risk compensation

The Speech I Got Arrested For (But Not Really) [shared with permission]

So my best good pal who walked out of the pokey earlier this afternoon gave this speech at the thing, a couple whiles before the cops decided to assault peaceful protesters and then haul people off to jail for the crime of not running away fast enough (seriously; they’re calling not getting away “resisting a police officer”).  They told me I could share it wherever I pleased to, so this here’s me using what little voice I’ve got.


As some of you may have heard, I’ve recently been released from being locked up in the men’s processing center of the Marion County Jail. Which, as a non-binary trans person with gender non-conforming proclivities, would not have boded well had I not had the company of good comrades nearby, and the knowledge that people were still fighting for us on the outside. Also, there were neo-nazis. So there’s that. And to top it all off, I’ve been repeatedly deadnamed in the media. So, please, don’t read the names of the arrests, out of respect for me as your friend and as a person. But, in its full, uncut glory, I present to you the call-to-arms I issued last night: 


 Good evening. My name is Cambria. I organise locally in several Leftist, Labour, and Trans liberation circles, and tonight I am speaking on behalf of the Michiana and Central Indiana IWW’s General Defence Committee. The mission of the GDC is to provide defense and relief to members of the working class who are being persecuted for their activity in the class struggle, and to aid those who find themselves persecuted by the powers that be in their struggle for justice and freedom. This aid may include bail, bond, or legal aid, and may take the form of a grant or a no interest loan. Members may also rest assured of solidarity from the organization, including motions of support, letters writing, and public education as to the case (or cases) in question. Such gestures of solidarity are offered to political prisoners, regardless of membership in the IWW or GDC. 

Keep reading

One Call Examines Ongoing Controversy around the Use of Medical Marijuana in Workers’ Compensation

JACKSONVILLE, Fla.–(BUSINESS WIRE)–

Small-scale clinical trials have shown promising results in medical marijuana’s ability to treat chronic pain. However, marijuana remains illegal at the federal level, preventing broad use of marijuana as an alternative to addictive and dangerous painkillers. To outline these and other complex issues surrounding the medical marijuana debate, Kevin Glennon, RN, BSN, vice president of clinical programs at One Call Care Management (“One Call”), was selected to deliver a featured presentation at the annual Risk Management Society (RIMS) Conference.

In his session, “Controversy Continues: Medical Marijuana in Workers’ Compensation,” Glennon informed risk managers and workers’ compensation professionals about the latest developments regarding legalization, clinical studies and potential policy changes of medical marijuana under the Trump administration.

“Today, controversy continues due to the discrepancy between state and federal laws,” said Glennon. “At the federal level, marijuana is illegal because it’s classified as a Schedule 1 drug under the Controlled Substance Act (CSA). However, to date, 29 states and the District of Columbia have legalized medical marijuana. In addition, 83 percent of Americans now believe doctors should be able to recommend medical marijuana to patients, according to a recent Yahoo/Marist poll.”

Last year, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) was asked to reconsider its classification of marijuana, but it decided against changing it and wanted stronger evidence of marijuana’s therapeutic value. Toward this end, the DEA increased the number of entities registered to grow and supply marijuana to researchers. This will increase availability for clinical trials, but there are still significant hoops to jump through to conduct marijuana research.

These obstacles come at a time when the industry needs alternative treatments for pain, noted Glennon. Last year, Time magazine reported that overdose deaths in the U.S. involving opioids (prescription painkillers and heroin) quadrupled since 1999, and opioid abuse was costing $72 billion in medical costs alone each year.

“Due to the types of accidents and injuries that occur in workers’ compensation, the industry experiences a high incidence of chronic pain cases, which makes it vulnerable to opioid abuse,” added Glennon. “With more states legalizing medical marijuana, however, we’re seeing reports of patients actually turning down prescription painkillers like Oxycodone in favor of medical marijuana.”

Studies have shown a correlation between states legalizing medical marijuana and a subsequent decrease in painkiller prescriptions, opioid use and deaths from opioid overdoses.

While President Trump is sympathetic toward patients using medical marijuana for serious ailments, his administration may heighten enforcement against recreational use. If a federal crackdown occurs, even users of medical marijuana are technically in violation of federal law. A user’s employment, access to government benefits and parental rights could be in jeopardy if marijuana is detected in drug-screening tests. As a result, the threat of increased enforcement may set back legalization efforts in other states. And, several marijuana-reclassification bills that have been proposed at the federal level are now stalled.

