Category: Archive – 2011

A world of researcher recruitment revolves around EURAXESS

These are challenging times for any business. It is difficult to maintain a competitive edge, but the one way to go about it is to invest in R&D. Perhaps you are at present looking to hire a researcher, but where do you start? Your first port of call should be EURAXESS.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"EURAXESS – Researchers in Motion" is a pan-European initiative to enhance research potential in Europe. It brings together the European Commission and 36 countries to provide a wealth of information and support regarding research careers across the European Research Area.

EURAXESS Jobs: a stress-free recruitment tool offering constantly updated information on research job vacancies, funding opportunities and fellowships throughout Europe, making it an attractive place for researchers to look for the best opportunities. Your research job vacancy could be the one they are looking for. Here you can post job vacancies and search for the best candidates, free of charge.

EURAXESS Services: a network of over 200 centres located in 36 European countries, at your disposal for any concerns you may have regarding the employment of a researcher irrespective of nationality. You can receive free and personalised assistance on topics including: visas; work permits; accommodation; social security; taxes; and language lessons.

EURAXESS Rights: spells out rights and obligations for researchers and their employers through the 'European Charter for Researchers and the Code of Conduct for their Recruitment'. This ‘Charter & Code' has the aim of supporting research careers and encouraging transparent and fair recruitment procedures. In signing the ‘Charter & Code' you join a truly pan-European network of researchers and research organisations, and you benefit from international visibility on the EURAXESS Rights website and eventually through the use of the special HR Excellence in Research Logo. To date, nearly 1000 institutions from 30 countries have expressed their support.

More information on any of the above can be found on the EURAXESS – Researchers in Motion website (http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/)

An improved version of the TARIC, the EU's online customs tariff data base, is now available in the TARIC's 21 languages.

It offers new search functions, relating to the type of measures applicable to a product or a chapter and to certain tariff quota;

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

the (type of) measures applicable during a certain period;

the regulations that are linked to the measures or the EU Official Journal; as well as

the possibility to display more than one product code at the same time.

Any question on the use of the new version can be sent to

Commission Decision 2008/329/EC has ceased being valid on 21 April 2009 and its validity has not been renewed. Consequently, the requirements regarding the affixing of warnings on magnetic toys deriving from Government Notice No. 493 (Government Gazette no. 18,261 of 6th June 2008) are no longer applicable.

 

The affixing of warnings on every magnetic toy is no longer needed since the risks posed by magnetic toys have been addressed by the harmonised standard covering the mechanical and physical properties relating to the safety of toys. This means that manufacturers of magnetic toys need to abide to some specific restrictions, which are detailed in the harmonised standard and which mainly concern the magnetic flux index of magnets and the size of the magnets used in toys, in order to be entitled to affix the CE mark on their magnetic toys.

Magnetic/electrical experimental sets that are not intended for children under 8 years are excluded from the requirements of the harmonised standard, provided that they carry a warning. The exception applies only to the more advanced experimental sets that include building of electrical motors, loudspeakers, doorbells, etc., i.e. products that need both magnetism and electricity for their function. The following is the warning that must be affixed on the packaging and instructions for use of such products:

"WARNING! Not suitable for children under 8 years. This product contains (a) small magnet(s). Swallowed magnets can stick together across intestines causing serious injuries. Seek immediate medical attention if magnet(s) are swallowed".

When a manufacturer follows the harmonised standard and affixes the CE mark to his magnetic toy, he/she is declaring that the provisions of the harmonised standard have been adhered to and that the magnetic toy is safe. This is the reason why the affixing of warnings on magnetic toys is no longer required.

Feed back to be sent to by 19th of January 2011.

The EU has proposed a new set of rules to better adapt the GSP rules of origin to the needs of the beneficiary countries.

 

The reform will be implemented from 2011 and the main highlight is the special distinction towards Least Developed Countries (LDCs). A specific effort has been made to simplify the procedures.

By relaxing several conditions and allowing operators to establish the certificates of origin themselves, the new regulation will give more predictability and be less burdensome for the beneficiary country authorities.

The current certificates issued by public administrations will be replaced by assessments made out by registered exporters -self certification- after a transition period (2017). Until then, both sides' customs authorities will work to reinforce cooperation.

Target sectors identified and specially targeted

Textiles: LDCs will now need just a single transformation, instead of the previous double transformation. This means that fabric can now be imported to produce clothing and this would, for example, allow for sourcing of very competitive fabrics abroad.

Agricultural products: an important effort of simplification has taken place. For instance, limitations on the use of sugar have been reduced permitting up to 40% in weight of nonoriginating sugar (instead of the previous 30% in value). However some new limitations have been introduced in very concrete cases (i.e. the use of dairy products).

