LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – Spain called on Italy on Tuesday to end its “deceptive” tactics in its war against migrants, including the use of mobile personnel boards and “de facto” detention camps, in its push to stem the flow of asylum seekers across its southern border with Italy.
The Spanish government, in a letter sent to Italy’s ambassador in Madrid, said the Italian military is “not equipped to manage the crisis” on its southern frontier with Morocco and said it had made no progress against traffickers.
The letter was sent by Spain’s foreign ministry in Rome to Ambassador Maria Correa.
It came as Italian Prime Minister Paolo Gentiloni urged other European nations to join a bloc in which Italy is a member to deal with the crisis.
“Italy is not a safe country,” Gentilona said on a visit to Turkey, referring to Italy by its Spanish acronym.
“We have a very high risk in this respect and this is what we are talking about here,” he said.
“I call on the European Union, the United States, Canada, France, Germany, Portugal, Spain, Italy, Greece, Portugal and all the member states of the bloc to take concrete measures to prevent the exploitation of the refugees in our common territory,” Gentila said.
In recent weeks, Italian authorities have detained more than 2,000 people trying to reach Italy’s borders, while authorities have said that at least 300 have died.
The war against illegal migration has become a major political issue as several governments, including France and Germany, have pledged to stem it, as well as Italy, which is one of the European nations with the largest numbers of asylum-seekers.
Italy, which has taken in more than 60,000 asylum-seeker arrivals this year, said last month that more than 1,000 migrants had died trying to cross its border with Spain.(Reporting by Marco Bellini; Editing by Daniel Wallis and Peter Cooney)
The Navy will soon be using automation for more than half of its personnel functions, including the hiring, firing and promotion of its more than 6,200 sailors.
But that automation isn’t being deployed on a large scale.
Instead, a smaller number of employees are being assigned to more-skilled roles, which can mean less automation for those who need it the most.
In order to provide better training and tools to recruit, train and retain a workforce, the Navy is working to modernize its personnel system.
But a recent report from the U.S. Naval Institute of Technology suggests that even with automation, there’s still a lot more work to do.
In fact, the report found that while automation is helping improve the hiring process, it’s not necessarily helping in every area of the service.
For instance, the program that makes up the automation program at the Navy’s fleet headquarters is still not fully automated.
That’s because it’s still in the design phase.
But the new report from U.N. Systems Analysis, an international engineering and research organization, suggests that if more automation is used, the automation could be used to better train personnel.
Specifically, it says that automated training could be helpful to those who require additional skills or skills they aren’t sure how to get.
In the case of sailors, the UNAVCO report said that sailors who need a more traditional skillset would benefit from more automation, and those who already possess the skillset could benefit from automation in the form of more qualified candidates.
While that may not be a big deal for some, the Pentagon and the Navy have said that more automation in personnel systems will help the force meet its growing military readiness requirements.
So while automation in training is an important step forward, it doesn’t mean the automation is going to make every task automated.
That’s because, while the automation can help in certain areas, it could also slow down the entire process of hiring, hiring and hiring again.
The UNAGCO report says that while the Navy could be deploying automation for a variety of tasks, it still won’t be fully automated until at least 2019.
When a new boss asks for a pay cut, you have the option of accepting it.
A new mayor in Chicago’s Liberty Personnel Services (LPS) Board of Directors said in a letter to employees last month that she “believes that your personal and professional freedom to choose how you work is essential to your job performance.”
LPS’s director of human resources told the staff that she was seeking a pay increase and was “pushing for an increase to $13.50/hour.”
The letter was obtained by the Chicago Tribune, and the board’s president, Mary Lou Hagen, responded in a Facebook post that LPS will seek a $13-an-hour increase “for the first time in its history.”
But LPS employees who are eligible for raises are given the option to apply for one, and LPS Board President Mary LouHagen is asking employees to do so, saying, “We believe that the increased salary should be offered for an employee’s own choice.”
LPLS is part of a nationwide union of city public employees.
LPS does not have a policy on employee choice, and employees are free to make the decision they think best for themselves, but LPS has had a contentious relationship with unions in recent years.
In 2016, LPS laid off a full quarter of its workforce, which included more than 100 police officers, as the result of a citywide strike.
The city later settled with the police union for a total of $20 million.
LPLP officials said in 2016 that the layoffs were in response to an “increased workload” of police officers and a “higher cost to taxpayers.”
The city said at the time that LPL was being held to the same standard as public employees in terms of staffing, overtime pay, and benefits.
In 2015, the Chicago Teachers Union voted to unionize and form a bargaining unit, and in 2016, the union filed a lawsuit challenging the city’s use of overtime pay.
In December 2016, a federal judge found that LPGs contract with LPS violated the National Labor Relations Act.
A federal judge in 2016 also ruled that LPMS violated the Fair Labor Standards Act by failing to offer a salary raise to its employees who requested it.
LPG officials also disputed the federal judge’s finding that LPA employees were not treated fairly under their collective bargaining agreement.
LPD fired nearly 40 officers after they refused to participate in a “coup” that was scheduled to take place on November 2.
LPA officials argued that the police department was not obligated to provide a raise, but the judge disagreed.
He ruled that the department could only be held accountable if it gave a raise to officers who chose to walk off the job.
A spokeswoman for the LPA did not respond to a request for comment.
A spokesperson for LPL said LPL has not filed a complaint with the National Employment Law Project or the Office of the Special Counsel, but it did say that it has been “forced to take action because of our failure to pay our employees” and because of the “public’s interest in the quality of life for our officers.”
LPD spokesperson Adam Collins said LPS did not “make any promises or threats” to pay raises, and said LPG did not request an increase for 2016 because the department was already overfunded.
Collins said in an email that “the city has been in a constant state of emergency since the 2016 police officers strike.”
He said the department had been in negotiations with LPLs bargaining unit “for a while,” but LPL had not reached a deal with LPD.
“We’ve been working to resolve our differences, but unfortunately, they have not been resolved,” Collins said.
LPC spokesperson Erin Coyle said in February that the city was not in compliance with the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) guidelines on collective bargaining.
“The city does not allow city employees to make personal choices regarding whether to work with their own union or not,” Coyle wrote.
“That is why the city is not in a position to provide pay raises to LPL workers.”
LPC’s contract with the city expired in 2020, but in 2017, LPL’s leaders voted to form a new bargaining unit.
LPNS also has had an off-the-record, confidential “labor peace” process with the LPL.
The process, which has been widely publicized, has involved LPL employees holding meetings, and then LPL officials offering a pay raise in a public forum.
LPMs first round of pay raises took place in April.
In October, the city announced it was ending the process altogether, citing the state’s moratorium on collective bargaining for public employees and a lack of public trust in the process.
Lpls leaders said in December that the process had been going on for months, and that the LPD’s contract “is not enforceable.”