Legal pot efforts have turned states from narcs to pushers

Tourists Laura Torgerson and Ryan Sheehan, visiting from Arizona, smell cannabis buds at the Green Pearl Organics dispensary on the first day of legal recreational marijuana sales in California, January 1, 2018 in Desert Hot Springs, California. Pot is now legal for recreational use in 11 states with three more states expected to join them in 2019 or 2020 . In many cases, states aren’t just agreeing to look the other way or even just reap the tax benefits of legal marijuana sales. In fact, an As


Tourists Laura Torgerson and Ryan Sheehan, visiting from Arizona, smell cannabis buds at the Green Pearl Organics dispensary on the first day of legal recreational marijuana sales in California, January 1, 2018 in Desert Hot Springs, California. Pot is now legal for recreational use in 11 states with three more states expected to join them in 2019 or 2020 . In many cases, states aren’t just agreeing to look the other way or even just reap the tax benefits of legal marijuana sales. In fact, an As
Legal pot efforts have turned states from narcs to pushers Cached Page below :
Company: cnbc, Activity: cnbc, Date: 2019-09-10  Authors: jake novak
Keywords: news, cnbc, companies, legal, drug, narcs, recreational, efforts, youre, marijuana, states, law, way, pot, pushers, turned


Legal pot efforts have turned states from narcs to pushers

Tourists Laura Torgerson and Ryan Sheehan, visiting from Arizona, smell cannabis buds at the Green Pearl Organics dispensary on the first day of legal recreational marijuana sales in California, January 1, 2018 in Desert Hot Springs, California.

Of course legalization, especially in the case of marijuana, has been in the spotlight for the past decade. Pot is now legal for recreational use in 11 states with three more states expected to join them in 2019 or 2020 . Meanwhile, it’s legal to use marijuana for medicinal purposes in 33 states. Canada has legalized recreational use nationwide.

None of this is anything new to the large number of Americans who have long supported new strategies to combat drug use. They have often emphasized treatment over interdiction and various levels of decriminalization or even legalization.

All of the above mentioned results of the drug wars have long given even more conservative Americans pause when it comes to drug laws. That’s especially true based on the fact that incarcerations and arrests for drug possession, have been rising at a much faster pace than arrests and incarcerations for drug trafficking and more violent drug crimes.

But for all of that cost, there is no solid evidence that demand for narcotics has dropped discernibly over the decades. New drugs from crack to meth to opioids have come in and out of vogue, proving the “whack-a-mole” aspect of how new demands keep forcing law enforcement to readjust for different threats.

Increased law enforcement, using violent methods, has produced a corresponding increase in violent criminals dominating much of the drug trade.

It forces more than one million drug arrests per year, leaving more than half a million people currently in prison for drug crimes.

If you’re thinking that the emphasis has gone from zero tolerance for marijuna all the way to, “if you can’t beat ’em, join ’em,” without taking any intermediate steps, you’re right on the money.

But legalization is hardly where it stops. In many cases, states aren’t just agreeing to look the other way or even just reap the tax benefits of legal marijuana sales. Instead, they’re actively encouraging the industry. Former House Speaker John Boehner has become a prominent spokesperson for the marijuana industry.

Some states, like Michigan, are even trying to help African Americans and other minorities get into the pot business as a form of some kind of “social justice” or payback for years of their communities being adversely targeted by drug law enforcement.

There’s just one question: what happened to just trying the decriminalization part? If you’re thinking that the emphasis has gone from zero tolerance for marijuna all the way to, “if you can’t beat ’em, join ’em,” without taking any intermediate steps, you’re right on the money.

Having states or eventually the federal government promoting the marijuana industry is problematic for a number of reasons. The biggest problem is the threat marijuana poses to teeenagers and their cognitive development. A new warning on marijuna use for adolescents and pregnant women was issued just this summer by the U.S. surgeon general.

And make no mistake, much of the legal pot industry is marketing products to teens in the same way vaping companies and the makers of the hard lemonade and spiked seltzer have been accused of doing for years.

In fact, an Aspen Institute report issued just after recreational pot became legal in Colorado noted the many products and strategies local businesses were using to lure younger users. In states where governments spend money to encourage certain forms of marijuana entrepreneurship, it’s hardly a stretch to say that parents are seeing their tax dollars being used to at least indirectly market marijiuana to their children.

We’re a long way from trying to simply right a wrong about over-incarceration for drug crimes now, aren’t we?

Speaking of the health risks, the same state of Michigan that’s pushing marijuana sales has also just imposed a ban on some of the most popular forms of vaping. It’s easy to get confused about government health priorities with that kind of mixed messaging.

Then there’s the question of just how effective legalization is at cutting down on the illegal drug trade. The Los Angeles Times reported last month that despite having the largest legal pot market in the country, California’s black market for marijuana is still growing.

Inevitably when anyone brings up these health concerns or any misgivings about the states promoting an intoxicating drug, that person is hit with a litany of arguments about how marijuana is no more harmful than alcohol and it’s not worth continuing to make it illegal.

But that’s not the argument here. Lifting blanket bans on pot and ending unfair and costly law enforcement efforts to arrest people for marijuana possession is something a majority of Americans seem to support and rightfully so. The issue here is whether it’s wise, safe, or even fiscally responsible for the government to get into the marijuana business.

The answer to those questions aren’t clear, but they should give more of us serious pause. One thing that is clear is that it’s disingenuous to use strong arguments for decriminalization as an excuse for aggressive state supported drug use.

It’s even more dubious for our government to go from blacklisting marijuana as a total evil to promoting it as an economic and social panacea.

Jake Novak is a political and economic analyst at Jake Novak News and former CNBC TV producer. You can follow him on Twitter @jakejakeny.


