have been dedicated to providing clients high quality financial consulting, research, and training services on Basel III, risk management, risk-based supervision, capi...

Read More

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
U.S. Bank Regulatory Easing Is Negative For Investors And Taxpayers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In a disappointing decision, the Federal Reserve Board will limit its use of the "qualitative objection" in Dodd-Frank's Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review. This reduces transparency to the market about potential risk management and capital planning problems at systemically important banks.

# data[].attributes.headline
Why Immigrants, Students And U.S. Companies Are Going To Canada

# data[].attributes.subject
Why Immigrants, Students And U.S. Companies Are Going To Canada

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"Oh, Canada" is a refrain more U.S. companies, high-skilled foreign nationals and international students are listening to in response to more restrictive immigration policies in the United States.

The Trump administration has made it more difficult for international students to stay or work in America and new international student enrollment at U.S. universities declined over 6% in the 2017/2018 academic year, while Canadian universities are attracting international students at record levels. The number of international students in Canada increased 16% in 2018, after rising 20% in 2017.

It's not just international students choosing Canada. "Sixty-three percent of employers surveyed in the Envoy study are increasing their presence in Canada, either by sending more workers there or by hiring foreign nationals there," reported the technology news outlet . "More than half of those did both. Another 65% of hiring professionals said Canada's immigration policies are more favorable to U.S. employers than U.S. policies. Of those surveyed, 38% are thinking about expanding to Canada, while 21% already have at least one office there."

To better understand the Canadian immigration system and what may be attracting U.S. businesses, I interviewed Peter Rekai, founder of the Toronto-based immigration law firm Rekai LLP.

Stuart Anderson: Is it your experience that U.S. companies frustrated with current immigration policies are moving more people and resources to Canada?

Peter Rekai: Definitely. Canada is becoming a destination for high-skilled foreign workers who can't get new or extended status in the United States. Sometimes U.S companies just "park" these workers in Canada, hoping to get them eventually into the United States. However, many other U.S. companies have opened affiliates in Canada to which they are transferring their foreign workers on a long-term basis.

While a number of such "tech refugees" regret that they cannot stay in Silicon Valley, those with families appreciate that in Canada their spouses can get "open" work permits, their children can go to public schools and the family will be covered by universal public healthcare. They also appreciate that a clear path to permanent residence (and ultimately citizenship) is available to them, likely after a year of working in Canada.

Anderson: H-1B visa cases filed without premium processing can take U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 6 to 12 months to complete. What's processing like for the equivalent temporary visas in Canada?

Rekai: The federal government's new Global Skills Strategy has facilitated hiring and accelerated the processing of high-skilled workers. The goal is to get all high-skilled labour-market exempt workers to Canada and to their respective employers within 2 weeks (2 weeks longer if a labour market approval is required). Employers of low- to medium-skilled workers seeking labour market approvals face longer processing periods (currently between 3 to 9 months).

Anderson: Is it accurate to say Canada has made it easier for businesses in recent years?

Rekai: Yes. The government has expanded the number of categories of work permit categories that exempt employers from having to go through the cumbersome labour market approval process to obtain permission to hire a foreign worker. Some of this expanded mobility for professionals and business people has been due to the signing of new free trade agreements with nations in the Americas, the Pacific and the European Union.

Anderson: Can you explain how permanent residence, the equivalent of a U.S. green card, operates in Canada for business immigration?

Rekai: Economic immigrants account for 50% to 60% of all applicants for permanent residence in Canada. Their eligibility is largely determined by a "points system" based on a "human capital" model that rewards youth, education, skilled job experience and sophisticated English or French language skills.

Generous "points" are accorded to those with skilled work experience in Canada and to holders of Canadian post-secondary diplomas and degrees. This effectively establishes a path to permanent residence for currently employed skilled temporary foreign workers, ensuring that most of Canada's new economic immigrants are already gainfully employed by the time they become permanent residents. This "path" to permanent residence also underlines the significant role played by Canadian employers, who initially choose the temporary foreign workers.

