Vetting and barring scheme

This factsheet for CIPD members was last updated in June 2013. Background to the Vetting and Barring Scheme The Vetting and Barring Scheme was introduced on 12 October 2009 following the Soham case which concerned the murder of Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman by Ian Huntley. The Bichard Report into the case made a series of recommendations which were implemented in England, Wales and Northern Ireland by the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006. It was also implemented in Scotland by the Protection of Vulnerable Groups (Scotland) Act 2007. Login or register for a free account to continue reading this factsheet and to learn about: •Background to the Vetting and Barring Scheme •Changes under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 •Filtering of of old and minor cautions and convictions •Barred lists •Criminal offences •Action points •Useful contacts •Further reading

Strategic groups, cognitive groups and environmental change in the UK pharmaceutical industry

This chapter explores the relationship between changes in strategy and environmental pressures within the UK Pharmaceutical Industry during a ten- year period. Two stable strategic time periods (SSTPs) were identified each of five years duration. Within each time period seven strategic groups were found but 11 out of 29 firms (37.9%) changed strategic groups membership during the period studied. The break between these two SSTPs was found to coincide with a sharp increase in the substitution of branded pharmaceuticals by cheaper parallel imports. A significant relationship was found between firms that changed groups and both their continent of origin and nationality. Firms whose home markets are more vulnerable to substitution were more likely to switch strategic groups. © 2011 Nova Science Publishers, Inc. All rights reserved.

Corporate environmental responsibility and accountability:what chance in vulnerable Bangladesh?

Bangladesh has recently been enjoying significant economic growth mainly arising from an export led development strategy. However, in that process its natural environment has been degraded and become more vulnerable in geophysical terms (e.g. environmental pollution). Much of the Bangladeshi population are also vulnerable in socio-economic terms due primarily to widespread poverty. In this context we ask, albeit sceptically, whether there is any chance of holding corporations to account for their environmental responsibilities. Using the notions of vulnerability and ecological rifts we answer this question by providing evidence from published sources and a series of 32 semi-structured interviews with Bangladeshi stakeholder groups. Key findings include, inter alia, corporate reluctance to take responsibility for the environmental impact of their activities. Our interviewees discuss the possibility of a role for mandatory corporate reporting in enhancing corporate accountability and we argue that this is essential if the contradictions and irrationalities of the globalized capitalist system are to be made visible. Achieving such accountability, however, will not be easy due to a lack of political will and the prohibitive costs involved. Incurring such costs could raise the dangerous prospect of Bangladesh losing business to other, less regulated, economies.