Podcasts about disparate

Watch the video interview here One of the common pain points when calculating your carbon emissions is simply gathering the data. When collating data from different departments and suppliers, it can be easy to get overwhelmed. The struggle doesn't stop there, as after obtaining all that data you have to find the best way to capture and display it in a way that's useable for the necessary number crunching. Many will turn to an old favourite, spreadsheets, but these can quickly become very unwieldy and impractical if you've got a lot of data to process. Thankfully, there's a lot of new tech and tools available to help make this task both approachable and integrated within your business. In this episode, Mel Blackmore is joined by Jessica Matthys, Lead Product Manager at Pulsora, to discuss how you can take data complexity from spreadsheets to supply chains, diving into data fragmentation, optimisation and how this can all be balanced for practicality. You'll learn ·      Who is Jessica Matthys? ·      Who are Pulsora? ·      What does data complexity mean in the context of carbon accounting? ·      What are the requirements for CSRD in California? ·      What are the biggest pain points relating to data collection? ·      How can you prevent data fragmentation across your business? ·      What does 'Comprehensive data' mean in the context of sustainability? ·      How can Pulsora help a business take their carbon data from spreadsheets to integrated data systems? ·      How can you make you carbon data more auditable and traceable? ·      How can new carbon focused technology, such as AI tools, help with seeking investment? ·      How can you get information from your supply chain to cover scope 3 emissions?   Resources ·      Pulsora ·      CSRD – California Regulations ·      SB-253 & SB-261 ·      Carbonology   In this episode, we talk about: [00:25] Episode Summary – Mel Blackmore is joined by Jessica Matthys, Lead Product Manager at Pulsora, to explore how you can take data complexity from spreadsheets to supply chains, diving into data fragmentation, optimisation and how this can all be balanced for practicality. [01:40] Who is Jessica Matthys: Is the Lead Product Manager for carbon solutions at Pulsora. She's been with Pulsora for a year and a half, but has worked within the ESG / carbon / sustainability space for over 8 years in total. Something that people might not know about Jessica is that her passion for sustainability started much earlier than her working career, starting in high school where she opted to live on a farm for one semester. That unique experience of working closely with nature and animals set her on the path that she still walks today. [02:30] Who are Pulsora? Pulsora is an end to end sustainability management AI powered platform. They can manage anything from data collection and carbon accounting all the way towards ESG reporting and audit support. The focus of their platform is auditability and transparency . [04:40] What does data complexity mean in the context of carbon accounting? Jessica breaks this down into three main elements: Disparate nature of data – When compiling data for greenhouse gas accounting, you have to take a lot into consideration including your own production and consumption in addition to all the upstream and downstream relationships across your value chain. The data for all of this will be scattered and will need to be brought together in order to get a full comprehensive view of your emissions data. Missing primary data – Some data may be very difficult to obtain, say from a supplier in a remote region, so in those cases you may need to make estimations to fill those gaps. However, you need to establish a proven and trusted methodology that can be repeated for such instances. Auditability and transparency – Your data needs to be robust enough to hold up to scrutiny in an audit. New and upcoming regulatory requirements will have stricter rules around how you collect and report your emissions. We can see this in regulations such as SB 253 and 261 within CSRD that will affect businesses in California. There's a new focus on mandatory reporting as opposed to voluntary, so you will need to ensure your data is in a good place to be audited when this starts to effect other organisations globally. [07:30] What are the requirements for CSRD in California? There are two main climate bills coming into effect in California in 2026, these are SB-253 and SB-261, which are supported by CARB (California Air Resources Board). These two regulations affect businesses who are either doing business in, have employees located in, or selling products over a certain revenue threshold in California. Affected businesses will be required to report on their scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions. There isn't anything new in these regulations that we haven't already seen in other European focused requirements, aside from the mandatory element. The first deadline for this reporting is expected to be due by June 2026, and this first year they will only be expecting reports for your scope 1 and 2 data. SB-261 has a slightly different focus, with it requiring climate risk reporting. This is similar to existing frameworks like ISSB or TCFD. This report can be published publicly and you just need to submit a link to that report to the appropriate bodies in California. The deadline for this one is fast approaching, with it being set at 1st January 2026. [11:10] What are the biggest pain points relating to data collection?: Jessica shares an example of a company that came to Pulsora with a spreadsheet that they dubbed 'the monster spreadsheet' that contained 100+ tabs with hundreds of people adding to it. It got to the point where it was always crashing and simply became a burden to use. It's a fairly common story, though maybe not to this extreme, that companies find they quickly outgrow spreadsheets as a form of manual data collection. There is also the question of the quality of data provided, how can they trust the insights gained from the data provided from so many different sources? At Pulsora, they've made use of AI within their platform that can help bring all that data together and analyse it to identify any anomalies and duplicated data. They've also focused on creating collaborative workflows, so all communications regarding collection of emissions data can be kept under one roof, meaning you have a fully traceable and auditable trail for all data collected. [15:10] How can you prevent data fragmentation across your business? Pulsora have made use of AI to prevent data fragmentation, they have achieved this with agentic AI, which is AI that can coordinate between different paths and can make decisions without a human in the loop. A use case for this might be where you have a company with thousands of suppliers, but would only be able to get emissions data from the handful of long-term suppliers that are happy to work with them. AI can assist with the remaining suppliers by looking for any published information those suppliers have, and take that emissions and financial data to create an intensity factor for the supplier. This can then make an informed estimate for how many emissions equate from so much spend with that supplier. The AI will of course keep a trail for all it's sourced data so a human can review this and ensure the information is correct if needed. [18:45] What does 'Comprehensive data' mean in the context of sustainability? When gathering emissions data, a business has to consider what part of its operations creates the most emissions. This will differ depending on the sector and nature of your business. Whether you're a B2B business or a manufacturer, you need to confirm where your largest emissions source. It's imperative that your emissions inventory is reflective of your business and its impact.  There will also be gaps in the data you want / need to collect. You still need to ensure that data in any reporting provided is reflective of your operations, you can't just leave that data out, especially as there are now tools to help fill those gaps. AI for example can identify representative data to help bridge those gaps to provide a comprehensive inventory. [22:35] How can Pulsora help a business take their carbon data from spreadsheets to integrated data systems?: Jessica uses a company, Franklin Templeton, to explain the process. In this case, the company is a global asset manager and they used Workday for a lot of their HR, procurement and financial data. When it came to collating emissions data, they didn't realise that 95% of the information needed was already stored in Workday. For other companies that are quire energy intensive, there's a high chance that you already have a comprehensive system with most of the data required. In Franklin Templeton's case, they helped them to transfer this over into the Pulsora system with an existing out-of-the-box migration tool for Workday. For the HR data Pulsora were able to assist with ESG reporting. The Pulsora system was able to apply emissions factors to the transferred data automatically, which helped to create a comprehensive view of their scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions. Jessica give another example for a glass manufacturing company called Seagen who are based in Turkey. While they didn't have the monster spreadsheet situation, they had a fairly good system in place but it wasn't quite reaching the mark in terms of being able to report against multiple different carbon frameworks. Pulsora's system help to quantify their data, quite a task in of itself due to how high their emissions were, and it also helped to apply all this gathered data to those carbon frameworks. They also utilised Pulsora to help gather various metrics from 7 business units across 100 sites, that aided in audit preparation and insurance. [29:00] How can you make you carbon data more auditable and traceable?:  If you're just starting out on your emissions journey, we highly recommend looking to the GHG protocol for guidance on the scope 1,2 and 3 definitions and what's required of each for reporting. The first step you should take is to determine what scopes and categories are relevant to your business according to the GHG protocol. There are a few different approaches including a percentage based approach or ones that include more detailed data analysis. The second step is emission factors, which is essentially a process of taking your business activities and translating that into emissions. You need to establish a consistent approach to documenting these emission factors, and those emissions factors will be determined by your region. UK for example use DEFRA factors, the US have EPA and Europe uses AIB. There are global data sets available as well, such as IEA. The main key is establishing your methodology early on, and be consistent in your approach while documenting everything in line with that agreed methodology. For a more structured approach to carbon emissions reporting, that includes auditability and traceability at it's core are ISO Standards such as ISO 14064 and ISO 14068. [32:45] How can new carbon focused technology, such as AI tools, help with seeking investment? Jessica shares a sneak peak into a new feature that Pulsora have recently released to help with seeking investment, which is invoice reading. This feature allows users to upload invoices to the Pulsora system, and it will extract the required data without the need for manual input. This aids in the auditability and traceability within the system as this data is displayed right alongside the evidence it was extracted from. The system can also compare file content to spot and flag up any anomalies, so you can ensure your data is as accurate as possible before going through a formal audit process with a third-party such as Carbonology. That stamp of approval from a successful third-party audit can then be used for raising capital and sharing with stakeholders. [35:55] How can you get information from your supply chain to cover scope 3 emissions?:  Jessica provides some helpful tips for scope 3 emissions, including:- Don't worry about getting primary information from all of your suppliers. You only need enough data to identify your decarbonization plans and strategy to share with stakeholders with a high degree of confidence. You don't have to get it 100% perfect. Prioritise your suppliers – Consider how much you spend with each supplier, how good are your relationships with them? What impact do your suppliers have on your emissions? You should target the ones that are the most impactful. A lack of response doesn't always mean a lack of data -  Some supplier just won't respond to your data requests, but there are ways you can still get some information, such as 10 based emission factors to get a baseline. With publicly available data about specific sectors and regions, you can get pretty close to the info you need. Get creative – There are other ways to gather data, such as using similar more responsive suppliers as a baseline. You could hold an industry group meeting to talk about improving data transparency and data sharing. This process will be beneficial for all involved by driving both costs and emissions down through a collaborative effort. Create a sphere of influence, drive the change you want to see within your supply chain. Create a Supplier Sustainability Strategy – Again, a consistent and planned approach will encourage engagement. Lastly, don't sweat it if you can't always get the data you want. Making a start is more important than getting it perfect. A lot of frameworks are quite forgiving and allow you time to mature your systems to a level where reporting can be repeated on an annual basis. [40:30] What book would Jessica recommend? A Costa Rica travel book. Jessica simply love the country and it's culture, it's also highly immersive in nature and mostly operates on renewable energy. [40:30] What is Jessica's favourite quote? "If you were born with the weakness to fall, you were born with the strength to rise" Ruby Carr – extract from her poetry book 'Milk and Honey' If you'd like to learn more about Pulsora, check out their website. We'd love to hear your views and comments about the ISO Show, here's how: ●     Share the ISO Show on Twitter or Linkedin ●     Leave an honest review on iTunes or Soundcloud. Your ratings and reviews really help and we read each one. Subscribe to keep up-to-date with our latest episodes: Stitcher | Spotify | YouTube |iTunes | Soundcloud | Mailing List