Fisheries: the rules of origin have been simplified and relaxed eliminating the current crew requirement for vessels conditions.

Cumulation is now also possible:

Within the already existing regional groups (i.e. ASEAN, SAARC, etc) as well as the newly added MERCOSUR group.

Between SAARC and ASEAN for most products

Between GSP countries and countries linked to the EU via an FTA upon request for industrial products

SMEs were left with mixed feelings by the vote at the European Parliament's plenary on the so-called "Bendtsen report" on the EU Energy Efficiency Action Plan. GRTU praises most of the report's recommendations, which are going to feed into the plan to be presented by the European Commission in spring next year, in particular as far as assistance and funding possibilities for SMEs are concerned. However, GRTU supports the recommendation made by MEPs of an impact assessment prior to increasing the speed and scope of the application of the Ecodesign directive.

 

Finally, while clearly supporting initiatives that can lower the environmental impact of the transport sector, GRTU is against the "modal shift" from high energy intensive transport modes to low energy ones advocated by the Parliament, calling on the Commission to revert to the "co-modality" approach, by which all transport modes are used in combination to achieve an optimal and sustainable utilisation of resources.

The vote on the Bendtsen report will provide the European Commission with excellent input for its upcoming Energy Efficiency Action Plan. We fully share the report‟s recommendations on the need to devise mechanisms for assisting SMEs in achieving greater energy efficiency and to provide financing schemes at national, regional and local level to reach this aim. However, we are afraid that the some recommendations on ecodesign and transport policy may be a step too far for SMEs.

On the Ecodesign directive, the report calls for a faster implementation and for the extension of the rules to a long and detailed list of new products. This cannot be done without a proper impact assessment of the consequence of such an extension on SMEs.

With just two letters you can indicate that your product complies with the EU legislation, making it eligible to be sold throughout the European Union. That is the CE marking.

 

Since 1993 this label gives you access to the entire European market, including the 27 European Union countries as well as Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein.

By affixing the CE mark to your product, you indicate its compliance with the necessary legislation and avoid having to obtain individual approvals from each of the 30 national authorities, thereby reducing costs and the administrative burden.

Not all products need to bear the CE marking. It applies to about 24 product categories, from toys and electrical equipment to medical devices. You can find out whether your product requires CE marking at the "Requirements" section of the Export Helpdesk or by accessing the full list of product categories.

Interesting to manufacturers

Whether you are based in Europe or elsewhere, you must affix the CE marking to your product if required. By using it, you are declaring that your product complies with the legal requirements in force in Europe.

The affixing of the CE marking may be done either by the manufacturer himself or by an authorised European representative.

For some products it is necessary to have an authorised third party (the so called Notified Bodies) involved in the assessment procedure. To check the list of assessment bodies, check the NANDO database.

Interesting to importers

While manufacturers are responsible for ensuring product compliance and adding the CE marking, importers also play an important role in making sure that only products complying with EU legislation are placed on the market.

If the goods have been produced outside the EU and the manufacturer has no representative in Europe, importers must verify that the manufacturer has taken the necessary steps to ensure the conformity of the product and that the documentation is available if requested.

If you market the goods under your own name, you take over the manufacturer's responsibilities. That means you must have sufficient information on the design and production of these products, as you will be assuming the legal responsibility for using the CE marking.

GRTU is satisfied that after persistent pressure by GRTU and detailed negotiations with the Permanent secretaries responsible for Resources and Rural Affairs and for Environmental Policies and MEPA and for Finance and the Economy and Investment, Government has once again issued applications for exemptions from Eco Contribution in accordance with Legal Notice 84 of 2010. This Legal Notice includes a list of products that are liable to the exemption of Eco Contribution payment.

 

GRTU has consistently been requesting the issue of this application as from 1^st September 2010. We have also insisted with Government to increase the products on the said Legal Notice that are currently liable to Exemption, if one is an Authorised Packaging Scheme member. The last part of our demand seems to have fallen on deaf ears. We shall of course continue to insist on this matter as the only way that Authorised Schemes can survive is by Private Industry paying according to the polluter pays principle and not by indirect taxation, which is what Eco Contribution is actually today.

Eco Contribution continues to be the most haphazard ‘environmental tax' ever to be burdened on a select number of the business community at large in Malta and Gozo.

The Malta Chamber of Small and Medium Enterprises advices all traders and importers currently effecting payments of Eco Contribution that The Approving Body (Eco-Contributions) has issued the relative applications for exemption from eco-contribution on packaging waste for the coming year 2011. GRTU will be setting up two meetings for all those current payers of Eco Contribution who by Legal Notice 84 of 2010 can become exempt from this payment. The meetings are scheduled as follows:

Thursday January 6^th at 1.30 pm and Friday January 7^th at 7pm at GRTU Head Offices.