Company: cnbc, Activity: cnbc, Date: 2019-09-10  Authors: jake novak
Keywords: news, cnbc, companies, legal, drug, narcs, recreational, efforts, youre, marijuana, states, law, way, pot, pushers, turned


Home Forums

    • Forum
    • Topics
    • Posts
    • Last Post

CEOs from Amazon, IBM, Salesforce and more ask Congress to pass a consumer data privacy law

CEOs of 51 companies from the Business Roundtable, including Amazon, IBM and Salesforce, signed a letter to U.S. congressional leaders Tuesday urging them to create “a comprehensive consumer data privacy law.” We are committed to protecting consumer privacy and want consumers to have confidence that companies treat their personal information responsibly.” Cook advocated for “a comprehensive federal privacy law” in the U.S. during a speech at a privacy conference in Brussels last year. A federal


CEOs of 51 companies from the Business Roundtable, including Amazon, IBM and Salesforce, signed a letter to U.S. congressional leaders Tuesday urging them to create “a comprehensive consumer data privacy law.” We are committed to protecting consumer privacy and want consumers to have confidence that companies treat their personal information responsibly.” Cook advocated for “a comprehensive federal privacy law” in the U.S. during a speech at a privacy conference in Brussels last year. A federal
CEOs from Amazon, IBM, Salesforce and more ask Congress to pass a consumer data privacy law Cached Page below :
Company: cnbc, Activity: cnbc, Date: 2019-09-10  Authors: lauren feiner
Keywords: news, cnbc, companies, ibm, pass, companies, salesforce, consumer, privacy, ceos, consumers, services, congress, comprehensive, law, ask, data, letter, federal


CEOs from Amazon, IBM, Salesforce and more ask Congress to pass a consumer data privacy law

CEOs of 51 companies from the Business Roundtable, including Amazon, IBM and Salesforce, signed a letter to U.S. congressional leaders Tuesday urging them to create “a comprehensive consumer data privacy law.”

The executives, who span a range of industries, said a federal law is necessary to ensure “strong, consistent protections for American consumers” and allow “American companies to continue to lead a globally competitive market.” The letter was addressed to leaders of the House Energy and Commerce committees and the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation committees, in addition to House and Senate leaders.

“As Chief Executive Officers of leading companies across industries, our companies reach virtually every American consumer and rely on data and digital platforms every day to deliver and improve our products and services,” the CEOs wrote in the letter. “Consumer trust and confidence are essential to our businesses. We are committed to protecting consumer privacy and want consumers to have confidence that companies treat their personal information responsibly.”

The letter comes as lawmakers have been more closely scrutinizing Big Tech over its data practices. The Federal Trade Commission recently issued two major fines to Google and Facebook over their handling of user data. And on Monday, 50 attorneys general from U.S. states and territories announced an investigation into Google’s advertising business, which heavily relies on data. With this new message, tech leaders are offering their help in forming legislation that could regulate their own industry.

“We urgently need a comprehensive federal consumer data privacy law to strengthen consumer trust and establish a stable policy environment in which new services and technologies can flourish within a well-understood legal and regulatory framework,” the CEOs said in the letter. “Innovation thrives under clearly defined and consistently applied rules.”

The CEOs who signed the letter represented a subset of the Business Roundtable, a group of top executives from U.S. corporations. The group made headlines last month when nearly 200 members signed a statement disavowing shareholder value as the primary focus of a corporation, marking a major shift in business philosophy. Instead, the executives said other considerations, such as investing in employees and dealing ethically with suppliers, should become key business goals.

Notably missing from Tuesday’s letter to congressional leaders was Apple CEO Tim Cook, who has been a vocal supporter of data privacy measures. Cook advocated for “a comprehensive federal privacy law” in the U.S. during a speech at a privacy conference in Brussels last year.

Read the full letter below:

Dear Leader McConnell, Speaker Pelosi, Leader Schumer, Leader McCarthy, Chairman Wicker, Chairman Pallone, Ranking Member Cantwell and Ranking Member Walden: We write to urge you to pass, as soon as possible, a comprehensive consumer data privacy law that strengthens protections for consumers and establishes a national privacy framework to enable continued innovation and growth in the digital economy. There is now widespread agreement among companies across all sectors of the economy, policymakers and consumer groups about the need for a comprehensive federal consumer data privacy law that provides strong, consistent protections for American consumers. A federal consumer privacy law should also ensure that American companies continue to lead a globally competitive market. As Chief Executive Officers of leading companies across industries, our companies reach virtually every American consumer and rely on data and digital platforms every day to deliver and improve our products and services. Consumer trust and confidence are essential to our businesses. We are committed to protecting consumer privacy and want consumers to have confidence that companies treat their personal information responsibly. We are also united in our belief that consumers should have meaningful rights over their personal information and that companies that access this information should be held consistently accountable under a comprehensive federal consumer data privacy law. Consumers have grown accustomed to a breadth of resources and services made available over the internet across state borders and even globally. Consumers should not and cannot be expected to understand rules that may change depending upon the state in which they reside, the state in which they are accessing the internet, and the state in which the company’s operation is providing those resources or services. Now is the time for Congress to act and ensure that consumers are not faced with confusion about their rights and protections based on a patchwork of inconsistent state laws. Further, as the regulatory landscape becomes increasingly fragmented and more complex, U.S. innovation and global competitiveness in the digital economy are threatened. We urgently need a comprehensive federal consumer data privacy law to strengthen consumer trust and establish a stable policy environment in which new services and technologies can flourish within a well-understood legal and regulatory framework. Innovation thrives under clearly defined and consistently applied rules. Business Roundtable has released a Framework for Consumer Privacy Legislation (attached to this letter), which provides a detailed roadmap of issues that a federal consumer privacy law should address. As the Framework describes, a comprehensive federal consumer data privacy law should create robust protections for consumers by requiring businesses to take responsibility for the collection, use and sharing of personal information. The United States has been a global leader in technology and data-driven innovation and now has the opportunity to lead on consumer data privacy for the benefit of all consumers, companies and commerce. We stand ready to work with you.

Subscribe to CNBC on YouTube.

Watch: FTC consumer protection director on YouTube’s $170M fine for violating kids’ privacy


Company: cnbc, Activity: cnbc, Date: 2019-09-10  Authors: lauren feiner
Keywords: news, cnbc, companies, ibm, pass, companies, salesforce, consumer, privacy, ceos, consumers, services, congress, comprehensive, law, ask, data, letter, federal


Home Forums

    • Forum
    • Topics
    • Posts
    • Last Post

UK business department says a quarter of its staff is working on Brexit

Around a quarter of staff at Britain’s business department are working on the country’s exit from the European Union, the department said in response to a Freedom of Information request. Under the Freedom of Information law, Reuters asked several key government departments, including the finance ministry, interior ministry and revenue and customs ministry, how many of their staff were working on preparations for a no-deal exit. The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy however


Around a quarter of staff at Britain’s business department are working on the country’s exit from the European Union, the department said in response to a Freedom of Information request. Under the Freedom of Information law, Reuters asked several key government departments, including the finance ministry, interior ministry and revenue and customs ministry, how many of their staff were working on preparations for a no-deal exit. The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy however
UK business department says a quarter of its staff is working on Brexit Cached Page below :
Company: cnbc, Activity: cnbc, Date: 2019-09-10
Keywords: news, cnbc, companies, brexit, deal, quarter, preparations, working, johnson, staff, information, business, law, ministry, department


UK business department says a quarter of its staff is working on Brexit

Demonstrators take part in a protest aimed at showing London’s solidarity with the European Union following the recent EU referendum, inTrafalgar Square, central London, Britain June 28, 2016.