Bihar is one state made up of many distinct worlds. In Seemanchal, floods and identity anxieties take over everyday life. In Magadh, jobs and economic justice are among the demands. The people of Mithilanchal lean on migration remittances. Meanwhile, a major electoral roll revision in 2025 removed a large number of names—women among them—raising questions about voter inclusion ahead of November's Assembly elections. Now that the rallies have begun, are leaders listening closely enough to what each corner of Bihar wants?Guest: Srinivasan Ramani, Deputy National Editor, The Hindu Host: Anupama Chandrasekaran Edited and produced by Sharmada Venkatasubramanian Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Con Alberto Iturralde, responsable de Operativa DAX

Comment on the Show by Sending Mark a Text Message.The ground just shifted under workplace civil rights. Federal investigators have closed thousands of disparate impact charges, and right-to-sue letters are landing across the country. We walk through what this change really means: the legal theory behind disparate impact, why the EEOC halted these cases, and how the responsibility now moves squarely to workers and their advocates.We unpack the practical steps for bringing a case to court within the tight 90-day window, from identifying the exact policy at issue to gathering applicant flow data, pass rates, and workforce demographics. We talk about the role of expert statisticians, how to show that disparities are not random, and what courts look for when deciding whether a practice is job-related and consistent with business necessity. You'll also hear how to propose less discriminatory alternatives that still meet business needs, which is often decisive in these cases.AI-driven hiring tools loom large in the conversation. We explain how algorithms can encode historical bias, what documentation and validation employers should have, and what records plaintiffs need to request to test for adverse impact. While the EEOC steps back, some state and local agencies remain active, offering parallel options for investigation. The bottom line is urgent but empowering: your rights remain intact, the venue has changed, and preparation is everything. If you received a right-to-sue letter, mark the 90-day deadline, talk to counsel, and start building your evidence now.If you find this helpful, follow the show, share it with a colleague who needs to hear it, and leave a quick review so others can find these updates. Your feedback guides future topics and keeps this resource strong. If you enjoyed this episode of the Employee Survival Guide please like us on Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn. We would really appreciate if you could leave a review of this podcast on your favorite podcast player such as Apple Podcasts. Leaving a review will inform other listeners you found the content on this podcast is important in the area of employment law in the United States. For more information, please contact our employment attorneys at Carey & Associates, P.C. at 203-255-4150, www.capclaw.com.Disclaimer: For educational use only, not intended to be legal advice.

Le journal de l'économie du 15/10/2025, entre disparité du prix de l'essence et contrebande cigarettière.

Le journal de l'économie du 15/10/2025, entre disparité du prix de l'essence et contrebande cigarettière.

This week, we're covering the new H-1B visa fee, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's (EEOC's) closure of disparate impact cases, and recent key labor appointments. New Fee for H-1B Visas Employers must now pay $100,000 for each first-time H-1B petition filed on or after September 21, 2025. Current visa holders are not affected. Exceptions may apply, but details are limited. EEOC Shuts Down Disparate Impact Cases The EEOC has closed nearly all disparate impact cases following a recent executive order. These claims can still be pursued in court. The agency will also dissolve its Office of Enterprise Data and Analytics, although EEO-1 reporting requirements appear unchanged. Key Labor Roles Confirmed The Senate has confirmed Daniel Aronowitz as Assistant Secretary of Labor for the Employee Benefits Security Administration. Additionally, the Senate has confirmed over 100 other labor-related appointments—including 11 top labor positions—restoring a quorum at both the EEOC and the Merit Systems Protection Board. Visit our site for this week's Other Highlights and links: https://www.ebglaw.com/eltw407 Download our Wage & Hour Guide for Employers app: https://www.ebglaw.com/wage-hour-guide-for-employers-app. Subscribe to #WorkforceWednesday: https://www.ebglaw.com/eltw-subscribe Visit http://www.EmploymentLawThisWeek.com This podcast is presented by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. All rights are reserved. This audio recording includes information about legal issues and legal developments. Such materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. These informational materials are not intended, and should not be taken, as legal advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances, and these materials are not a substitute for the advice of competent counsel. The content reflects the personal views and opinions of the participants. No attorney-client relationship has been created by this audio recording. This audio recording may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.    