Anderson: You've noted before that it could be dangerous to import the Canadian points system wholesale into the United States because Canada's system works because it's flexible and responds to employer needs but that type of "flexibility" in the wrong hands could be disastrous for U.S. employers.

Rekai: Putting broad immigration decision-making into the hands of a strong executive can lead to "be careful what you wish for" outcomes. An ideologue in an empowered U.S. executive branch (e.g., White House aide Stephen Miller) could significantly change the focus of U.S. immigration through executive order or action.

As I've noted previously, if the United States adopted the same immigration system as Canada, then the president of the United States, via the Secretary of Homeland Secretary, could set the level of legal immigration in a given year at zero, 500,000 or 5 million, whichever level he prefers. In addition, the president through his designee could establish or eliminate entire categories of immigrants and decide on the number of immigrants in each category, or do the equivalent when deciding the overall point level or which characteristics get points at all.

Anderson: It seems to Americans that Canada has historically avoided the same level of political divisiveness over immigration that we have seen in the United States. Is that a correct perception?

Rekai: Not entirely. Being bounded by 3 large oceans and sharing our only land border with the most affluent nation in the world has allowed Canada to avoid the immigration stresses imposed by large movements of asylum seekers and economic refugees. This has permitted Canadian governments to pursue a more orderly immigration process within controlled borders.

Canada pursued a largely white European-based immigrant selection process until the advent of the "points system" in the mid-1960s, which democratised and globalised our immigrant selection.

Canadian governments, Conservative and Liberal, over the past few decades have all been keen supporters of steadily raising immigration levels as an economic tool, with an emphasis on attracting skilled immigrants. Currently, our annual immigrant intake represents 1% of our population and, on a per capita basis, is 3 times that of the United States. However, our governments have been cautious to avoid any sudden boost in numbers so as to preserve the positive but delicate Canadian pro-immigration consensus.

Anderson: What do you think is the biggest weakness for businesses or employment-based immigrants in the Canadian immigration system?

Rekai: On the high-skilled worker side, the current points system, which the Minister of Immigration has the power to adjust at will, tends to be too tough on mid-career applicants, who are likely to be more accomplished and experienced in their occupational fields than their younger counterparts. Applicants under the federal selection programme start losing "points" in the age category after the age of 30, making them less competitive.

The heavy emphasis of the Canadian points system on post-secondary education, as well as its emphasis on those with offers of long-term full-time employment, has made it difficult to attract trades that are considered valuable in the workplace, particularly construction workers, such as carpenters, bricklayers, electricians, etc. The more recent establishment of a designated "trades stream," which de-emphasizes post-secondary degrees and acknowledges that employment in the construction industry is based on shorter-term projects, has served to create an opening for trade applicants, although it's too early to determine its success.

The Canadian system also features a partial outsourcing of economic immigration selection to the provinces. Regional employers have input in selecting immigrants with particular skills that are needed locally, including allowing for the selection of certain low-skilled workers (e.g., meat cutters needed by food processing plants in Manitoba and Saskatchewan, and long-haul truckers in Alberta).

Anderson: Why is Canada good for international students?

Rekai: International students who graduate from (at least) 2-year programmes at Canadian colleges and universities, in any field, are eligible for 3-year open work permits. Typically, graduates with a Canadian post-secondary credential will be young, communicate well in English or French and have gained one or more years of Canadian skilled work experience pursuant to their post-graduation work permits. This makes them competitive applicants under the points-based economic permanent resident selection process.

The knowledge that there is a clear "studies to work to permanent residence" path has significantly increased the number of international students coming to Canada, with many choosing Canada over attending U.S. schools for this reason.

Anderson: Do you think if U.S. policymakers don't make it easier to hire and retain high-skilled foreign nationals in America that more U.S. companies, immigrants and international students will be coming to Canada?