Around a quarter of staff at Britain’s business department are working on the country’s exit from the European Union, the department said in response to a Freedom of Information request.

More than three years after Britons voted for Brexit in a 2016 referendum, huge amounts of government time and money are being devoted to the country’s preparations to leave the bloc, its most significant policy shift in decades.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson has vowed to deliver Britain’s departure on Oct. 31, with or without a deal, and his government has ramped up preparations for a no-deal departure.

If and when Britain’s exit happens remains uncertain however, after parliament passed a law which would force Johnson to seek a delay if there is no exit deal in place.

Under the Freedom of Information law, Reuters asked several key government departments, including the finance ministry, interior ministry and revenue and customs ministry, how many of their staff were working on preparations for a no-deal exit.

Most responded either to say the cost of providing such information would be greater than the limit provided for under the law, or that they did not have a breakdown between staff working on different Brexit outcomes.

The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy however said it had around 1,000 full-time equivalent staff working on a range of Brexit-related matters, roughly a quarter of its 4,065 full-time equivalent staff.

It said these staff were already in place before Johnson took office.

The finance ministry said it is and has been increasing the number of its staff who are working on preparations for a no deal, but did not give a number.

The Department for Transport said around 290 of its 2,731 full time equivalent staff were working on Brexit.

With Brexit dominating the political agenda, some have warned domestic priorities have fallen by the wayside.

The Institute for Government think-tank said earlier this year that the reprioritisation of civil servants onto Brexit work had impacted the government’s ability to deliver on flagship policies such as reforming the health service and tackling domestic abuse.

“The situation is not going to improve any time soon: if a Brexit deal is agreed, the civil service will have to continue working at full tilt to negotiate and implement the detail of the future UK-EU relationship,” it said.

“If there is no deal, the foreseeable future will be a case of all hands on deck to minimise disruption and mitigate any impacts to the UK’s security and economy.”


Company: cnbc, Activity: cnbc, Date: 2019-09-10
Keywords: news, cnbc, companies, brexit, deal, quarter, preparations, working, johnson, staff, information, business, law, ministry, department


Home Forums

    • Forum
    • Topics
    • Posts
    • Last Post

UK Parliament is now suspended as Brexit crisis boils over: Here’s what could happen next

With the U.K Parliament now shuttered for five weeks and the recent political turmoil throwing up more questions than answers, analysts have been busy contemplating what could happen next in Britain as it approaches its Brexit deadline. It’s fair to say the U.K.’s political establishment has been in tumult since the divisive 2016 referendum on EU membership. It has culminated in Parliament’s three-time rejection of the existing Brexit deal on offer, but also the dismissal of a no-deal Brexit. A


With the U.K Parliament now shuttered for five weeks and the recent political turmoil throwing up more questions than answers, analysts have been busy contemplating what could happen next in Britain as it approaches its Brexit deadline. It’s fair to say the U.K.’s political establishment has been in tumult since the divisive 2016 referendum on EU membership. It has culminated in Parliament’s three-time rejection of the existing Brexit deal on offer, but also the dismissal of a no-deal Brexit. A
UK Parliament is now suspended as Brexit crisis boils over: Here’s what could happen next Cached Page below :
Company: cnbc, Activity: cnbc, Date: 2019-09-10  Authors: holly ellyatt
Keywords: news, cnbc, companies, crisis, parliament, brexit, referendum, boils, law, nodeal, johnsons, heres, suspended, deal, election, happen


UK Parliament is now suspended as Brexit crisis boils over: Here's what could happen next

With the U.K Parliament now shuttered for five weeks and the recent political turmoil throwing up more questions than answers, analysts have been busy contemplating what could happen next in Britain as it approaches its Brexit deadline. The shutdown of Parliament — known as prorogation — will see lawmakers reconvene on October 14. The suspension marks the end of one parliamentary session before the start of the next, and it’s usual for it to take place at this time of year. However, the current shutdown, which began in the early hours of Tuesday, is more controversial than most due to its extended length and because it comes at a period of high anxiety in U.K. politics over the direction of Brexit. It’s fair to say the U.K.’s political establishment has been in tumult since the divisive 2016 referendum on EU membership. It has culminated in Parliament’s three-time rejection of the existing Brexit deal on offer, but also the dismissal of a no-deal Brexit. This summer, Parliament saw the arrival of a new prime minister in July determined for the U.K. to leave the EU on October 31 “come what may.”

What just happened?

That divide between Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s government and Parliament was thrown into sharp relief in a dramatic week full of intrigue, votes and resignations. In the last seven days, lawmakers seized control of parliamentary business, voted to block a no-deal Brexit and to force the prime minister to ask for a further delay to the departure (legislation that hastily became law on Monday) as well as twice rejecting Boris Johnson’s bid to bring about a snap election that could strengthen his hand.

Johnson was dealt further blows with key resignations from his government, including that of his own brother who said he was torn between “family loyalty and national interest.” Now Parliament is suspended for five weeks and will reconvene just days before an EU Council summit on October 17 which is just over two weeks from the currently proposed Brexit departure date. Here’s a brief guide to what could (and what is meant to) happen next:

Brexit on October 31?

As it stands, the U.K. is still due to leave the EU on October 31 whether it has a deal or not. A majority of Parliament voting to block a no-deal Brexit does not mean that it won’t still happen. For starters, the EU would have to agree to granting another delay to the U.K.; and there are already grumblings from the continent that the U.K. has not presented valid reasons for requesting more time. Johnson could also ignore the law requiring him to ask for more time.

Ignoring a no-deal Brexit

Despite Parliament voting to block a no-deal Brexit and passing a law, Johnson has repeatedly said he would still try to take the U.K. out the EU on October 31. In fact, he has said he would rather “die in a ditch” than ask the EU for more time and some believe he could launch a legal challenge to the no-deal Brexit legislation, also known as the “Benn Law.” “Johnson is expected to challenge the Benn Law in the Supreme Court,” analysts Joseph Lupton and Olya Borichevska at J.P. Morgan said in a note Monday. “He also may send a letter to the EU to encourage it not to grant an extension. Those strategies are unlikely to succeed on their own merits, but could further Johnson’s pre-election signalling of a hard-line, no compromise Brexit on October 31.”

More talks?

Johnson has insisted he wants a deal and would use the time that Parliament is suspended to continue last-ditch talks with Brussels to get over the major stumbling point of the Irish “backstop.” This is seen as an insurance policy designed to prevent a hard border on the island of Ireland if the U.K. and EU can’t agree a trade deal in a post-Brexit transition period (only envisaged if there is a deal). As it stands, the backstop would keep Northern Ireland and the rest of the U.K. in a customs union with the EU, making it very unpopular with Brexiteers in Parliament.