Hosts Dean Stockford and Len Suzio welcome back attorney Lori Sommerfield, a partner at Troutman Pepper Locke LLP, to continue their two-part discussion of Executive Order 14-281 and its effort to curb disparate impact theory in fair lending enforcement. The episode covers the legal landscape post-EO, including the Supreme Court's history, lingering federal versus state authority, private litigation risks, and practical steps lenders should take—retain strong fair lending programs, document business justifications, test for less discriminatory alternatives, and prepare for future reversals. Listeners get clear, practical guidance for compliance teams navigating uncertainty as enforcement shifts between federal agencies, state regulators, and private plaintiffs. Brought to you by GeoDataVision and M&M Consulting

The Department of Homeland Security failed to effectively implement a critical retention incentive program for cyber talent, according to a new report from the agency's inspector general, which found that federal funds meant for the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency were used incorrectly. In 2015, the agency implemented the Cyber Incentive program. The goal, the inspector general said, was to provide extra incentives to employees that might otherwise leave the federal government. More than $100 million has been spent on the program in recent years. The program “was designed to help CISA retain mission-critical cybersecurity talent needed to execute its mission,” the report noted, and was meant to consider a series of qualifications to guide who received the retention benefit. The government hoped to keep in-demand technology experts in government. The watchdog wrote that “CISA's implementation of the program wasted taxpayer funds and invites the risk of attrition of cyber talent, thereby leaving CISA unable to adequately protect the Nation from cyber threats.” Instead of being targeted toward valuable talent likely to transition to the private sector, the payments were disbursed generally, with many ineligible employees receiving tens of thousands of dollars in payment. The Pentagon's chief information officer is undertaking yet another reform of the Defense Department's IT enterprise — this time focusing on streamlining its classified networks to enhance data sharing and interoperability. Katie Arrington, who is performing the duties of CIO, plans to introduce a new program dubbed “Mission Network-as-a-Service” that aims to reduce the number of disparate data fabrics used by combatant commands into a single, unified network. Speaking last week during the Billington Cybersecurity Summit, Arrington said the program will be key to realizing the department's vision for Combined Joint All-Domain Command and Control, or CJADC2. Broadly speaking, CJADC2 seeks to connect the U.S. military's sensors and weapons under a single network, enabling rapid data transfer between warfighting systems and domains. The Pentagon also wants to be able to quickly share relevant information with international partners and allies during conflicts, adding another layer of difficulty to realizing the construct. The Daily Scoop Podcast is available every Monday-Friday afternoon. If you want to hear more of the latest from Washington, subscribe to The Daily Scoop Podcast  on Apple Podcasts, Soundcloud, Spotify and YouTube.

Jamie and Dan talk about Keyboard Demos, the importance of 1998, and extended fruit metaphors. We really knock this one out efficiently. Check out our Frankenstein's Jukebox Host Picks Playlist on Spotify!Listen to our songpromises and other stuff Dan has done on Soundcloud!A huge thanks to amazing artist Kelp Rabbit for our logo! Check out her store for earrings, t-shirts, and more amazing designs!We're a proud part of the Scavengers Network! Check out the site for loads more podcasts from indie creators! 

A CMO Confidential Interview with Dr. Dan McCarthy, Professor of Marketing at Maryland and leading practitioner of Customer Lifetime Value. Dan shares insights from his privacy research based on Apple's "App Tracking Transparency" (ATT) initiative commonly known as "Ask App Not to Track" which include a significant impact on business results, a degradation of CAC, and a disproportionate hit to small companies. Key topics include: how the elimination of a Facebook customer ID negatively impacted revenue, why averaging marketing results can be a profit killer, and why analytical time frames matter. Tune in to hear updates on Dan's other research including Peloton, loyalty programs and "How everyone is cheating their way through college." CMO Confidential: The Disparate Impact of Privacy Policy — with Dr. Dan McCarthy (UMD) on ATT, CLV & CACWhat happens to your revenue when attribution breaks? In this episode, 5x CMO Mike Linton sits down with Dr. Dan McCarthy (Professor of Marketing, University of Maryland; leading practitioner of Customer Lifetime Value) to unpack Apple's App Tracking Transparency (ATT) and its ripple effects on marketing performance. Dan shares new research showing how the loss of a Facebook customer ID degraded click-through, CAC, and revenue—with disproportionate pain for smaller, Facebook-heavy brands.We dig into why averages kill profit (stop using blended CAC/CLV!), how channel-specific, time-varying metrics drive smarter allocation, and the practical playbook for marketers in a post-IDFA world. Dan also updates us on his other research—Peloton, loyalty & subscription programs (DoorDash/Postmates), and the “everyone is cheating their way through college” debate and what it means for teaching and real-world readiness.What you'll learn • How ATT broke cross-site attribution and raised CAC while lowering revenue yield • Why small DTC brands took the biggest hit, and how (or if) they can recover • The danger of blended CAC/CLV vs. channel-specific, time-varying metrics • Subscription insights: novelty vs. maturity effects, and behavior after cancellation • Action items to protect growth when signal quality declinesAbout our guestDr. Dan McCarthy is a professor at the University of Maryland (formerly Emory) and one of the foremost experts on CLV and customer-based corporate valuation. His work spans privacy's impact on e-commerce, subscription economics, loyalty programs, and public-company customer metrics.Sponsor: TypefaceTypeface helps the world's biggest brands move from brief to fully personalized campaigns in hours, not months. With its agentic AI marketing platform, one campaign becomes thousands of on-brand experiences across ads, email, and video—with enterprise-grade security and seamless MarTech integrations. Learn more at typeface.ai/cmo.Subscribe for more C-suite-level conversations every Tuesday, and catch our Friday newsletter with the top insights.⸻00:00 – Intro & sponsor: Typeface AI01:35 – Meet Dr. Dan McCarthy & ATT explained05:00 – How ATT broke attribution and raised CAC09:15 – Why small brands took the biggest revenue hit13:30 – The danger of blended CAC & CLV averages17:20 – Practical advice: channel-specific, time-varying metrics21:00 – Updates on Peloton & subscription research25:00 – The “everyone is cheating in college” debate28:00 – Final advice: beware of irrational subscriptionsSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Historians have well described how US immigration policy increasingly fell under the purview of federal law and national politics in the mid-to-late nineteenth century. It is far less understood that the rights of noncitizen immigrants in the country remained primarily contested in the realms of state politics and law until the mid-to-late twentieth century. Such state-level political debates often centered on whether noncitizen immigrants should vote, count as part of the polity for the purposes of state legislative representation, work in public and publicly funded employment, or obtain professional licensure.Enacted state alienage laws were rarely self-executing, and immigrants and their allies regularly challenged nativist restrictions in court, on the job, by appealing to lawmakers and the public, and even via diplomacy. Battles over the passage, implementation, and constitutionality of such policies at times aligned with and sometimes clashed against contemporaneous efforts to expand rights to marginalized Americans, particularly US-born women.  Often considered separately or treated as topics of marginal importance, Disparate Regimes: Nativist Politics, Alienage Law, and Citizenship Rights in the United States, 1865–1965 (Oxford University Press, 2025) by Dr. Brendan A. Shanahan underscores the centrality of nativist state politics and alienage policies to the history of American immigration and citizenship from the late nineteenth to the mid-twentieth centuries. It argues that the proliferation of these debates and laws produced veritable disparate regimes of citizenship rights in the American political economy on a state-by-state basis. It further illustrates how nativist state politics and alienage policies helped to invent and concretize the idea that citizenship rights meant citizen-only rights in law, practice, and popular perception in the United States. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. You can find Miranda's interviews on New Books with Miranda Melcher, wherever you get your podcasts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

