Podcasts about disparate

Agradece a este podcast tantas horas de entretenimiento y disfruta de episodios exclusivos como éste. ¡Apóyale en iVoox! U.M.E.- Otro nuevo disparate en España (16-07-2026) Más contenido inédito en: https://www.es-tv.es Aportaciones a Raúl: https://www.patreon.com/user?u=40527138 Nº de cuenta: ES75 3018 5746 3520 3462 2213 Bizum: 696339508 o 650325992 Aportaciones a David: https://www.patreon.com/davidsantosvlog Nº de Cuenta: ES78 0073 0100 5306 7538 9734 Bizum: +34 644919278 Aportaciones a Equipo-F: TITULAR: EQUIPO F CUENTA: ES34 1465 0100 9417 5070 9106 C ÓDIGO SWIFT: INGDESMM Conviértete en miembro de este canal para disfrutar de ventajas: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-un-murciano-encabronao-david-santos-los-audios_sq_f11099064_1.html Canales de U.M.E.: Un murciano encabronao (Anmistiado) https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnetJQrKgE6M2cuM3z0Y8pQ Raúl U.M.E. (Anmistiado) https://www.youtube.com/@raulu.m.e.canal2720 El Cid murcianizador (Anmistiado) https://www.youtube.com/@ElCidmurciano/ Un murciano encabronao 3 U.M.E. (Anmistiado) https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5W_DTLvV-B9F2RhV9TCdeQ/videos Raúl U.M.E. Canal 2 (Defunto) Un murciano encabronao 3 U.M.E. (Defunto) Cosicas de Raúl (Defunto) RDM (Defunto) Raúl Viva España (Defunto) Raúl de Murcia (Defunto) Canales de David Santos: David Santos: https://www.youtube.com/c/DavidSantosVlog David Santos directos: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC9tKe5zFEb6BHVuaYH7qzTw/featured https://www.twitch.tv/davidsantos_oficial/Escucha este episodio completo y accede a todo el contenido exclusivo de Un murciano encabronao y David Santos. Los audios.. Descubre antes que nadie los nuevos episodios, y participa en la comunidad exclusiva de oyentes en https://go.ivoox.com/sq/1099064

»

Disparate Impact, Merit-Based Admissions, and Federal Contracting Reforms. Guest: Michael Toth. Michael Toth discusses the historical use of "disparate impact" as a mechanism for discrimination in university admissions. He details the current administration's efforts to root out racial preferences in federal contracting. Toth argues for a return to merit-based standards to restore the principle of equal justice. 131920 SCOTUS

Send us Fan MailMost HR professionals aren't prepared for the seismic shift happening around discrimination laws and missing it could cost you millions. What if your workplace policies are unknowingly trending toward unconstitutional practices, risking hefty fines and legal battles? This episode reveals the surprising changes to disparate impact guidelines, the real story behind recent legal opinions, and why your current practices might be out of step with federal standards. When the Department of Justice and EEOC start emphasizing intent and individual decision-making over broad policies, HR teams need to rethink everything from background checks to AI screening tools. You'll discover how a seemingly neutral rule, like a blanket criminal background check, can disproportionately harm protected groups without explicit discrimination. We break down real-world examples of unintended consequences, from hiring policies to physical ability tests, and how to identify hidden barriers that could expose your company to litigation.You'll also learn how recent legal opinions are reshaping the landscape, highlighting the importance of causation and the role of less discriminatory alternatives. We explore practical frameworks for assessing whether your employment practices are truly job-related and necessary, helping you avoid costly missteps. Plus, we delve into the intricacies of AI tools in hiring: Are these systems fair? Do they measure what matters? And how can HR stay involved without taking on undue risk?Tune in with Chuck and John to get all of the details you'll need to navigate these guidelines.  Support the showOur new book...The Ultimate Guide to HR: Checklists Edition is now AVAILABLE! Go to UltimateGuidetoHR.com to Get HR Right: and Avoid Costly Mistakes. Certified and approved for 3 SHRM Recertification Credits.Join the HR Team of One Community on Facebook or visit TeamAtHRstories.com and sign up for emails so you can be the first to know about new things we have coming up.You can also follow us on Instagram and TikTok at @HRstoriesPodcastDon't forget to rate our podcast, it really helps other people find it!Do you have a situation or topic you'd like the team to discuss? Are you interested in having Chuck or John talk to your team or Emcee your event?  You can reach the Team at  Email@TeamAtHRStories.com for suggestions and inquiries.The viewpoints expressed by the characters in the stories are not necessarily that of The Team at HR Stories. The stories are shared to present various, real-world scenarios and share how they were handled by policy and, at times, law. Chuck and John are not lawyers and always recommend working with an employment lawyer to address concerns. 