The BBC reported Monday that the government could be considering a compromise over the Irish “backstop” in that it could be applicable to Northern Ireland only, potentially placating Brexiteers — albeit at the expense of lawmakers bent on keeping the U.K. indivisible in terms of law.

Election before 2020?

Although opposition parties defeated Johnson’s bids to hold an early election (his Conservative Party still leads opinion polls) most did so because they wanted to see the threat of a no-deal Brexit dissipate. The legislation to block a no-deal Brexit was not enough for many lawmakers, however, with several opposition parties wanting to see the departure date delayed before agreeing to a snap election (Johnson needs two-thirds of Parliament to approve a snap vote). With Parliament also suspended now until October 14 and the no-deal Brexit legislation in place, most Brexit watchers now see a snap election as likely to happen in November, after a possible delay to the departure date. How the pro-Brexit Conservatives and Brexit Party will fare, compared to opposition parties largely opposing Brexit or at least calling for another referendum on the issue, is now a matter of debate. Kallum Pickering, senior economist at Berenberg Bank, said in a note Tuesday that “the prospect of an election and/or second referendum looms large,” forecasting an election in November. “Despite the turmoil in Westminster, the high chance that the U.K. will ask the EU for a further Brexit delay (given a probability of 85% up from 40%) decisively reduces the risk of a no deal on 31 October (2.5% from 30%). However, the prospect of an election and/or second referendum looms large — this keeps the hard Brexit risk alive.”

Deal by October 31?

With speculation that Johnson’s government could be considering the proposal of a compromise over the “backstop” policy, some experts believe that a deal could still possibly be passed before October 19. Goldman Sachs’ base case scenario says “there is no pre-Brexit general election and a Brexit deal is struck and ratified by the end of October,” according to its European Economist Adrian Paul. “In substance, we think that deal is unlikely to look very different from the Brexit deal already negotiated between the EU and the U.K. — a deal that was repeatedly rejected under PM May’s premiership.” Still, Goldman Sachs notes that a delayed departure could lead to a November election in which either the one-issue Brexit Party could do well leaving “the path open to a ‘no deal’ Brexit early next year.”

Second referendum?


Company: cnbc, Activity: cnbc, Date: 2019-09-10  Authors: holly ellyatt
Keywords: news, cnbc, companies, crisis, parliament, brexit, referendum, boils, law, nodeal, johnsons, heres, suspended, deal, election, happen


Home Forums

    • Forum
    • Topics
    • Posts
    • Last Post

Apple says that claims it broke Chinese labor laws in iPhone factory are mostly ‘false’

Apple on Monday denied most of what is in a report which alleges that the iPhone-maker and its manufacturing partner Foxconn violated Chinese labor law. Chinese labor law states that temporary hires cannot exceed 10% of the total employed workers. “We looked into the claims by China Labor Watch and most of the allegations are false,” Apple said in a statement. Student employees also work overtime during peak production season even though internship laws prohibit that. Apple said it found during


Apple on Monday denied most of what is in a report which alleges that the iPhone-maker and its manufacturing partner Foxconn violated Chinese labor law. Chinese labor law states that temporary hires cannot exceed 10% of the total employed workers. “We looked into the claims by China Labor Watch and most of the allegations are false,” Apple said in a statement. Student employees also work overtime during peak production season even though internship laws prohibit that. Apple said it found during
Apple says that claims it broke Chinese labor laws in iPhone factory are mostly ‘false’ Cached Page below :
Company: cnbc, Activity: cnbc, Date: 2019-09-09  Authors: saheli roy choudhury
Keywords: news, cnbc, companies, working, overtime, factory, chinese, iphone, report, false, apple, broke, labor, claims, peak, work, temporary, workers, law, laws


Apple says that claims it broke Chinese labor laws in iPhone factory are mostly 'false'

Apple on Monday denied most of what is in a report which alleges that the iPhone-maker and its manufacturing partner Foxconn violated Chinese labor law.

China Labor Watch (CLW), a New York City-based watchdog, published a report on Sunday that found more than half of the workforce employed in August at the largest iPhone factory in Zhengzhou, China, were temporary hires — or “dispatch” workers, which included student interns.

Chinese labor law states that temporary hires cannot exceed 10% of the total employed workers. In September, many of those student workers returned to school, which led to a decrease in the number of temporary workers, but it was still greater than what Chinese law stipulates, the advocacy group said.

“We looked into the claims by China Labor Watch and most of the allegations are false,” Apple said in a statement. “We have confirmed all workers are being compensated appropriately, including any overtime wages and bonuses, all overtime work was voluntary and there was no evidence of forced labor.”

Apple did not disclose which of the allegations are true.

Foxconn did not immediately respond to CNBC’s emailed request for comment.

Workers earn a base wage of 2,100 yuan ($295), which is “insufficient to sustain the livelihood for a family living in Zhengzhou city,” according to the CLW report.

The report also claims other rights violations at the factory including:

Workers at the factory put in “at least 100 overtime hours a month” during peak production seasons, even though Chinese labor law states they must not work more than 36 overtime hours a month. Resignations are not approved for regular workers during peak season.

Some dispatch workers failed to receive bonuses promised to them from the dispatch company.

Student employees also work overtime during peak production season even though internship laws prohibit that.

The factory does not provide workers with adequate personal protective equipment and workers do not receive any occupational health and safety training.

The factory does not report work injuries.

Apple said it found during its investigation that the percentage of temporary workers exceeded its standards. “We are working closely with Foxconn to resolve this,” the company said.

Apple’s supply chain has faced numerous criticisms over the years due to poor working conditions. For its part, the iPhone maker has pushed suppliers to improve labor practices if they want to continue working with the tech giant.