Hosts Dean Stockford and Len Suzio welcome Lori Sommerfield, a partner at Troutman Pepper Locke LLP, to discuss and explain President Trump's Executive Order 14281 (April 23, 2025), which directs federal agencies to limit use of the disparate impact theory in fair lending enforcement and to review existing guidance, pending matters, and consent orders that leverage that theory. The federal banking agencies are removing disparate impact references in their examination manuals and shifting toward intentional discrimination theories, while  use of the disparate impact theory by state authorities and private litigants remain risks. Banks and financial services companies should continue to review policies and procedures for potential disparate impact, conduct rigorous fair lending monitoring and testing, and prepare for potential future shifts in enforcement. Brought to you by GeoDataVision and M&M Consulting

Historians have well described how US immigration policy increasingly fell under the purview of federal law and national politics in the mid-to-late nineteenth century. It is far less understood that the rights of noncitizen immigrants in the country remained primarily contested in the realms of state politics and law until the mid-to-late twentieth century. Such state-level political debates often centered on whether noncitizen immigrants should vote, count as part of the polity for the purposes of state legislative representation, work in public and publicly funded employment, or obtain professional licensure.Enacted state alienage laws were rarely self-executing, and immigrants and their allies regularly challenged nativist restrictions in court, on the job, by appealing to lawmakers and the public, and even via diplomacy. Battles over the passage, implementation, and constitutionality of such policies at times aligned with and sometimes clashed against contemporaneous efforts to expand rights to marginalized Americans, particularly US-born women.  Often considered separately or treated as topics of marginal importance, Disparate Regimes: Nativist Politics, Alienage Law, and Citizenship Rights in the United States, 1865–1965 (Oxford University Press, 2025) by Dr. Brendan A. Shanahan underscores the centrality of nativist state politics and alienage policies to the history of American immigration and citizenship from the late nineteenth to the mid-twentieth centuries. It argues that the proliferation of these debates and laws produced veritable disparate regimes of citizenship rights in the American political economy on a state-by-state basis. It further illustrates how nativist state politics and alienage policies helped to invent and concretize the idea that citizenship rights meant citizen-only rights in law, practice, and popular perception in the United States. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. You can find Miranda's interviews on New Books with Miranda Melcher, wherever you get your podcasts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

Historians have well described how US immigration policy increasingly fell under the purview of federal law and national politics in the mid-to-late nineteenth century. It is far less understood that the rights of noncitizen immigrants in the country remained primarily contested in the realms of state politics and law until the mid-to-late twentieth century. Such state-level political debates often centered on whether noncitizen immigrants should vote, count as part of the polity for the purposes of state legislative representation, work in public and publicly funded employment, or obtain professional licensure.Enacted state alienage laws were rarely self-executing, and immigrants and their allies regularly challenged nativist restrictions in court, on the job, by appealing to lawmakers and the public, and even via diplomacy. Battles over the passage, implementation, and constitutionality of such policies at times aligned with and sometimes clashed against contemporaneous efforts to expand rights to marginalized Americans, particularly US-born women.  Often considered separately or treated as topics of marginal importance, Disparate Regimes: Nativist Politics, Alienage Law, and Citizenship Rights in the United States, 1865–1965 (Oxford University Press, 2025) by Dr. Brendan A. Shanahan underscores the centrality of nativist state politics and alienage policies to the history of American immigration and citizenship from the late nineteenth to the mid-twentieth centuries. It argues that the proliferation of these debates and laws produced veritable disparate regimes of citizenship rights in the American political economy on a state-by-state basis. It further illustrates how nativist state politics and alienage policies helped to invent and concretize the idea that citizenship rights meant citizen-only rights in law, practice, and popular perception in the United States. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. You can find Miranda's interviews on New Books with Miranda Melcher, wherever you get your podcasts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Historians have well described how US immigration policy increasingly fell under the purview of federal law and national politics in the mid-to-late nineteenth century. It is far less understood that the rights of noncitizen immigrants in the country remained primarily contested in the realms of state politics and law until the mid-to-late twentieth century. Such state-level political debates often centered on whether noncitizen immigrants should vote, count as part of the polity for the purposes of state legislative representation, work in public and publicly funded employment, or obtain professional licensure.Enacted state alienage laws were rarely self-executing, and immigrants and their allies regularly challenged nativist restrictions in court, on the job, by appealing to lawmakers and the public, and even via diplomacy. Battles over the passage, implementation, and constitutionality of such policies at times aligned with and sometimes clashed against contemporaneous efforts to expand rights to marginalized Americans, particularly US-born women.  Often considered separately or treated as topics of marginal importance, Disparate Regimes: Nativist Politics, Alienage Law, and Citizenship Rights in the United States, 1865–1965 (Oxford University Press, 2025) by Dr. Brendan A. Shanahan underscores the centrality of nativist state politics and alienage policies to the history of American immigration and citizenship from the late nineteenth to the mid-twentieth centuries. It argues that the proliferation of these debates and laws produced veritable disparate regimes of citizenship rights in the American political economy on a state-by-state basis. It further illustrates how nativist state politics and alienage policies helped to invent and concretize the idea that citizenship rights meant citizen-only rights in law, practice, and popular perception in the United States. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. You can find Miranda's interviews on New Books with Miranda Melcher, wherever you get your podcasts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

Historians have well described how US immigration policy increasingly fell under the purview of federal law and national politics in the mid-to-late nineteenth century. It is far less understood that the rights of noncitizen immigrants in the country remained primarily contested in the realms of state politics and law until the mid-to-late twentieth century. Such state-level political debates often centered on whether noncitizen immigrants should vote, count as part of the polity for the purposes of state legislative representation, work in public and publicly funded employment, or obtain professional licensure.Enacted state alienage laws were rarely self-executing, and immigrants and their allies regularly challenged nativist restrictions in court, on the job, by appealing to lawmakers and the public, and even via diplomacy. Battles over the passage, implementation, and constitutionality of such policies at times aligned with and sometimes clashed against contemporaneous efforts to expand rights to marginalized Americans, particularly US-born women.  Often considered separately or treated as topics of marginal importance, Disparate Regimes: Nativist Politics, Alienage Law, and Citizenship Rights in the United States, 1865–1965 (Oxford University Press, 2025) by Dr. Brendan A. Shanahan underscores the centrality of nativist state politics and alienage policies to the history of American immigration and citizenship from the late nineteenth to the mid-twentieth centuries. It argues that the proliferation of these debates and laws produced veritable disparate regimes of citizenship rights in the American political economy on a state-by-state basis. It further illustrates how nativist state politics and alienage policies helped to invent and concretize the idea that citizenship rights meant citizen-only rights in law, practice, and popular perception in the United States. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. You can find Miranda's interviews on New Books with Miranda Melcher, wherever you get your podcasts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

