Also, ours the intention to change the work environment is quite firm, which is confirmed by the fact that two thirds of persons (62%) would not give up their decision to leave the company even if the employer offered them a new, significantly higher salary than they had. 24% of people who would ‘extend their fidelity’ and withdraw their dismissal decision if their employer promised them a raise do not agree. We have no negative experiences due to the dismissal The image of the employer also has an important influence on our decision, because we want to work in a company that has proven care for employees, then various financial conditions (such as bonuses, recourses and Christmas bonuses), flexible working hours, challenging work tasks, better location and the like. In the latest research, My job has found out what our most common reasons for dismissal are and where the point of ‘shooting’ lies after which there is no going back. When it comes to reasons for dismissal, they are at the top of the list too little pay, which is why half of the respondents search for job advertisements, then impossibility of professional advancement, poor working conditions te negative attitude with a direct superior.  When asked what kind of offer a potential new employer could make us think about quitting our current job, most respondents answered – better pay.  For Croats, dismissal is by no means a foreign concept. Research has confirmed that it is as many as 80% of people in their careers so far have resigned at least once, and the search for new business challenges usually turns to after 4 years of experience with the same employer. Among other motives, we are encouraged to change the work environment by numerous overtime hours, disagreement with the company’s management, a better offer from another employer, but also boredom, illegal business operations of the employer and insufficient independence in performing work tasks. Too little pay, poor working conditions and inability to progress Interestingly, at the time of resignation only a third of respondents had already agreed on a new job (34%), an equal number of people were in the process of looking for work (32%), and 17% of people did not even think about where to work. On the other hand, approximately 7% of respondents made the decision impulsively and immediately, without questioning her, resigned. There are few of us who have never, at least for a moment or two, after a hard day at work and an argument with the boss dreamed of resigning and leaving the office with applause and shouts of approval from former colleagues who many times wanted to do the same, but did not were brave enough. But how often do we decide on this important step? Also, before making a final decision we like to listen to other people’s opinions, and we most often consult with family members (49%), partner (44%) and friends (28%), while every fifth person makes this important decision independently. As expected or not, men resign more often than women without first consulting a trusted person. A new employer can attract us with a better salary and its image We do not make a decision hastily One in four respondents points out that a month has passed from the moment of the decision to leave until the dismissal, for a fifth of respondents that period has been extended to half a year, and for every tenth person to a year.  In 50% of cases, employers ask us to take notice, and during this time most people do not have negative experiences, except for occasional reproachful looks and scathing comments from colleagues or superiors, so it is not surprising that we usually break up with the employer in good relations (in 66% of cases). Aware of the importance and possible consequences of dismissal, such as a rule, we do not make a decision hastily, but think about it for a while.  Source: MojPosao.net Cover photo: Pexels.com

Economy,  Press Release,  Seniors Hershey, PA – Governor Tom Wolf today joined Department of Banking and Securities Secretary Robin L. Wiessmann and Department of Aging Secretary Teresa Osborne to discuss measures the Wolf Administration has taken to help protect senior citizens from financial scams and fraud.“Financial crime can be visited upon older Pennsylvanians by someone they know — caregivers, friends, professionals, or service providers who abuse the trust that has been placed in them – or, in some cases, they can be targeted by strangers with elaborate scams,” Governor Wolf said. “That’s why my administration decided to pull together and collaborate across all our agencies to work to protect older Pennsylvanians from this kind of abuse.”“Elder financial abuse is one of the most significant financial crimes of the 21st century, and it is estimated to cost older Americans $36 billion each year,” said Secretary Wiessmann. “In order to help protect our seniors from financial fraud and abuse, we are developing and providing education programs for front-line professionals who have close contact with older Pennsylvanians. Through these programs, accountants, doctors, lawyers, and investment professionals are learning to identify signs of elder financial abuse, as well as how to report it and prevent this crime.”During a panel discussion at the Mohler Senior Center in Hershey, Governor Wolf pointed specifically to “PA $AFE,” an information exchange and clearinghouse created as part of the governor’s Consumer Financial Protection Initiative, which involves over 20 Pennsylvania state government agencies engaged in financial education and consumer protection activities.“As an example of how PA $AFE operates, leaders from 14 agencies with consumer hotlines are trained to work to ensure their staff members know the appropriate places to refer calls that are not typically handled by their agencies,” Governor Wolf explained. “They are also making certain that the financial information they share with consumers is up-to-date and consistent across agencies.”In November 2015, Governor Wolf announced the Consumer Financial Protection Initiative “in order to educate the public about financial protection and best practices in a concise, efficient way.” Among the four goals he laid out for this initiative include:·         Establish a state government interagency financial education exchange for consumers.·         Help professionals who work with senior citizens identify signs of elder financial abuse and prevent this crime.“There are many types of financial fraud scams that target seniors,” said Secretary Osborne. “The Wolf Administration recognizes that financial fraud education is critical. Protection means involvement, and in order to prevent older Pennsylvanians from becoming victims of financial fraud, we must educate those around us on what these scams are, how they work, and where to call for help.”Senior citizens, the caregivers, or family members with questions about financial transactions can call the Department of Banking and Securities at 1-800-PA-BANKS. The department also maintains on online library of resources to help consumers learn to protect themselves at: www.dobs.pa.gov. SHARE Email Facebook Twitter April 21, 2017 Governor Wolf Urges Seniors to Protect Themselves Against Financial Fraud

The Pensions and Lifetime Savings Association (PLSA) has updated its corporate governance and voting guidelines to emphasise the importance of corporate reporting on strategic risk and non-executive directors’ time commitments.The new edition of the guidelines, released on Saturday, reflects recent work carried out by the association and its intention to “advance market best practices”, said Luke Hildyard, policy lead on stewardship and corporate governance.The 2015-16 version does not introduce any new principles but differs from last year’s guidelines in the emphasis that has been placed on certain principles and the detail added, he told IPE.He said there were additions in three main areas, addressing company and shareholder responsibilities. One of the areas concerns corporate reporting, the focus of work carried out by the association earlier this year.Following on from this, the PLSA revised the guidelines to emphasise that corporate reporting “should enable an investor to understand how the company is maximising the long-term value of the human capital it has at its disposal”.The guidelines refer specifically to the “composition of the workforce” and “the sustainability of the employment model” as aspects that merit particular attention to allow shareholders to develop a more “holistic view” of the risks and opportunities facing a given company.Companies are also called on to develop and refine their understanding and reporting of strategic risks continually.The guidelines were amended to stress the importance of ensuring non-executive directors have sufficient time and energy to be able to discharge their role properly.This is not a new concern for the association and its members, but the new edition of the guidelines includes a note calling on shareholders to be “mindful of concurrent directorships” and to take into account the nature of the director’s commitments.It also gives specific examples of what could constitute a director’s being what Hildyard referred to as “overcommitted”, in which case a vote against the (re-)election of a director could be warranted.The PLSA’s views on best practice surrounding the issuance of shares without pre-emption rights have also evolved, with the 2015-16 corporate governance and voting guidelines incorporating a new call for companies to give shareholders as much advance notice as possible if they intend to dis-apply pre-emption rights.“Companies should clearly signal their intention to undertake a non-pre-emptive issue at the earliest opportunity and establish a meaningful dialogue with their shareholders,” the guidelines state.“They should also keep shareholders informed of issues related to an application to disapply their pre-emption rights. Shareholders, in turn, should review the case made by a company on its merits and decide on each case individually using their usual investment criteria.”,WebsitesWe are not responsible for the content of external sitesLink to 2015-16 PLSA Corporate Governance and Voting Guidelines