Company: cnbc, Activity: cnbc, Date: 2019-09-09  Authors: saheli roy choudhury
Keywords: news, cnbc, companies, working, overtime, factory, chinese, iphone, report, false, apple, broke, labor, claims, peak, work, temporary, workers, law, laws


Home Forums

    • Forum
    • Topics
    • Posts
    • Last Post

American Airlines mechanic charged with sabotaging a plane

An American Airlines mechanic has been arrested and charged with sabotaging an aircraft’s navigation system before a flight in July, forcing crew to abort takeoff from Miami, authorities said. An affidavit in federal court said the mechanic told law enforcement he was upset about stalled contract negotiations with the company and that the “dispute had affected him financially.” The plane was taken out of service for maintenance, American Airlines said. American returned the plane that aborted ta


An American Airlines mechanic has been arrested and charged with sabotaging an aircraft’s navigation system before a flight in July, forcing crew to abort takeoff from Miami, authorities said. An affidavit in federal court said the mechanic told law enforcement he was upset about stalled contract negotiations with the company and that the “dispute had affected him financially.” The plane was taken out of service for maintenance, American Airlines said. American returned the plane that aborted ta
American Airlines mechanic charged with sabotaging a plane Cached Page below :
Company: cnbc, Activity: cnbc, Date: 2019-09-05  Authors: leslie josephs
Keywords: news, cnbc, companies, unions, law, aircraft, according, charged, mechanics, enforcement, mechanic, plane, airlines, american, service, sabotaging, takeoff


American Airlines mechanic charged with sabotaging a plane

An American Airlines mechanic has been arrested and charged with sabotaging an aircraft’s navigation system before a flight in July, forcing crew to abort takeoff from Miami, authorities said.

An affidavit in federal court said the mechanic told law enforcement he was upset about stalled contract negotiations with the company and that the “dispute had affected him financially.”

Flight 2834 was about to depart for Nassau, Bahamas on July 17 with 150 people on board, when an error message appeared after the engines were started up. The crew aborted takeoff and returned to the gate. The plane was taken out of service for maintenance, American Airlines said. Passengers deplaned and American provided a different aircraft for the flight.

The mechanic told law enforcement officials he inserted a piece of foam into the inlet of the plane’s air data module, which measures the plane’s pitch, speed and other information, according to the affidavit.

“At American we have an unwavering commitment to the safety and security of our customers and team members and we are taking this matter very seriously,” American Airlines spokeswoman Leslie Scott said.

American returned the plane that aborted takeoff back to service after an inspection and “immediately notified federal law enforcement who took over the investigation with our full cooperation,” Scott said.

The mechanic, Abdul-Majeed Marouf Ahmed Alani, has been suspended, the airline said. He is set to appear in court on Friday, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Miami.

Alani said “his intention was not to cause harm to the aircraft or its passengers” but to “cause a delay or have the flight cancelled in anticipation of obtaining overtime work,” according to the affidavit.

A fellow mechanic found a loose pitot tube, which connects to the aircraft data module, according to the affidavit. The tube turned out to have been blocked by the foam, investigators said.

American and its mechanics have been locked in a bitter labor dispute over contract talks this year. The airline has accused the unions that represent its some 12,000 mechanics of purposefully disrupting operations by forcing aircraft out of service in order to gain leverage in negotiations. American has said the union’s actions have forced it to cancel hundreds of flights and delay others, adding to operational challenges stemming from the worldwide grounding of the Boeing 737 Max. The unions have denied the allegations.

“From a union standpoint we wouldn’t condone even the thought of doing this,” said Gary Peterson, a vice president at the Transport Workers Union, which represents American’s mechanics.


Company: cnbc, Activity: cnbc, Date: 2019-09-05  Authors: leslie josephs
Keywords: news, cnbc, companies, unions, law, aircraft, according, charged, mechanics, enforcement, mechanic, plane, airlines, american, service, sabotaging, takeoff


Home Forums

    • Forum
    • Topics
    • Posts
    • Last Post

Why Republicans (and even a couple of Democrats) want to throw out tech’s favorite law

In June, Hawley introduced a bill tying Section 230 protections to a new requirement that big tech companies prove political neutrality every two years. “With Section 230, tech companies get a sweetheart deal that no other industry enjoys: complete exemption from traditional publisher liability in exchange for providing a forum free of political censorship,” Hawley said in a statement about the legislation. But that preamble doesn’t have the force of law, and the actual text of section 230 doesn


In June, Hawley introduced a bill tying Section 230 protections to a new requirement that big tech companies prove political neutrality every two years. “With Section 230, tech companies get a sweetheart deal that no other industry enjoys: complete exemption from traditional publisher liability in exchange for providing a forum free of political censorship,” Hawley said in a statement about the legislation. But that preamble doesn’t have the force of law, and the actual text of section 230 doesn
Why Republicans (and even a couple of Democrats) want to throw out tech’s favorite law Cached Page below :
Company: cnbc, Activity: cnbc, Date: 2019-09-03  Authors: david ingram, jane c timm
Keywords: news, cnbc, companies, companies, tech, 230, neutrality, techs, platforms, online, favorite, content, law, couple, facebook, democrats, republicans, internet, throw


Why Republicans (and even a couple of Democrats) want to throw out tech's favorite law

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg arrives to testify before a joint hearing of the US Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee and Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill, April 10, 2018 in Washington, DC. Jim Watson | AFP | Getty Images

The neutrality myth

Growing partisan backlash over how tech companies such as Twitter, Facebook and others moderate their platforms has led some politicians to take aim at Section 230. In June, Hawley introduced a bill tying Section 230 protections to a new requirement that big tech companies prove political neutrality every two years. “With Section 230, tech companies get a sweetheart deal that no other industry enjoys: complete exemption from traditional publisher liability in exchange for providing a forum free of political censorship,” Hawley said in a statement about the legislation. “Unfortunately, and unsurprisingly, big tech has failed to hold up its end of the bargain. Hawley’s been crafting himself as the GOP’s chief critic of tech giants, but he’s hardly the first to target Section 230. “The predicate for Section 230 immunity under the C.D.A. is that you’re a neutral public forum,” claimed Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, last year, referring to 1996 act. There is a line in a nonbinding preamble to Section 230 — what are known as the congressional “findings” — that describes the internet as a “forum for a true diversity of political discourse.” But that preamble doesn’t have the force of law, and the actual text of section 230 doesn’t require neutrality. “What matters in the statute is not whether you’re politically neutral. It’s whether you’re a content creator,” explained former Rep. Chris Cox, the California Republican who helped write the 1996 law. He said neutrality wasn’t a consideration. Cox told NBC News he wanted to encourage content moderation, while acknowledging that it would be impossible for tech companies to review everything users put online the way traditional publishers — who are subject to defamation laws, for example — do.

“Defamation laws have a purpose. We weren’t trying to get rid of them. We were just trying to make sure we didn’t get rid of the internet at the same time,” he said. Cox’s co-author in the House, now Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., has said the same. “I hear constantly about how the law is about neutrality. Nowhere, nowhere, nowhere does the law say anything about that,” he told Wired this year.