Historians have well described how US immigration policy increasingly fell under the purview of federal law and national politics in the mid-to-late nineteenth century. It is far less understood that the rights of noncitizen immigrants in the country remained primarily contested in the realms of state politics and law until the mid-to-late twentieth century. Such state-level political debates often centered on whether noncitizen immigrants should vote, count as part of the polity for the purposes of state legislative representation, work in public and publicly funded employment, or obtain professional licensure.Enacted state alienage laws were rarely self-executing, and immigrants and their allies regularly challenged nativist restrictions in court, on the job, by appealing to lawmakers and the public, and even via diplomacy. Battles over the passage, implementation, and constitutionality of such policies at times aligned with and sometimes clashed against contemporaneous efforts to expand rights to marginalized Americans, particularly US-born women.  Often considered separately or treated as topics of marginal importance, Disparate Regimes: Nativist Politics, Alienage Law, and Citizenship Rights in the United States, 1865–1965 (Oxford University Press, 2025) by Dr. Brendan A. Shanahan underscores the centrality of nativist state politics and alienage policies to the history of American immigration and citizenship from the late nineteenth to the mid-twentieth centuries. It argues that the proliferation of these debates and laws produced veritable disparate regimes of citizenship rights in the American political economy on a state-by-state basis. It further illustrates how nativist state politics and alienage policies helped to invent and concretize the idea that citizenship rights meant citizen-only rights in law, practice, and popular perception in the United States. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. You can find Miranda's interviews on New Books with Miranda Melcher, wherever you get your podcasts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Disparate political wings of Catherine Connolly's campaign, Sinn Féin's decision process, intrigue over a Fianna Fail candidate and Heather Humphreys closes on the FG ticket

The Legal Team discusses the Disparate Impact doctrine under Fair Housing law and the update to federal enforcement.

William/Shani: GM; The Zodiac System: Ygraine Bonechewer, Hexblood Witch; Jeremy: Astra - Gepettin Warlock; Yare: Morgan Thompson - Human Paladin; Drev: Yngrid von Rider - Awakened Undead Rogue; Katie: Molly Malone Clemens - Human Investigator; -----Thanks to all of our supporters at patreon.com/fsfilms for making this possible!Especially our $25+ Donors:Drevian AlexanderL ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

Despite being the focus of a concerted campaign to eject him from the country, Western Cape Independence protagonist Phil Craig is continuing his fight to get the province out of the country tacked together in 1910 by a colonial power. In this interview with BizNews editor Alec Hogg, the co-founder of the Cape Independence Advocacy Group explains how a five-week working trip to the US - and continued own-goals by Pretoria - has injected fresh momentum into the project.

Familiarity is good. It helps us to feel comfortable and safe and in some ways may strengthen our confidence and self-esteem when the things we see, understand and influence become patterns that we know inside and out. In this episode, we're taking a look at familiarity's opposition - unfamiliarity. We're talking about it in a Human Systems Dynamics kind of way, and I hope it helps you to feel better when you're floating in unfamiliar territory.

Hablamos con el Consejero de Presidencia andaluz, Antonio Sanz, sobre el incendio que aún mantiene a más de un millar de personas fuera de sus casas en Tarifa. Vamos al peor incendio del verano en Francia y hablamos de las incidencias en los trenes. De la política el enfrentamiento entre el PNV y el PP y el disparate en la compra de viviendas. Opinión y análisis: Javier Aroca, Mariola Urrea y Carmen Lumbierres. 

A tragédia dos incêndios tem assolado Portugal nos últimos anos com autarcas e jornalistas a propagarem comentários nem sempre corretos. Os acontecimentos desta semana eram inevitáveis ou expectáveis?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

É certo e sabido: tempo quente, vento de leste e lá temos a “tragédia dos incêndios”. E tão fatal como essa tragédia é a tragicomédia da corrida ao disparate protagonizada por políticos e jornalistas.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A tragédia dos incêndios tem assolado Portugal nos últimos anos com autarcas e jornalistas a propagarem comentários nem sempre corretos. Os acontecimentos desta semana eram inevitáveis ou expectáveis?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Welcome back to Model Citizens: AI Compliance for Banks and Fintech Lenders, a six-part miniseries from the Fintech Takes podcast in partnership with FairPlay.  With FairPlay's Kareem Saleh (Founder & CEO) at my side, we unpack: how can banks and fintechs build fair, compliant lending systems in a time of regulatory uncertainty? In Episode 2, we're joined by Kevin Moss (Senior Advisor at Baselayer, former CRO) and Andrada Pacheco (EVP & Chief Data Scientist at VantageScore) to explore how AI is reshaping credit modeling, and where caution is still very much required. We trace the evolution from decision trees and logistic regression to gradient boosting, cash flow data, and the emergence of AI. Along the way, we tackle the core dilemma: how to boost predictive power without losing explainability or fairness. Highlights include: Why better performance often comes at the cost of transparency (and how to bridge the gap with hybrid models) AI isn't new in credit risk modeling; tree-based methods like CART, CHAID, and gradient boosting have been around for decades (what's changing now is the scale, the data, and the complexity) LLMs are great for fraud, operations, and consumer education, but they're not safe for credit decisions just yet) Fairness is expanding: Disparate impact enforcement may be fading federally, but state attorney generals and plaintiffs' attorneys are picking up the slack. We close with a reminder: credit modeling doesn't just need to be effective. It needs to be explainable, equitable, and defensible; especially as AI raises the stakes. Don't forget to subscribe and catch more insights on Model Citizens in upcoming episodes! This miniseries is brought to you by FairPlay. FairPlay is an AI enablement company for financial services. They help companies build, test, optimize, validate and govern AI models. Learn more at Fairplay.ai Sign up for Alex's Fintech Takes newsletter for the latest insightful analysis on fintech trends, along with a heaping pile of pop culture references and copious footnotes. Every Monday and Thursday: https://workweek.com/brand/fintech-takes/ And for more exclusive insider content, don't forget to check out my YouTube page. Follow Alex:  YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJgfH47QEwbQmkQlz1V9rQA/videos LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/alexhjohnson Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/AlexH_Johnson Follow Kareem: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kareemsaleh/ Follow Kevin: LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevin-moss-b032163/ Follow Andrada: https://www.linkedin.com/in/andrada-pacheco-ph-d-26731a1/ Learn more about FairPlay here.

Welcome to The Chrisman Commentary, your go-to daily mortgage news podcast, where industry insights meet expert analysis. Hosted by Robbie Chrisman, this podcast delivers the latest updates on mortgage rates, capital markets, and the forces shaping the housing finance landscape. Whether you're a seasoned professional or just looking to stay informed, you'll get clear, concise breakdowns of market trends and economic shifts that impact the mortgage world.In today's episode, we review the what's going on with the weather around America as it pertains to mortgage. Plus, Robbie sits down with the American Bankers Association's Rod Alba for a discussion on disparate impact and how we can get to a place of better regulation. And we close by looking ahead to this week's economic calendar.Today's podcast is brought to you by nCino, makers of the nCino Mortgage Suite for the modern mortgage lender. nCino Mortgage Suite's three core products -- nCino Mortgage, nCino Incentive Compensation, and nCino Mortgage Analytics -- unite the people, systems, and stages of the mortgage process. See how nCino can support a homeownership journey that your borrowers and your team will love at nCino.com.