Rekai: High-skilled foreign nationals will continue to find a reliable path to permanent residence in a relatively short period of time in Canada. Absent changes in U.S. immigration policies, I would expect companies, immigrants and international students to continue to see Canada as an attractive alternative to the United States.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why Immigrants, Students And U.S. Companies Are Going To Canada

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"Oh, Canada" is a refrain more U.S. companies, high-skilled foreign nationals and international students are listening to in response to more restrictive immigration policies in the United States. The Trump administration has made it more difficult for international students to stay or work in America and new international student enrollment at U.S.

# data[].attributes.headline
Oil shoots above $65 on fears about Iran sanctions

# data[].attributes.subject
Oil shoots above $65 on fears about Iran sanctions

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
oil shoots above $65 on fears about iran sanctions - cnn

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Oil shoots above $65 on fears about Iran sanctions

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
US oil prices raced above $65 a barrel on Monday for the first time since Halloween after the White House pledged to deepen its crackdown on Iran.

# data[].attributes.headline
Tesla investigates after car appears to explode in China

# data[].attributes.subject
Tesla investigates after car appears to explode in China

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
tesla investigates after car appears to explode in china - cnn

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Tesla investigates after car appears to explode in China

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Tesla is investigating after one of its vehicles appeared to explode in China.

# data[].attributes.headline
Earth Day: Risks, deals and brands trying to make a difference

# data[].attributes.subject
Earth Day: Risks, deals and brands trying to make a difference

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Monday marks the 49th anniversary of Earth Day, an annual event where more than 193 countries hold demonstrations worldwide to support environmental causes.

Climate change has not only been a hot topic politically but the debate has made its way to Wall Street.

Last week, the world's largest asset manager BlackRock warned investors that they can no longer "afford to ignore" the risk climate change poses to the global economy. The global investment manager predicts more than $3.8 trillion of the U.S.'s municipal bond market is on the line due to climate-related risks in the future.

BlackRock's note follows similar sentiment from Morgan Stanley earlier this year, who warned climate-related disasters are expected to get worse with damages associated with global warming projected to top $54 trillion by 2040.

"We expect the physical risks of climate change to become an increasingly important part of the investment debate for 2019," Morgan Stanley analysts wrote in a note released in February, urging private enterprises to prepare for more disasters in the future.

However, many retailers and big corporations have been slowly changing their practices to an effort to become greener in recent years.

For example, last year, Starbucks, McDonald's, Goldman Sachs Group were among some of the big companies to ban plastic straws as part of a global push from environmentalists, who say straws are killing ocean wildlife. Now, the movement is turning to plastic bags.

California-based startup Lotus Trolley Bags said demand for its eco-friendly resusable shopping bags has doubled in last quarter alone with more than 1,400 retailers signing up to offer customers an alternative.

What's more, earlier this month, more than 4,500 Amazon workers teamed up to demand action from their boss Jeff Bezos on fighting climate change.

In an open letter published on Medium, employees asked Bezos to release a company-wide climate action plan to address the issue and added that leadership is "urgently needed" at the e-commerce giant. In a statement to FOX Business, Amazon said it plans to share its company-wide carbon footprint along with related goals and programs soon.