Foi uma das vozes mais influentes dos bastidores da rádio portuguesa. Neste episódio, Rui Pêgo revisita a infância em Angola, a chegada a Portugal pós-Revolução, a construção das rádios que marcaram gerações e a transformação dos media. Fala da ameaça da desinformação, da importância do serviço público, da polémica em torno da RTP e da forma como o digital mudou a comunicação. Pelo meio, deixa reflexões contundentes sobre liberdade, envelhecimento, educação e uma sociedade que, apesar de mais instruída, lhe parece cada vez mais abrutalhada.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

En este episodio analizo el caso de los 60 estudiantes excluidos por recibir un 0 en vascuence en la PAU del País Vasco, la antigua selectividad.

Today on The Editors, Rich, Charlie, Michael, and Dan discuss the reaction to the Karmelo Anthony sentence, the DOJ announcement about disparate impact, and Europeans' reactions to the U.S. as they explore the country while attending World Cup games. Editors' Picks: Rich: Sarah Schutte's upcoming magazine piece Charlie: Christian Schneider's piece “The Left's Citizens United Dishonesty Continues” Michael: Dan Flynn's piece “Is America 250 Not Really in 2026? Dan: Noah's post “Graham Platner Is the Very ‘Toxic Masculinity' Stereotype the Left Invented" Light Items: Rich: Random act of kindness Charlie: Music from the '50s Michael: His son's athletic accomplishments Dan: Air & Space Museum Sponsors:Made InVaer This podcast was edited and produced by Sarah Colleen Schutte. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

We begin our study in section II of the third volume from The Whole Truth About Fatima.Please support the Our Lady of Fatima Podcast:http://buymeacoffee.com/TerenceMStantonLike and subscribe on YouTube:https://m.youtube.com/@OurLadyOfFatimaPodcastFollow us on X:@FatimapodcastThank you!