Large organizations deal with a lot of data and information that is often in silos and not shared among internal groups. Digital infrastructure projects, for example, involve site acquisition and permitting, engineering, construction and ongoing operations and maintenance. Infrastructure businesses save time and money when all groups in the company can access data across the entire process.Paul Alder, Vice President-Delivery at OneVizion speaks with Inside Towers Business Editor, John Celentano, about how organizations can benefit from being able to access all their project information from single database platform.For more information: https://onevizion.com/.Support the show

On this, the third anniversary of the Trump-packed Supreme Court's 'Dobbs' decision overturning 'Roe v Wade,' it's notable that abortion rates are actually up in states with and without abortion bans on the books, according to a recent study. Still, pro-choice activists and Georgia Democrats made their case throughout the day that women deserve the right to bodily autonomy. On with me today to discuss the state of women's reproductive rights in Georgia and the U.S. is Georgia WIN List executive director Melita Easters.------Melita stuck around to share her insights on the dichotomy between (President Jimmy) Carter-era foreign policy - a more heart-felt and hands-on approach that led to the infamous Camp David Accords and the irrational 'Truth Social-led' Trump attempts at "waging" peace on the Middle East with bombs. On Iran, by the way, I shared a powerful op/ed written by Atlantan, Iranian-American Sophie Kaufman, married to a Jewish American man .... mother of two children and raising them immersed in both cultures. Then a peak in at a recent segment on 'The Late Show with Stephen Colbert' featuring two New York City mayoral candidates - one Muslim-American, the other Jewish-American. Why I shated this? It shows the coexistence of so-called 'rival factions' in a deeply liberal city and how both sides actually come to a point of agreement on shared values and goals on the left, whereas the right continues to believe, for more than half a century now, that military might and the threat of more of it, will somehow eventually make the suppressed opposition come to heel.

An exploration of workplace participation and earnings patterns for diverse women in US STEM professions that upends the myth that STEM work benefits women economically. Seen as part economic driver, part social remedy, STEM work is commonly understood to benefit both the US economy and people—particularly women—from underrepresented groups. But what do diverse women find when they work in US STEM occupations? What do STEM jobs really deliver—and for whom? In Disparate Measures: The Intersectional Economics of Women in STEM Work (MIT Press, 2024), Mary Armstrong and Susan Averett challenge the conventional wisdom that a diverse US STEM workforce will bring about economic abundance for the women who participate in it. Combining intersectionality theory and critical data theory with a feminist economic analysis, the authors explore how different groups of diverse women truly fare in US STEM professions.Disparate Measures is centered on eight unique, in-depth case studies, each of which provides an intersectional economic analysis (a term coined by the authors) of diverse women working in STEM occupations. Four case studies prioritize women of color and examine the STEM participation and earnings of Black women, American Indian and Alaska Native women, Asian and Pacific Islander women, and Hispanic women/Latinas; four additional case studies illuminate intersections that are frequently neglected by the STEM inclusivity literature: foreign-born women, women with disabilities, Queer women, and mothers. What the authors find in their groundbreaking, detailed analysis is that the promises of STEM are only partly true: when compared to women not working in STEM, most women are indeed economically elevated by STEM occupations—yet when compared to white men in the same STEM occupations, women's second-class status is usually reaffirmed. The authors conclude by offering seven “big-picture” recommendations for rethinking STEM equity, showing just how we can successfully confront the entrenched patterns of economic disadvantage faced by diverse women in STEM jobs. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

An exploration of workplace participation and earnings patterns for diverse women in US STEM professions that upends the myth that STEM work benefits women economically. Seen as part economic driver, part social remedy, STEM work is commonly understood to benefit both the US economy and people—particularly women—from underrepresented groups. But what do diverse women find when they work in US STEM occupations? What do STEM jobs really deliver—and for whom? In Disparate Measures: The Intersectional Economics of Women in STEM Work (MIT Press, 2024), Mary Armstrong and Susan Averett challenge the conventional wisdom that a diverse US STEM workforce will bring about economic abundance for the women who participate in it. Combining intersectionality theory and critical data theory with a feminist economic analysis, the authors explore how different groups of diverse women truly fare in US STEM professions.Disparate Measures is centered on eight unique, in-depth case studies, each of which provides an intersectional economic analysis (a term coined by the authors) of diverse women working in STEM occupations. Four case studies prioritize women of color and examine the STEM participation and earnings of Black women, American Indian and Alaska Native women, Asian and Pacific Islander women, and Hispanic women/Latinas; four additional case studies illuminate intersections that are frequently neglected by the STEM inclusivity literature: foreign-born women, women with disabilities, Queer women, and mothers. What the authors find in their groundbreaking, detailed analysis is that the promises of STEM are only partly true: when compared to women not working in STEM, most women are indeed economically elevated by STEM occupations—yet when compared to white men in the same STEM occupations, women's second-class status is usually reaffirmed. The authors conclude by offering seven “big-picture” recommendations for rethinking STEM equity, showing just how we can successfully confront the entrenched patterns of economic disadvantage faced by diverse women in STEM jobs. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/gender-studies

An exploration of workplace participation and earnings patterns for diverse women in US STEM professions that upends the myth that STEM work benefits women economically. Seen as part economic driver, part social remedy, STEM work is commonly understood to benefit both the US economy and people—particularly women—from underrepresented groups. But what do diverse women find when they work in US STEM occupations? What do STEM jobs really deliver—and for whom? In Disparate Measures: The Intersectional Economics of Women in STEM Work (MIT Press, 2024), Mary Armstrong and Susan Averett challenge the conventional wisdom that a diverse US STEM workforce will bring about economic abundance for the women who participate in it. Combining intersectionality theory and critical data theory with a feminist economic analysis, the authors explore how different groups of diverse women truly fare in US STEM professions.Disparate Measures is centered on eight unique, in-depth case studies, each of which provides an intersectional economic analysis (a term coined by the authors) of diverse women working in STEM occupations. Four case studies prioritize women of color and examine the STEM participation and earnings of Black women, American Indian and Alaska Native women, Asian and Pacific Islander women, and Hispanic women/Latinas; four additional case studies illuminate intersections that are frequently neglected by the STEM inclusivity literature: foreign-born women, women with disabilities, Queer women, and mothers. What the authors find in their groundbreaking, detailed analysis is that the promises of STEM are only partly true: when compared to women not working in STEM, most women are indeed economically elevated by STEM occupations—yet when compared to white men in the same STEM occupations, women's second-class status is usually reaffirmed. The authors conclude by offering seven “big-picture” recommendations for rethinking STEM equity, showing just how we can successfully confront the entrenched patterns of economic disadvantage faced by diverse women in STEM jobs. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/science