To celebrate Earth Day, Retailmenot.com compiled a list of retailers who are giving out deals in an effort to become more eco-friendly.
Allbirds
For Earth Day 2019, the theme of which is "Protect Our Species," shoe brand Allbirds is releasing five new limited-edition colors inspired by endangered birds. One new shoe design was released a day starting April 15 through April 19.
Best Buy
Get 40% off open-box electronics through April 27. These electronics have been returned in accordance with Best Buy's return policy and have been inspected by Best Buy to confirm they are in top notch condition.
CafePress
CafePress is offering 20% off items in the Earth Day collection with promo code EARTH19.
Caribou Coffee
Buy the straw-less Earth Month tumbler and score free refills of hot coffee or tea and $2 crafted pressed beverages through the end of April. Purchase the tumbler online, and get a free reusable Earth Day tote bag with promo code EarthDay.
Imperfect Produce
Get 40% off your first box of produce from April 22 through May 5 with code earthday2019.
Levi's
Bring in your used (make sure it's clean and dry) denim from any brand, and get a 20% discount off your purchase. The donated denim will be transformed into insulation for schools, libraries and low-income housing built by Habitat for Humanity via the Blue Jeans Go Green program.
Origins
Get the Earth Month Trio gift (a reusable tote bag, a bottle of Mega-Mushroom lotion and a flowering plantable pencil) with purchases of $45 or more.
Target
From April 22 through May 4, trade in an old car seat and get a 20% off coupon toward a new car seat, base, travel system, stroller or select other baby gear purchase. The coupon is good through May 11.
World Market
Get 20% off outdoor furniture with promo code 20OUTDOOR from now through April 29.
True Food Kitchen
This year, True Food Kitchen has decided to celebrate Earth Day all month long by partnering with Environmental Working Group. The restaurant chain said it will donate portions of its proceeds from its Good Earth Kale Cobb salad to the nonprofit to support its Dirty Dozen list each year.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Earth Day: Risks, deals and brands trying to make a difference

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Monday marks the 49th anniversary of Earth Day, an annual event where more than 193 countries hold demonstrations worldwide to support environmental causes. Climate change has not only been a hot topic politically but the debate has made its way to Wall Street.

# data[].attributes.headline
California gas prices surge to five-year high; what's causing the spike?

# data[].attributes.subject
California gas prices surge to five-year high; what's causing the spike?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
California residents are paying much higher prices at the pump compared with the average U.S. resident.

As of Thursday, the average gasoline price in the state was about $4.02, according to AAA, compared with the national average of $2.83.

Those are the highest prices California has seen since 2014. Prices have risen around 68 cents per gallon over the course of a month.

What's driving prices to multiyear highs? According to Dan McTeague, a senior petroleum analyst at GasBuddy, it's a supply crunch resulting from refinery upsets in Los Angeles and San Francisco.

"California's unique gasoline standard means replacements for the shortfall in production aren't easily found and ... explains why drivers there have seen gasoline prices spike nearly 68 cents a gallon in just a month," McTeague told FOX Business.

Drivers in Los Angeles have seen prices rise 71 cents per gallon in a month, while the increase was 72 cents in San Francisco.

Compounding the issue is massive flooding that occurred throughout parts of the Midwest, which affected ethanol blends and was expected to cause short-term pain at the pump for people in coastal areas due to distribution disruptions.

It doesn't appear as if there is any near-term relief on the horizon for California drivers either. McTeague predicts that prices could rise another 10 cents, assuming refineries are able to resume production levels, which is far from a certainty.

California also has among the highest gas taxes in the country.

While these conditions may be specific to California's refineries, a number of factors are expected to drive prices up around the country throughout the coming weeks. According to senior petroleum analyst for GasBuddy Patrick DeHaan, a variety of seasonal factors - including refinery maintenance - could drive the national average up to around $3 per gallon either later this month or next.

Gas prices were among the top expenses Americans were concerned about in 2019, as previously reported by FOX Business, after drivers spent $388 billion at the pump last year.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX BUSINESS APP
The good news is relief could follow a near-term price spike. DeHaan told FOX Business he expected prices to cool over the summer months, with prices falling into the $2.50 to $2.70 range.

While California prices are the highest in the nation, Alabama had the lowest prices as of Thursday, at about $2.50 per gallon.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
California gas prices surge to five-year high; what's causing the spike?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
California residents are paying much higher prices at the pump compared with the average U.S. resident. As of Thursday, the average gasoline price in the state was about $4.02, according to AAA, compared with the national average of $2.83. Those are the highest prices California has seen since 2014.