In this episode of The Consumer Finance Podcast, Chris Willis, Lori Sommerfield, Taylor Gess, and Lane Page discuss the CFPB's sweeping final amendments to Subpart A of Regulation B. The group unpacks the elimination of the disparate impact legal theory from ECOA, the narrowing of the discouragement standard (including what it means for targeted advertising), and the significant new limits on special purpose credit programs (SPCPs). They also explore expected litigation challenges, the continuing role of the Fair Housing Act and state laws in bringing cases under the disparate impact theory, and the practical steps lenders should be taking now to reassess fair lending testing, SPCP design, and redlining risk in light of the final rule. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Today's episode of the Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast features a wide-ranging and timely discussion about one of the most consequential fair lending developments in years: the CFPB's final rule fundamentally reshaping enforcement under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) and Regulation B. Hosted by Alan Kaplinsky (the Founder, Chair for 25 years and now Senior Counsel of the Consumer Financial Services Group at Ballard Spahr, LLP), the episode brings together an exceptional panel of fair lending authorities: our special guest Bradley Blower (the Principal and Founder of Inclusive-Partners LLC) along with John Culhane, Jr., and Richard Andreano, Jr., Senior Counsel in the Consumer Financial Services Group at Ballard Spahr LLP. The discussion revisits a proposal first examined on the podcast last year when the CFPB under Acting Director Russell Vought proposed sweeping revisions to ECOA enforcement principles (you can find more on that episode here). Now, the Bureau has finalized the rule largely as proposed, marking a dramatic shift in federal fair lending policy. The CFPB's Three Major Changes As discussed during the podcast, the final rule makes three major changes from the former Regulation B: ·        Eliminates the use of disparate impact analysis under ECOA and Regulation B. ·        Narrows discouragement liability by focusing primarily on spoken, written, or visual statements rather than broader conduct. ·        Revises the framework governing Special Purpose Credit Programs (SPCPs), particularly for for-profit lenders. The Bureau's stated rationale is that ECOA does not authorize disparate impact liability and that fair lending enforcement should focus on intentional discrimination rather than statistical disparities alone. Supporters of the rule argue that the changes provide lenders with clearer standards, reduce regulatory uncertainty, and create a more predictable environment for innovation, including AI-driven underwriting and algorithmic decision-making. Critics, however, contend that the rule ignores the historical role disparate impact analysis has played in uncovering systemic discrimination and could make it substantially more difficult to identify discriminatory outcomes embedded in facially neutral policies or automated systems. Disparate Impact: A Sea Change, But Not the End of Fair Lending The panel devoted significant attention to the CFPB's elimination of disparate impact liability under ECOA. John Culhane described the move as a "dramatic shift" for non-mortgage lending, noting that disparate impact theories historically drove many federal fair lending actions involving indirect auto finance, student lending, and other consumer credit products. At the same time, Rich Andreano emphasized that the mortgage industry remains subject to disparate impact claims under the federal Fair Housing Act because of the Supreme Court's decision in Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project. As a result, mortgage lenders still face substantial fair lending exposure notwithstanding the CFPB's new ECOA position. The panelists also stressed that disparate impact is far from dead at the state level. Several states, including Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York, are expected to continue aggressive fair lending enforcement using disparate impact theories under state statutes, regulations, and consumer protection laws. Indeed, the panel highlighted the growing role of state attorneys general and state regulators as federal enforcement narrows. Discouragement Liability and the "Townstone Effect" Another focal point of the discussion was the CFPB's narrowing of discouragement liability. The panel explored how the Bureau's revisions appear heavily influenced by the CFPB's controversial enforcement action against Townstone Financial, where the Bureau alleged that comments made during radio broadcasts and podcasts discouraged minority borrowers from applying for loans. Rich Andreano characterized the final rule's discouragement provisions as effectively "the Townstone rule," reflecting the current CFPB leadership's strong opposition to the prior Bureau's enforcement theory in that case. Nevertheless, both Brad Blower and John Culhane cautioned that courts and state regulators may continue to consider broader conduct, including branch placement, marketing strategies, and community engagement, when evaluating potential redlining or discouragement claims. SPCPs Face New Uncertainty The podcast also examined the CFPB's revisions to Special Purpose Credit Programs. Brad Blower explained that while SPCPs remain permissible, the new rule substantially complicates the use of race-conscious programs by for-profit lenders. Many institutions may now seek to redesign programs around race-neutral criteria such as first-generation homeownership, low- and moderate-income geographies, or majority-minority census tracts. Rich Andreano warned that many financial institutions, especially banks, may scale back SPCPs due to litigation and regulatory uncertainty, particularly given the broader political and legal environment surrounding diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. The Practical Message: "Stay the Course" Despite the significance of the CFPB's rule changes, the clearest takeaway from the discussion was remarkably consistent: lenders should not dismantle their fair lending compliance programs. All three panelists emphasized that institutions should continue: ·                 Monitoring for disparate impact. ·                 Reviewing underwriting and pricing models. ·                 Evaluating marketing and branch strategies. ·                 Testing AI and algorithmic systems for bias. ·                 Maintaining robust fair lending compliance management systems. As Brad Blower observed, institutions that "take their foot off the gas" risk state enforcement actions, private litigation, reputational harm, and future regulatory scrutiny under a different federal administration. Rich Andreano summarized the prevailing industry guidance succinctly: "Stay the course." AI, Algorithmic Underwriting, and Future Litigation The panel also explored how the rule intersects with AI-driven lending. Although federal ECOA disparate impact enforcement may narrow, the panelists noted that state laws and private litigation could continue targeting algorithmic discrimination. Several states already are pursuing or considering laws specifically addressing AI bias and automated decision-making. The panel further predicted that legal challenges to the CFPB's final rule are highly likely. Potential claims could include: ·        Administrative Procedure Act challenges. ·        Arguments that the CFPB disregarded congressional intent underlying ECOA. ·        Challenges arising under the Supreme Court's decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which eliminated Chevron deference to agency rules. The panel suggested that litigation over the final rule could ultimately reach the Supreme Court, particularly on the unresolved question of whether ECOA itself authorizes disparate impact liability. Conclusion This episode provides an exceptionally practical and nuanced examination of one of the most important fair lending developments in recent memory. While the CFPB has dramatically narrowed federal ECOA enforcement theories, the broader fair lending landscape remains highly active due to state enforcement, private litigation risk, the Fair Housing Act, and ongoing scrutiny of AI-based underwriting systems. For lenders, the message from the panel was unmistakable: despite the CFPB's final rule, fair lending compliance remains as important as ever. You can listen to the full podcast on the Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast available through Ballard Spahr and major podcast platforms. Consumer Finance Monitor is hosted by Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel at Ballard Spahr, and the founder and former chair of the firm's Consumer Financial Services Group. We encourage listeners to subscribe to the podcast on their preferred platform for weekly insights into developments in the consumer finance industry.