Bipartisan complaints

Republicans aren’t the only lawmakers targeting Section 230. Democrats have also pushed for companies to increase oversight of content published on their platforms. Presidential contender Beto O’Rourke included plans for rewriting Section 230 in a gun violence prevention plan released in August. In a proposal posted to his website, he called for revoking legal immunity for large internet platforms that don’t ban hateful activities, and for holding all internet companies liable for speech that incites violence if they knowingly promote it. “We must connect the dots between internet communities providing a platform for online radicalization and white supremacy,” O’Rourke’s proposal said. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif, has also voiced support for changes. “I do think that for the privilege of 230, there has to be a bigger sense of responsibility on it. And it is not out of the question that that could be removed,” she said in April. In May, a doctored video of Pelosi that made her appear to be slurring her words circulated online. YouTube removed the video from its service, while Facebook and Twitter chose not to.

A world without Section 230?

“If 230 were eliminated, you’d end up with two extremes,” Beckerman, the lobbyist, said. “You’d end up with the 8chan-type websites or worse, where literally anything goes and the platform has no intent or interest to moderate the content. All the nudity. All the hate. All the extremism, ” he continued. “Or you would end up with the opposite of the extreme where every single piece of content that goes up on a website has to be pre-screened before it goes up.” Jeff Kosseff, an assistant professor of cybersecurity law at the U.S. Naval Academy and author of the book “The Twenty-Six Words That Created the Internet,” a history of Section 230, suggested a third possibility: Websites could disallow user-generated content entirely, becoming more like traditional print publishers with highly curated, professional content and upending the business models for companies like Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. “You have a lot of people with very different criticisms of the current system who say, ‘Let’s get rid of Section 230,’ but they’re not answering the next question of, ‘What would the internet look like without Section 230?'” Kosseff said. Still, Kosseff said, the size and power of today’s internet companies like Google and Facebook was hard to fathom in the mid-1990s when Section 230 was written and around 40 million people worldwide were online. “Now you have single social media platforms that have billions of users, and they have tremendous power,” he said. The result is they can’t please everyone, and they generally don’t try to. “People are always going to disagree with moderation decisions when there’s that much power,” he said. Each of the big tech companies has its own rulebook for user posts, often written by lawyers and approved by company management. Those polices have evolved in recent years, with many adding provisions that ban hate speech and certain types of abuse.


Company: cnbc, Activity: cnbc, Date: 2019-09-03  Authors: david ingram, jane c timm
Keywords: news, cnbc, companies, companies, tech, 230, neutrality, techs, platforms, online, favorite, content, law, couple, facebook, democrats, republicans, internet, throw


Home Forums

    • Forum
    • Topics
    • Posts
    • Last Post

Trump reportedly promised pardons to aides who break the law to build border wall by 2020 election

Trump’s promise to build a “big, beautiful wall” along America’s southern border was a defining feature of his 2016 presidential campaign against Democrat Hillary Clinton. In a July tweet, Trump said it was “Fake News” to suggest no “new” wall had been built. CNN reported months earlier that Trump told Customs and Border Protection chief Kevin McAleenan that he would be pardoned if he were found to have broken immigration laws. An anonymous White House official told the newspaper that the presid


Trump’s promise to build a “big, beautiful wall” along America’s southern border was a defining feature of his 2016 presidential campaign against Democrat Hillary Clinton. In a July tweet, Trump said it was “Fake News” to suggest no “new” wall had been built. CNN reported months earlier that Trump told Customs and Border Protection chief Kevin McAleenan that he would be pardoned if he were found to have broken immigration laws. An anonymous White House official told the newspaper that the presid
Trump reportedly promised pardons to aides who break the law to build border wall by 2020 election Cached Page below :
Company: cnbc, Activity: cnbc, Date: 2019-08-28  Authors: kevin breuninger
Keywords: news, cnbc, companies, told, build, border, according, election, wall, law, break, project, reportedly, pardons, officials, immigration, built, promised, trump, president


Trump reportedly promised pardons to aides who break the law to build border wall by 2020 election

New bollard-style U.S.-Mexico border fencing is seen next to vehicle barriers in Santa Teresa, New Mexico, March 5, 2019.

President Donald Trump has told his officials to take new measures in a redoubled effort to build his long-promised border wall before the 2020 election — and has assured that he will issue pardons if his aides have to break laws to get the project done, according to The Washington Post.

Current and former officials involved in the project told the newspaper that Trump has directed his officials to seize private land along the U.S.-Mexico border, ignore environmental regulations and quickly approve billions of dollars’ worth of construction contracts.

Trump’s promise to build a “big, beautiful wall” along America’s southern border was a defining feature of his 2016 presidential campaign against Democrat Hillary Clinton. He repeatedly claimed that Mexico would pay for the entire infrastructure project, and maintained that stance as president — even as he allowed the government to shut down in December after Democrats pushed back on a $5.7 billion proposal to fund it.

Those funds would have only built about 234 miles of wall, according to a Jan. 6 letter from the Office of Management and Budget — far less than Trump has said he wants to build.

At that time, Trump claimed the wall would be finished in two years. But experts have said that the project could take more than a decade to complete, and could cost tens of billions of dollars.

The president has asserted as recently as this month that the wall “is under major construction.” But of the nearly 2,000-mile border, only about 60 miles of barrier have been built, and all as a “replacement” for aging structures that had already been built, the Post reported.

In a July tweet, Trump said it was “Fake News” to suggest no “new” wall had been built.

“When an old Wall at the Southern Border, that is crumbling and falling over, built in an important section to keep out problems, is replaced with a brand new 30 foot high steel and concrete Wall, the Media says no new Wall has been built,” he complained. “Building lots of Wall!”

Trump has held regular meetings to try to speed up the project, and has waved off worries about possible legal violations, suggesting he would pardon officials who pushed forward regardless, according to the Post.

“Don’t worry, I’ll pardon you,” he reportedly said in response to legal concerns about the use of eminent domain and contracting procedures.

CNN reported months earlier that Trump told Customs and Border Protection chief Kevin McAleenan that he would be pardoned if he were found to have broken immigration laws. McAleenan is scheduled to travel to El Salvador on Wednesday to discuss immigration issues, according to a Homeland Security Department press release.

The White House did not immediately respond to CNBC’s request for comment on the Post’s report. But deputy White House press secretary Hogan Gidley, in a statement to the newspaper, said Trump “promised to secure our border with sane, rational immigration policies to make American communities safer, and that’s happening everywhere the wall is being built.”

The reported criticisms, Gidley said, are “just more fabrications by people who hate the fact the status quo, that has crippled this country for decades, is finally changing as President Trump is moving quicker than anyone in history to build the wall, secure the border and enact the very immigration policies the American people voted for.”

An anonymous White House official told the newspaper that the president is just joking when he makes such statements about pardons.

Defense Secretary Mark Esper reportedly approved the construction of 20 more miles of border wall Tuesday.

Read the full report from The Washington Post.