“It’s a catch-22. Marijuana may be an effective alternative to opioids, but researchers are significantly restricted in being able to prove this theory, as long as marijuana is classified as a Substance 1 drug,” noted Glennon. “The fastest road to reclassification may be through FDA approval. If there is enough clinical evidence for the FDA to approve a marijuana-based drug, the DEA would move to reclassify.”

In the meantime, the industry should continue to monitor legalization efforts and new case law affecting our states, as well as follow best practice guidelines established by organizations like the American College for Occupational & Environmental Medicine (ACOEM).

About One Call Care Management

One Call is the nation’s leading provider of specialized solutions to the workers’ compensation industry. One Call has six locations across the United States with its corporate headquarters located in Jacksonville, Florida. One Call’s solutions enable faster, more efficient and more cost-effective claims resolution with a focus on injured workers’ needs across the continuum of care. One Call provides reliable, consistent connections to care with expertise in high-end diagnostics, physical therapy and transportation services, post-discharge home care and durable medical equipment, dental and doctor specialty services, complex care management, and the language services required for today’s multicultural workforce. For more information, visit www.onecallcm.com. For regular updates, follow One Call on Twitter at @onecallcm.

View source version on businesswire.com: http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20170502005652/en/

.bwalignc {text-align: center !important;} ;}

Whether I agree or disagree with who’s on the new money and why or why not…it will be the greatest travesty if we as a country do not use this as an opportunity to tell about their greatness. To sugarcoat Harriet Tubman’s legacy as simply a ‘fight for justice’ would deny some Americans teachable lessons; perpetuate ignorance. She was a disabled Black woman who very illegally freed hundreds of slaves in a system that made violence against Blacks not only acceptable, but profitable, marketable. She did all she did in spite of the government. She was very well breaking the law with every new escapee. She later, being a 40+ year old woman, served as a Union spy and left raids and missions that were vital to the North’s victory. Even after that, the government still refused her pension and compensation for risking her life. Any talks about “her legacy” that conveniently omit the slavery and the Civil War are revisionist and serve to perpetuate some retrospective sense of nationalism that she was not here for. Learn something. Do better.

SIERRA LEONE, Freetown : Volunteers arrive to pick up bodies of people who died of the Ebola virus, against a 100 US dollar weekly risk-taking compensation, on October 8, 2014 in Freetown. Dozens of British military personnel are due to fly to Sierra Leone next week to help build medical facilities to combat the Ebola epidemic, the defence ministry said on October 7. AFP PHOTO / FLORIAN PLAUCHEUR

anonymous asked:

As an anonymous game dev, do you have any opinion on the contract that SAG-AFTRA is considering striking over? Does it seem [un]reasonable from your position?

This is something topical, so I figured I’d try to address it. I’ve looked over the arguments, and I generally feel like both sides have some legitimate asks.

Primarily, [this is what SAG-AFTRA wants]:

  1. Royalties/residuals. Blockbuster games sell a lot of copies, and good voice acting makes a big difference. If you put in the work, you should get something out of it. I’m fairly certain they want this in addition to their current rates (which can be pretty high, most of the time it’s at least $10,000 per day to hire them with celebrities like Ron Perlman commanding multiples of that for a single day’s recording.)
  2. Hazard pay for vocally stressful performances. If you could possibly injure your throat or voice by having to scream, yell, or shout for hours on end, you should probably earn some sort of additional risk compensation for it - especially if you don’t have a steady job that provides health insurance.
  3. A stunt coordinator present at all motion capture sessions. This is an added cost that isn’t always needed - needing one when you’re motion capturing walking, sitting, conversing, etc. might not really be necessary.
  4. Transparency - the performers want to know what it is they are performing for before auditioning. This actually has some direct correlation with #4 that the publishers are asking for below.

For the most part, most of these are reasonable asks. It seems unlikely that publishers will simply grant additional monetary compensation on top of existing compensation without something else - reducing the flat payment amount in exchange for a small percentage of the total take, for example. But that’s an argument for the lawyers.

Keep reading for the publisher/developer side of this.

Keep reading