“I'm going to speak the truth here, and this is not pleasant for people to hear.” In my podcast with author Heather Mac Donald, she says uncomfortable things about race, crime, feminism and more.For example, she says, “The reality of our world today is not white privilege. It's black privilege.” She says many jobs and colleges today unfairly favor black candidates with fewer skills. “Harvard until recently had about 16% blacks in its freshman class,” says Mac Donald, “If it admitted based on academic merit, there would be less than 1%.” She's been repeatedly called “‘racist' for saying things like that. “Am I a racist for bringing this up? I am not!” responds Mac Donald, “The facts are the facts … They have been completely kept out of the public eye to keep this systemic lie of racism going on.” In this podcast, more facts you won't hear covered by mainstream media.

Yang Lu, M.S., and Catharine E. Fairbairn, Ph.D. (University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign) join AJP Audio to discuss the longitudinal effects of the use of personal alcohol breathalyzers in a natural setting on alcohol usage. Afterwards, AJP Editor-in-Chief Dr. Ned Kalin joins the podcast to discuss the rest of the April issue, which focuses on subjects related to substance use disorders. 00:57     What did you discover about the long term effects of using a personal blood alcohol monitor? 03:12     Do health monitoring devices actually change behaviors? 04:10     What did your cohort look like? 08:49     Disparate impact of monitoring on heavy drinkers and light drinkers 11:36     Clinical implications 14:34     Limitations 15:46     Avenues for further research 18:39     Kalin interview 18:46     Lu et al. 24:00     Wittekind et al. 29:50     Nicholson et al. Transcript Be sure to let your colleagues know about the podcast, and please rate and review it on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen to it. Subscribe to the podcast here. Listen to other podcasts produced by the American Psychiatric Association. Browse articles online. How authors may submit their work. Follow the journals of APA Publishing on Twitter. E-mail us at ajp@psych.org

Esta noche os invito a imaginar un laboratorio, dos profesores empeñados en tener razón… y una rana que está a punto de protagonizar uno de los experimentos más extraños de la ciencia ficción. - Narración: Juan Carlos Albarracín - Locución Sintonía: Antonio Runa - Música: Epidemic Sound, con licencia - Imagen de Portada: Pixabay, con licencia https://pixabay.com/es/illustrations/solo-verde-rana-2084663/ Los Cuentos de la Casa de la Bruja es un podcast semanal de audio-relatos de misterio, ciencia ficción y terror. Cada viernes, a las 10 de la noche, traemos un nuevo programa. Alternamos entre episodios gratuitos para todos nuestros oyentes y episodios exclusivos para nuestros fans. ¡Si te gusta nuestro contenido suscríbete! Y si te encanta considera hacerte fan desde el botón azul APOYAR y accede a todo el contenido exclusivo. Tu aporte es de mucha ayuda para el mantenimiento de este podcast. ¡Gracias por ello! Mi nombre es Juan Carlos. Dirijo este podcast y también soy locutor y narrador de audiolibros, con estudio propio. Si crees que mi voz encajaría con tu proyecto o negocio contacta conmigo y hablamos. :) Contacto profesional: info@locucioneshablandoclaro.com www.locucioneshablandoclaro.com También estoy en X y en Bluesky: @VengadorT Y en Instagram: juancarlos_locutor Escucha el episodio completo en la app de iVoox, o descubre todo el catálogo de iVoox Originals