An exploration of workplace participation and earnings patterns for diverse women in US STEM professions that upends the myth that STEM work benefits women economically. Seen as part economic driver, part social remedy, STEM work is commonly understood to benefit both the US economy and people—particularly women—from underrepresented groups. But what do diverse women find when they work in US STEM occupations? What do STEM jobs really deliver—and for whom? In Disparate Measures: The Intersectional Economics of Women in STEM Work (MIT Press, 2024), Mary Armstrong and Susan Averett challenge the conventional wisdom that a diverse US STEM workforce will bring about economic abundance for the women who participate in it. Combining intersectionality theory and critical data theory with a feminist economic analysis, the authors explore how different groups of diverse women truly fare in US STEM professions.Disparate Measures is centered on eight unique, in-depth case studies, each of which provides an intersectional economic analysis (a term coined by the authors) of diverse women working in STEM occupations. Four case studies prioritize women of color and examine the STEM participation and earnings of Black women, American Indian and Alaska Native women, Asian and Pacific Islander women, and Hispanic women/Latinas; four additional case studies illuminate intersections that are frequently neglected by the STEM inclusivity literature: foreign-born women, women with disabilities, Queer women, and mothers. What the authors find in their groundbreaking, detailed analysis is that the promises of STEM are only partly true: when compared to women not working in STEM, most women are indeed economically elevated by STEM occupations—yet when compared to white men in the same STEM occupations, women's second-class status is usually reaffirmed. The authors conclude by offering seven “big-picture” recommendations for rethinking STEM equity, showing just how we can successfully confront the entrenched patterns of economic disadvantage faced by diverse women in STEM jobs. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/economics

On April 23, President Trump signed E.O. 14281, Restoring Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy, declaring that “disparate-impact liability is wholly inconsistent with the Constitution and threatens the commitment to merit and equality of opportunity that forms the foundation of the American Dream.” In this episode, experts explore the origins, evolution, and controversy surrounding disparate impact law—from Section VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, to landmark Supreme Court decisions like Griggs v. Duke Power Co. (1971) and Wards Cove Packing Co., Inc. v. Atonio (1989), to the legislative response in the Civil Rights Act of 1991. What is disparate impact liability? How has it shaped outcomes in employment, housing, and equal access to opportunity? Is it a justifiable basis for legal liability without evidence of disparate treatment? Join us for a conversation on one of the most debated legal doctrines in American civil rights history and its role in shaping the future of equality and meritocracy.Featuring:Dan Morenoff, Executive Director, American Civil Rights Project and Adjunct Fellow, Manhattan InstituteGail Heriot, Professor of Law, University of San Diego School of Law[Moderator] Linda Chavez, Chairman, Center for Equal OpportunityAdditional Reading:Morenoff, Dan. "Disparate-Impact Liability: Unfounded, Unconstitutional, & Not Long For This World." Fedsoc.org. June 6, 2025. https://fedsoc.org/fedsoc-review/disparate-impact-liability-unfounded-unconstitutional-not-long-for-this-world

Watch the NEJM In Studio video of this interview at NEJM.org. David Jones is the Ackerman Professor of the Culture of Medicine at Harvard University. Harleen Marwah, the interviewer, is an Editorial Fellow at the Journal. W. Xue and D.S. Jones. Debating Race and the Diagnosis of Anemia — How Medicine Moved Away from Race-Based Standards. N Engl J Med 2025;392:2168-2173.

What makes a great Disparate? Adam and Pooka crack open M20 Forgotten and Forbidden Orders to spotlight the most compelling crafts in Mage 20—from the dream-walking Noma to the sandstorm-riding Taftani. Along the way, they unpack what works, what doesn't. Also in this episode: TryItCon 2, a listener review, and what happens when your RPG expectations go sideways.Show Notes TryItCon 2: Tarragon Edition – Now recruiting Storytellers and GMs for this online convention (June 13–15) in memory of Terry Robinson, $20 donation-based, proceeds go to charity Night Rangers fiction series ready — Technocratic Texas Rangers fiction M20 Forgotten and Forbidden Orders - Final NPC-focused supplement for Mage 20 The Noma - Reimagined Order of Hermes parallel with African roots The Templars - formerly Christian male militants, now inclusive and post-Christian The Taftâni - Strongest faction presence in Dubai, though questioned for realism The Hollow Ones - Introduces five internal “cliques” (e.g., Moles, Sound Wave Masters) The Kahu - Formerly Kopa Loei; modernized, open to diverse recruits

EO 14281 poses significant challenges for employers because it seeks to limit disparate impact liability but clashes with established state and local regulations and laws, such as New York City's law regarding the use of automated employment decision tools. This tension underscores the increasing complexity of managing artificial intelligence (AI)-driven decision-making in the workplace amid shifting legal standards. This week's key topics include: the scope of EO 14281; conflicts between EO 14281 and existing federal, state, and local laws; and best practices to mitigate risks in AI employment decisions. Epstein Becker Green attorneys Marc A. Mandelman and Nathaniel M. Glasser unpack these developments and provide employers with practical strategies to stay compliant and address critical workforce challenges. Visit our site for this week's Other Highlights and links: https://www.ebglaw.com/eltw391 Subscribe to #WorkforceWednesday: https://www.ebglaw.com/subscribe/ Visit http://www.EmploymentLawThisWeek.com This podcast is presented by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. All rights are reserved. This audio recording includes information about legal issues and legal developments. Such materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. These informational materials are not intended, and should not be taken, as legal advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances, and these materials are not a substitute for the advice of competent counsel. The content reflects the personal views and opinions of the participants. No attorney-client relationship has been created by this audio recording. This audio recording may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.

This week's guest, employment law expert Ben Ebbink of Fisher Phillips, tackles your biggest questions about President Trump's first 100 days head-on. Wondering if your DEI policies are still compliant? Not sure how executive orders will affect hiring and workplace rules? Curious how state laws come into play? Ben breaks down the red flags, offers practical compliance tips, and clarifies what's actually changed for employers in light of Trump's recent actions. Tune in to unravel exactly how executive orders, DEI policies, and shifting regulations could impact your workplace. Join Ben and Gene for a more in-depth review of Trump's first 100 days in this on-demand webinar: https://bit.ly/3FEWlVU Have a question for upcoming episodes or a topic you want covered? Let us know: https://payx.me/thrivetopics Topics include: 00:00 – Episode preview and welcome 01:51 – Webinar overview  03:01 – Is it time to revert your DEI policies? 05:49 – Managing risk in DEI programs 07:37 – DEI red flags that may attract scrutiny 11:10 – Demographic grant and scholarship programs 12:17 – Should you still call yourself an equal opportunity employer? 13:05 – EEO-1 reporting requirements and what changed 14:49 – Set-asides for women or minority-Owned businesses 16:57 – Do you need to rewrite your employee handbook? 19:33 – Disparate impact and disparate treatment 24:02 – AI legislation and state actions 28:31 – State vs federal law: Where does authority really lie? 31:36 – Wrap up and thank you DISCLAIMER: The information presented in this podcast, and that is further provided by the presenter, should not be considered legal or accounting advice, and should not substitute for legal, accounting, or other professional advice in which the facts and circumstances may warrant. We encourage you to consult legal counsel as it pertains to your own unique situation(s) and/or with any specific legal questions you may have.