Company: cnbc, Activity: cnbc, Date: 2019-08-28  Authors: kevin breuninger
Keywords: news, cnbc, companies, told, build, border, according, election, wall, law, break, project, reportedly, pardons, officials, immigration, built, promised, trump, president


Home Forums

    • Forum
    • Topics
    • Posts
    • Last Post

Trump can use these powers to pressure US companies to leave China

President Donald Trump speaks to the media as he departs the White House in Washington, DC, on August 21, 2019. Jim Watson | AFP | Getty ImagesHours after China announced retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods on Friday, President Donald Trump ordered U.S. companies to “start looking for an alternative to China, including bringing your companies HOME and making your products in the USA.” The stakes are high: U.S. companies invested a total of $256 billion in China between 1990 and 2017, compared with


President Donald Trump speaks to the media as he departs the White House in Washington, DC, on August 21, 2019. Jim Watson | AFP | Getty ImagesHours after China announced retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods on Friday, President Donald Trump ordered U.S. companies to “start looking for an alternative to China, including bringing your companies HOME and making your products in the USA.” The stakes are high: U.S. companies invested a total of $256 billion in China between 1990 and 2017, compared with
Trump can use these powers to pressure US companies to leave China Cached Page below :
Company: cnbc, Activity: cnbc, Date: 2019-08-24
Keywords: news, cnbc, companies, emergency, china, chinese, leave, international, pressure, law, legal, companies, trump, tariffs, president, powers


Trump can use these powers to pressure US companies to leave China

President Donald Trump speaks to the media as he departs the White House in Washington, DC, on August 21, 2019. Jim Watson | AFP | Getty Images

Hours after China announced retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods on Friday, President Donald Trump ordered U.S. companies to “start looking for an alternative to China, including bringing your companies HOME and making your products in the USA.” The stakes are high: U.S. companies invested a total of $256 billion in China between 1990 and 2017, compared with $140 billion Chinese companies have invested in the United States, according to estimates by the Rhodium Group research institute. Some U.S. companies had been shifting operations out of China even before the tit-for-tat tariff trade war began more than a year ago. But winding down operations and shifting production out of China completely would take time. Further, many U.S. companies such as those in the aerospace, services and retail sectors would be sure to resist pressure to leave a market that is not only huge but growing. Unlike China, the United States does not have a centrally planned economy. So what legal action can the president take to compel American companies to do his bidding? Trump does have some powerful tools that would not require approval from U.S. Congress:

More tariffs

Trump could do more of what he’s already doing, that is hiking tariffs to squeeze company profits enough for them to make it no longer worth their while to operate out of China. Trump on Friday boosted by 5 percentage points the 25% tariffs already in place on nearly $250 billion of Chinese imports, including raw materials, machinery, and finished goods, with the new higher 30% rate to take effect on Oct. 1. He said planned 10% tariffs on about $300 billion worth of additional Chinese-made consumer goods would be raised to 15%, with those measures set to take effect on Sept. 1 and Dec. 15. In addition to making it more expensive to buy components from Chinese suppliers, tariff hikes punish U.S. firms that manufacture goods through joint ventures in China.

“National Emergency”

Trump could treat China more like Iran and order sanctions, which would involve declaring a national emergency under a 1977 law called the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA. Once an emergency is declared, the law gives Trump broad authority to block the activities of individual companies or even entire economic sectors, former federal officials and legal experts said. For example, by stating that Chinese theft of U.S. companies’ intellectual property constitutes a national emergency, Trump could order U.S. companies to avoid certain transactions, such as buying Chinese technology products, said Tim Meyer, director of the International Legal Studies Program at Vanderbilt Law School in Nashville. Trump used a similar strategy earlier this year when he said illegal immigration was an emergency and threatened to put tariffs on all Mexican imports. Past presidents have invoked IEEPA to freeze the assets of foreign governments, such as when former President Jimmy Carter in 1979 blocked assets owned by the Iranian government from passing through the U.S. financial system. “The IEEPA framework is broad enough to do something blunt,” said Meyer. Using it could risk unintended harm to the U.S. economy, said Peter Harrell, a former senior State Department official responsible for sanctions, now at the Center for a New American Security. U.S. officials would need to weigh the impact of China’s likely retaliation and how U.S. companies would be affected. Invoking IEEPA could also trigger legal challenges in U.S. courts, said Mark Wu, a professor of international trade at Harvard Law School.

Federal procurement curbs

Another option that would not require congressional action would be to ban U.S. companies from competing for federal contracts if they also have operations in China, said Bill Reinsch, a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies think tank. Such a measure might be targeted specifically at certain sectors since a blanket order would hit companies such as Boeing (BA.N), which is both a key weapons maker for the Pentagon and the top U.S. exporter. Boeing opened its first completion plant for 737 airliners in China in December, a strategic investment aimed at building a sales lead over its European arch-rival Airbus (AIR.PA). Boeing and Airbus have been expanding their footprint in China as they vie for orders in the country’s fast-growing aviation market, which is expected to overtake the United States as the world’s largest in the next decade.

1917 Trading with the Enemy Act


Company: cnbc, Activity: cnbc, Date: 2019-08-24
Keywords: news, cnbc, companies, emergency, china, chinese, leave, international, pressure, law, legal, companies, trump, tariffs, president, powers


Home Forums

    • Forum
    • Topics
    • Posts
    • Last Post

At age 22, she gave up studying law to sell $63,000 swimsuits and $2,300 bras

Claudia Lambeth inside her Luna Mae boutique Luna MaeLuna Mae debuted in the U.S. in 2015, and Lambeth now calls some of the wealthiest women on the planet devoted clients. Luna Mae lingerie Luna Mae”One of my largest commissions was listing out a quote for a 50-piece bridal collection,” said Lambeth. Claudia Lambeth looking at Luna Mae lingerie Luna MaeLambeth’s journey to become a successful CEO and entrepreneur is almost as interesting as the beautiful garments she builds from scratch. “It wa


Claudia Lambeth inside her Luna Mae boutique Luna MaeLuna Mae debuted in the U.S. in 2015, and Lambeth now calls some of the wealthiest women on the planet devoted clients. Luna Mae lingerie Luna Mae”One of my largest commissions was listing out a quote for a 50-piece bridal collection,” said Lambeth. Claudia Lambeth looking at Luna Mae lingerie Luna MaeLambeth’s journey to become a successful CEO and entrepreneur is almost as interesting as the beautiful garments she builds from scratch. “It wa
At age 22, she gave up studying law to sell $63,000 swimsuits and $2,300 bras Cached Page below :
Company: cnbc, Activity: cnbc, Date: 2019-08-18  Authors: jessi joseph
Keywords: news, cnbc, companies, lambeths, law, studying, swimsuits, sell, cost, 63000, bras, shes, lingerie, gave, 2300, luna, mae, lambeth, 22, age, fashion


At age 22, she gave up studying law to sell $63,000 swimsuits and $2,300 bras

At age 22, with no formal fashion education Claudia Lambeth took a giant leap and started a one-of-a-kind luxury lingerie line while she was in law school. With just a little seed money she inherited from her grandfather, Lambeth was able to purchase fabrics and other materials she needed to build her first bra and develop lingerie patterns that helped start her company, Luna Mae London, in October 2012.