Len Suzio explains that although President Trump's Executive Order 14281 aims to limit disparate impact liability, the legal status of disparate impact remains unsettled. The Supreme Court upheld disparate impact under the Fair Housing Act in Inclusive Communities but imposed strict limits requiring a clear causal link between a specific practice and disparities—limits often downplayed by regulators in recent enforcement actions. Despite legal uncertainty and shifting enforcement priorities between administrations, Len advises compliance professionals to continue using disparate impact statistical analysis as a risk-management tool. Regardless of its legal future, it remains a practical way to identify potential discrimination, prompt further review, and demonstrate good-faith compliance. Brought to you by GeoDataVision and M&M Consulting

A testimony of the needed guidance of the Lord (this time in the realm of food and rage).

In this special crossover episode of The Consumer Finance Podcast and Regulatory Oversight, Chris Willis is joined by colleagues Lori Sommerfield and Matthew Berns to discuss New Jersey's sweeping new disparate impact regulations under the Law Against Discrimination. They break down one of the most comprehensive state-level disparate impact rules in the U.S., the contrasts with traditional federal standards, and implications for enforcement in financial services. The discussion dives into credit scores, underwriting models, AI and automated decision-making tools, and the difference between New Jersey's approach and the Trump administration's effort to scale back disparate impact at the federal level, offering practical takeaways for lenders and other covered entities navigating this shifting landscape. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

  Holly and Greg are joined by Dr. Richard Ferguson, President of the Black Physicians of Utah, to discuss the healthcare of black women in America and what leads to vastly more grave statistics for black mothers over white mothers.   

durée : 00:13:18 - Les Nuits de France Culture - par : Antoine Dhulster - Roger Caillois est au micro de Jeannine Worms en 1970, premier volet d'un long entretien en douze parties, où l'écrivain doit répondre de l'immense diversité de son œuvre qui pourrait désorienter le lecteur. - réalisation : Antoine Larcher - invités : Roger Caillois écrivain, éditeur, membre de l'Académie française

Episode Description: Kick off 2026 by decluttering your mind and marriage! In this episode, we explore how cluttered beliefs create misery in relationships and share 14 destructive marriage myths backed by research from experts like John Gottman, Murray Bowen, David Schnarch, and Carol Dweck. Learn healthier alternatives to foster deeper connection, reduce resentment, and build a fulfilling partnership. Perfect for couples seeking healthy relationship tips, toxic belief deconstruction, and marriage advice grounded in science.Keywords: toxic marriage beliefs, declutter your marriage, healthy relationship tips 2026, Gottman marriage research, Bowen family systems theory, Schnarch intimacy advice, Harvard happiness study relationships.The 14 Destructive Beliefs & Healthier Alternatives"My spouse should make me happy / complete me." Faulty due to external locus of control leading to lower satisfaction (Australian Study). Alternative: "My spouse is a companion in my happiness—I am responsible for my own emotional well-being.""If they really loved me, they'd know what I need without me saying it." Mind-reading expectations cause conflict (Mind-Reading Study; ResearchGate PDF). Alternative: "Love includes clear, kind communication about my needs and feelings.""A happy marriage means we never fight or have conflict." Gottman's research shows 69% of issues are perpetual (Gottman Institute). Alternative: "Conflict is an opportunity to understand each other better and grow closer through repair.""My partner should change to fix our problems." Satisfaction driven by perceptions, not partner change (PNAS Study). Alternative: "I can only change myself. Leading by example often invites positive shifts in my partner.""Disparate sexual desires mean we're incompatible." Normal in all relationships per Schnarch's "sexual crucible" (Crucible Institute; Psychology Today). Alternative: "Differences in desire are normal and offer growth opportunities.""Keeping score of who does more is fair and necessary." Breeds resentment; generosity boosts satisfaction (

Employers shouldn't overly rely on reports that the EEOC is no longer interested in disparate impact: private lawsuits and other entities bringing such claims, both in the traditional discrimination and the emerging "illegal DEI" contexts, still pose legal risks. In this episode, our attorneys discuss disparate impact versus treatment, "job-relatedness" defenses, the role of statistics and the value of privileged disparate impact analyses, and the need for ongoing employer vigilance given the potential financial and reputational harms associated with disparate impact claims.  