Boortz explains a term you may have heard before and not realized it will be used against you.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Boortz explains a term you may have heard before and not realized it will be used against you.Atlanta's ONLY All Conservative News & Talk Station.: https://www.xtra1063.com/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Miguel Sousa Tavares relembra a responsabilidade dos políticos na ida a votos e analisa a campanha. E considera que os atuais protagonistas são "uma má opção" para primeiro-ministro. O cronista comenta ainda o anúncio de candidatura presidencial de Gouveia e Melo: "um tiro de pólvora seca, um disparate a 3 dias das eleições" que "ninguém compreende". See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This episode is presented by Create A Video – The 'disparate impact theory" has twisted so many areas of our society, and President Trump's executive order is a good first step in identifying the problem and the rot it has caused. Subscribe to the podcast at: https://ThePetePod.com/ All the links to Pete's Prep are free: https://patreon.com/petekalinershow Media Bias Check: If you choose to subscribe, get 15% off here! Advertising and Booking inquiries: Pete@ThePeteKalinerShow.comGet exclusive content here!: https://thepetekalinershow.com/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Beverly Hills Precious Metals Exchange - Buy Gold & Silver https://themelkshow.com/gold/ Speak with Gold Expert Andrew Sorchini…Tell Him Mel K Sent You! Order Mel's New Book: Americans Anonymous: Restoring Power to the People One Citizen at a Time https://themelkshow.com/book Dr. Zelenko Immunity Protocols https://zstacklife.com/MelK We The People must stand strong, stay united, resolute, calm, and focus on the mission. We at www.themelkshow.com want to thank all our amazing patriot pals for joining us on this journey, for your support of our work, and for your faith in this biblical transition to greatness. We love what we do and are working hard to keep on top of everything to help this transition along peacefully and with love. Please help us amplify our message: Like, Comment & Share! The Show's Partners Page: https://themelkshow.com/partners/ Consider Making A Donation: https://themelkshow.com/donate/ Another way to get involved and find ways to become active in the community is to come meet Mel and many amazing truth warriors at our upcoming live in-person speaking events. Together we are unstoppable. We look forward to seeing you. God Wins! https://themelkshow.com/events/ Remember to mention Mel K for great discounts on all these fun and informative events. See you there! Our Website www.TheMelKShow.com Support Patriots With MyPillow Go to https://www.mypillow.com/melk Use offer code “MelK” to support both MyPillow and The Mel K Show Mel K Superfoods Supercharge your wellness with Mel K Superfoods Use Code: MELKWELLNESS and Save Over $100 off retail today! https://themelkshow.com/partners/ Healthy Hydration: https://themelkshow.com/partners/ Patriot Mobile Support your values, your freedom and the Mel K Show. Switch to Patriot Mobile for Free. Use free activation code MELK https://themelkshow.com/partners/ HempWorx The #1 selling CBD brand. Offering cutting edge products that run the gamut from CBD oils and other hemp products to essential oils in our Mantra Brand, MDC Daily Sprays which are Vitamin and Herb combination sprays/ https://themelkshow.com/partners/ Dr. Zelenko Immunity Protocols https://zstacklife.com/MelK The Wellness Company - Emergency Medical Kits: https://themelkshow.com/partners/ Dr. Jason Dean and BraveTV bring you the most innovative and cutting edge science in Nutrition with Nano-Particle Detoxification, The Full Moon Parasite Protocol and Clot Shot Defense. https://themelkshow.com/partners/ Dr. Stella Immanuel, MD. Consult with a renowned healthcare provider! Offering Telehealth Services & Supplements. Use offer code ‘MelK' for 5% Off https://themelkshow.com/partners/ Rumble (Video) - The Mel K Show: https://rumble.com/c/TheMelKShow Twitter: https://twitter.com/MelKShow Twitter (Original): https://twitter.com/originalmelk TRUTH Social: https://truthsocial.com/@themelkshow Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/themelkshow/ CloutHub: https://app.clouthub.com/#/users/u/TheMelKShow Mel K Show Video Platform (Subscription): https://www.themelkshow.tv Bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/Iw2kiviwZpwx/ Podbean: https://themelkshow.podbean.com/ Gab: https://gab.com/MelKShow GETTR: https://www.gettr.com/user/themelkshow Locals.com: https://melk.locals.com/ Banned Video: https://banned.video/channel/the-mel-k-show Brighteon: https://www.brighteon.com/channels/themelkshow

What is "disparate impact?" You may not have heard of it, but this concept massively changed America for the worst over the past fifty years. Charlie explains what disparate impact is and why Trump's new EO to get rid of it is so crucial. Kevin Hassett of the National Economic Council offers promising updates on Trump tariffs and the American economy. Become a member at members.charliekirk.com! Get new merch at charliekirkstore.com!Support the show: http://www.charliekirk.com/supportSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

What is "disparate impact?" You may not have heard of it, but this concept massively changed America for the worst over the past fifty years. Charlie explains what disparate impact is and why Trump's new EO to get rid of it is so crucial. Kevin Hassett of the National Economic Council offers promising updates on Trump tariffs and the American economy. Become a member at members.charliekirk.com! Get new merch at charliekirkstore.com!Support the show: http://www.charliekirk.com/supportSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode, the last in Part One of Season 3, we spend some time with the men: Debling, John, and Will. Cressida and Danbury model some good friendship behaviours and… Oh who are we kidding. The only thing anyone takes away from this episode is: if the carriage is a-rocking, don't come a-knocking! Don't forget you can find us on facebook as @bridgertonpod and instagram as @wwddpod and we'd love for you to keep us in your online conversation using the hashtag WWDDpod. Featuring: - Patrick's fashion - Blondes don't have more fun - Disparate courting strategies - Men, explaining the world - Fan theories - Cressida's cage - Lady Featherington's armour - Manic regency pixie girl - Undrunk lemonade - Sad boy torpedo - Earnestness - Colin, consent, and conscientious finger choices Here are is the media we talk about in this episode: - Bridgerton in Bowral - Bridgerton, Season One - Bridgerton, Season Two - The Bridgerton books, a series by Julia Quinn - Romancing Mr Bridgerton, Bridgerton series 4, by Julia Quinn - Ocean's Eleven, a 2001 film ‘- But Daddy I love him', a song by Taylor Swift - The Northwest Passage, a bad idea - Little Women, a book by Louisa May Alcott - Gilmore Girls, a television show - Charlotte Tilbury, a makeup company - Swan Lake, a ballet - Star Wars: A Force Awakens, a 2015 film - ‘Snow on the Beach', a song by Taylor Swift and Lana Del Rey - Game of Thrones, a television show - ‘Race for your Love', a trope - ‘Give Me Everything', a song by Pitbull - Pitch Perfect, a 2012 film We were joined for this episode by our first official friend of the show, Patrick Lenton. You can hear more from Patrick by following him on his socials and by reading his newsletter Nonsense. For your TBR, Patrick recommends Boyfriend Material by Alexis Hall. Get it from your favourite independent bookstore or your local library. Don't forget you can find us on facebook @bridgertonpod and instagram @wwddpod and join the conversation using the hashtag #WWDDpod. You can also leave us a rating or review on your favourite podcast provider. Leaving a review ups your chance of a memorable carriage ride. This episode was recorded on the traditional and unceded land of the Wurundjeri, and Boonwurrung people. Our editor is Ben McKenzie of Splendid Chaps Productions. If you need production work completed, you can find them here: splendidchaps.com