Claudia Lambeth inside her Luna Mae boutique Luna Mae

Luna Mae debuted in the U.S. in 2015, and Lambeth now calls some of the wealthiest women on the planet devoted clients. Sales have tripled for the past two years in a row, she said. Lambeth’s vision was to create an ultra-high-end bespoke line of sexy undergarments. She wanted to bring Savile Row to women’s lingerie using luxe fabrics and high-craft tailoring with prices that rival and sometimes surpass the cost of custom-tailored suits for men.

Luna Mae lingerie Luna Mae

“My quest was just building the most beautiful, luxurious, comfortable, best-fitting bra I could and I knew that because I didn’t come from a fashion background, I had to really understand and sink my teeth into understanding the construction of a bra,” she said. Lambeth sells knickers (that’s what they call panties in England) made of French silk that start at $800, and bras of the same material that cost around $2,300. And she’s now designing bathing suits that cost more than a car. Lambeth invited CNBC to the English countryside for a behind the scenes look at a couture black one-piece swimsuit she’s selling for over $63,000.

Luna Mae $63,000 black one-piece CNBC

The corseted suit is covered in seven hand-sewn butterflies made out of a rare metallic thread and layered with Swarovski crystals and beads that cost more than $600 a piece.

Hand-sewn butterflies that cost $600 a piece Luna Mae

The bespoke piece also has 18-karat yellow gold fasteners and is accented by a 9-carat diamond broach created by celebrity jeweler Stephen Webster. Webster’s diamond butterfly is included in the price and is not sold separately.

9-karat diamond broach designed by Stephen Webster Luna Mae

But Lambeth’s globetrotting clientele don’t seem to mind spending tens of thousands of dollars for her custom couture. The designer said she’s sold several swimsuits in this price range inspired by her black one-piece and no two pieces she creates are alike. Plus, her clients are willing to wait months for a personal fitting. Some make appointments at her flagship store in London while they’re in town. Others prefer Lambeth come to them, and she’s willing to travel anywhere in the world for a fitting.

Luna Mae lingerie Luna Mae

“One of my largest commissions was listing out a quote for a 50-piece bridal collection,” said Lambeth. The collection was designed for a client in the Middle East who ended up purchasing every undergarment she sketched. Lambeth signs non-disclosure agreements with her ultra-high-net-worth clients, so she’s not allowed to disclose the total for that commission but given her price points, one can imagine that single order could be worth hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Claudia Lambeth looking at Luna Mae lingerie Luna Mae

Lambeth’s journey to become a successful CEO and entrepreneur is almost as interesting as the beautiful garments she builds from scratch. From a young age, Lambeth was obsessed with lingerie and knew she wanted to be a designer but after graduating from high school, her father insisted she pursue more practical academic studies like the law. Lambeth thought, “he must be joking,” but after some consideration she felt that because fashion was a huge passion of hers she would be able to learn it on her own. “I definitely could not teach myself law!” she said. “I wanted to be treated as a businesswoman and a female entrepreneur and I considered a law degree to be a subject that people respected.” Lambeth chose Kings College in the U.K. for her studies. “I would sit in my lectures sketching things,” she recalled. “Everyone was taking serious notes and I wasn’t.”

Luna Mae

Refusing to give up on her vision, Lambeth relentlessly focused on getting her fashion fix by interning with high-end clothing brands instead of law firms. “I wanted to get a glimpse of all sides of the fashion industry so I could broaden my understanding and learn how each role is different,” Lambeth recalled. “I assumed that if I knew a little about each different area, I would have enough of an understanding to start my own company.” Within fashion, her internships included public relations and marketing, designing, writing for a magazine, styling and general operations.

Luna Mae

None of the internships were credited towards her degree and landing the positions outside of her field of study wasn’t easy. “For one of the internships, I turned up at their offices with just my CV and when I was told I would have to come back another time, I just sat in reception and waited until someone would see me,” she said. “I got the internship the following afternoon.” And because Lambeth was particularly obsessed with designing lingerie, she was determined to learn how to make the perfect bra.

“Because I haven’t studied design, I was self-taught, I used to pull apart bras to look at the under-workings and how could I make the straps more beautiful and how can I change the hook and eye and look at the cradle and that was a really big development process, it just came from me sort of tearing up bras.” She also spent time looking for the best suppliers of various bra components and would challenge them by asking what they could do to make each piece more comfortable and longer lasting. Lambeth also did extensive research on sizing and spoke to women about their own experiences with ill fitting bras. “It was a lengthy process but one that I really feel helps to set Luna Mae apart.” It took Lambeth two years of working non-stop through law school to perfect her vision.

Luna Mae

During that time, she was researching the lingerie industry and trying to understand what a customer’s journey was like when buying bras. “This is where I discovered the gap for a completely personalized service, which focused on making the woman feel celebrated and special and didn’t limit her to a standard bra size.” She also spent time visiting expert tailors to understand how their business operated. Incredibly, Lambeth was able to graduate with her law degree despite much of her time and focus being spent creating her brand, Luna Mae.

Claudia’s law school graduation photo Luna Mae

“Luckily, I had friends who took great notes on the actual lectures so I was still able to get through the degree!” Lambeth graduated in 2012 and launched Luna Mae in the U.S. three years later. Lambeth’s big break came after she visited Vogue Magazine in New York to introduce them to her new brand. One of the journalists Lambeth met during that visit recommended Luna Mae to a colleague who could not find a lingerie designer to make a custom bustier for her wedding gown. That recommendation landed Lambeth her first big client in the U.S. Lambeth’s client then presented the custom bustier to Valentino, who built the rest of her wedding dress around Lambeth’s design.

Claudia opening the Luna Mae boutique in Belgravia, London Luna Mae


Company: cnbc, Activity: cnbc, Date: 2019-08-18  Authors: jessi joseph
Keywords: news, cnbc, companies, lambeths, law, studying, swimsuits, sell, cost, 63000, bras, shes, lingerie, gave, 2300, luna, mae, lambeth, 22, age, fashion


Home Forums

    • Forum
    • Topics
    • Posts
    • Last Post