Vann Thomas Powell, Lisa Beard, and Micah McCoy remotely joined Michael Chovan-Dalton and Dani Paglione at the JKC Gallery at Mercer County College to talk about their newly formed photography collective, Disparate Projects. We will also discuss the process of publishing their first book, Fractured by Christiaan Lopez-Miro.Vann Thomas Powell is a photographer, curator, and researcher. Vann received his MFA in Experimental and Documentary Art at Duke University (2023) and has been featured in solo exhibitions, books, and periodicals in the United States and abroad including The Independent (UK), Glitterati Editions (New York, NY). His books and works can be found in private and public collections including the Rubenstein Rare Books and Manuscripts Library (Duke University) and the Museum of Fine Art Special Collections (Tufts University). Vann is a Photolucida Critical Mass 2023 Top 200 Finalist.Lisa Beard is a photo-based artist, writer, teacher, and curator. Featured in national and international exhibitions, her work has appeared in group and solo shows, recently as a featured exhibitor for Head On Photo Festival in Sydney, AU. She has also been included in publications for The International Center of Photography, The Hand Magazine, Float Magazine, and Broad Magazine. She is a 2024 Klompching Fresh Finalist and Photolucida Critical Mass 2024 Top 200 Finalist. Lisa received her MFA in Media Arts from Maine Media College (2022).Micah McCoy is a photographer, curator, and poet based in Northwest Arkansas. He received his MFA in Photography from Columbia College Chicago (2022) and has exhibited work in solo and group exhibitions both in the United States and abroad. His work explores issues of religiosity, anxiety, and social detachment. Micah's editorial photography has been featured in publications including NBC News, The New York Post, and others. https://disparateprojects.comDisparate Projects is an evolving collective and platform dedicated to the exploration of contemporary photography. Founded by Lisa Beard, Micah McCoy, and Vann Thomas Powell, we are committed to thoughtful photographic curation, engaging critical discussions in photographic theory, and nurturing collaborations with photographers of disparate approaches.This podcast is sponsored by the Charcoal Book ClubBegin Building your dream photobook library today athttps://charcoalbookclub.comThe Real Photo Show is hosted and produced by Michael Chovan-DaltonThe JKC Gallery Artist Talks are hosted and produced by: Real Photo Show/Michael Chovan-Dalton, Julia Colonna, and Dani Paglione.

At the heart of the federal DEI machine is the doctrine of "disparate impact." Now, the Trump DOJ is moving rapidly to rip that doctrine to shreds. If they succeed, it will have a transformative effect on the whole country. The DOJ's civil rights chief Harmeet Dhillon explains why her move is so crucial and long-overdue, and the show reacts to Trump's 2024-style rally in Pennsylvania. Watch every episode ad-free on members.charliekirk.com! Get new merch at charliekirkstore.com!Support the show: http://www.charliekirk.com/supportSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

At the heart of the federal DEI machine is the doctrine of "disparate impact." Now, the Trump DOJ is moving rapidly to rip that doctrine to shreds. If they succeed, it will have a transformative effect on the whole country. The DOJ's civil rights chief Harmeet Dhillon explains why her move is so crucial and long-overdue, and the show reacts to Trump's 2024-style rally in Pennsylvania. Watch every episode ad-free on members.charliekirk.com! Get new merch at charliekirkstore.com!Support the show: http://www.charliekirk.com/supportSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

El PP tardó en pronunciarse sobre la propuesta de nombramiento de la nueva Fiscal General del Estado. Parece obvio que el perfil elegido les sorprendió. Fue, de hecho, la portavoz del PP en el Congreso la que ofreció ya avanzado el día de ayer unas primeras declaraciones dignas de olvido. Estamos tan acostumbrados ya a escuchar excesos verbales que casi estamos inmunizados contra el disparate. ¿Acaso quien acumula una larga carrera profesional no se ha ganado el derecho a ser oída antes de ser juzgada? Lo aconseja del decoro y un mínimo sentido de la vergüenza, aunque quizás esto sea demasiado pedir para quien vive la política a garrotazos.

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

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.

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

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 ★

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.

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

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.

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.