Current holders of Eco Exemption Certificates still need to re apply for exemption for the year 2011.

Green MT, GRTU's Authorised National Waste Packaging Scheme will be providing all the support required to fill in these applications in order to be submitted by 28^th January 2011.

Liquigas as successors at law of Enemalta Corporation in all fields related to gas production, purchase, sale and distribution is contractually legally committed by individual contracts with each individual gas distributors. As a result of these contracts Liquigas has conceded to each individual gas distributor the rights of Liquigas as per sale and distribution Licences issued to Liquigas by MRA (and Enemalta Corporation as predecessors in title) in each territory conceded under contract to each gas distributor.

 

To strengthen the position of each distributor the Enemalta Corporation, as the then Licensing Authority, also issued to each individual gas distributor an operating Licence also "renewable automatically every year" so that each individual gas distributor is not dependent on the management in his territory of the licence applicable to Enemalta (and therefore its successor Liquigas) but can operate  also as an independent licensee on the basis of his operating Licence incorporating the territory to which his licence is applicable This Licence is issued in terms of the contractual obligation binding the Licensing Authority.

The decision of the Office for Fair Competition of December 24^th, 2011 in no way alters the validity and contractual obligations of the parties. The decision of OFC declared however that:

Liquigas are to "cease and desist immediately from imposing any exclusive purchase/distribution obligation on any individual gas distributor in the execution of his obligations " under the contract.

Liquigas "with immediate effect and unconditionally supplies distributors with gas cylinders in order to avoid consumer harm."

Indeed GRTU contends that the MRA is obliged to ensure that no action whatsoever is effected by Liquigas, or any other supplier that may enter the distribution market, that may be deemed to be in breach of the contractual obligations entered into in 1992 or be deemed in contempt of the OFC's decision 24^th December 2010.

GRTU on behalf of Gas Distributors is committed to enter   into bilateral discussions with Liquigas as soon as it is convenient for Liquigas so that the practical arrangements as to how to implement the decision of OFC with the least inconvenience to Liquigas and to consumers and commercial users are agreed and to ensure that each Gas Distributor continues to abide by the concessionary rights awarded to him by the contract of 1992 and to revive the Board of Discipline mentioned in Article 16 that  provide for a statutory grievance procedure mechanism.

GRTU on behalf of the Gas Distributors is currently in discussions with Easygas to agree on the terms of sale and distribution of Easygas cylinders.  Currently no agreement exists with Easygas as GRTU prudently awaits conclusion of additional arrangements with their contractual partners Liquigas, however in the absence of more detailed structural arrangements approved by MRA action has been taken to implement the OFC decision as follows:

Easy gas will provide cages to gas distributors so Easygas cylinders are clearly identifiable

Easygas will provide each gas distributor with at least 35 cylinders, comprising different sizes, and first provision is on free credit basis and payment effected on first replacement by gas distributors of cylinders sold to consumers and for which payment by consumers has been effected.

The service offered  until  further arrangements is:

Sale of new Easygas service on a deposit of Euro25 and appropriate Easygas deposit receipt.

Replacement of Liquigas cylinder with Easygas cylinder at no charge provided customer provides LiquigasEnemalta deposit receipt and Gas Distributor provides new Easygas receipt for €25.

Withdrawal of Liquigas cylinder and replacement with Easygas upon payment of €20 in cases where customer does not provide receipts and issue by gas distributor of Easygas deposit receipt for €25 (Liquigas exchanges gas cylinders for only €5 when no receipt is available, this as Company policy). Deposit applies the same for all sizes of cylinders.

Other arrangements will be entered into once relations on a tri-partite basis Liquigas, Easygas and GRTUGas Distributors get moving in a structured form leading to a ‘clearing-house" arrangement.

Liquigas must retain its obligation to accept return of cylinders either on production of receipt and payment of €25 or no receipt for the lower €5 whether return is made directly by consumers or by gas distributors.

GRTU accepts Government declared policy announced on 24th December 2010 in favour of a unique sole system of trucking in the distribution of gas cylinders in localities and this for environmental, social and traffic management criteria.

GRTU contends that  MRA as a contractual party to the 1992 is obliged to ensure that neither Liquigas nor Easygas  abuse of their licence to hamper Gas Distributors in the rights and concessionary territory under their care through the provision by either supplier of new trucking/delivery services in competition with the service offered by gas distributors for as long as the distributors abide the terms of their contractual obligations.

GRTU will make all endeavors possible to ensure an early upgrade of the current distribution system in the localities for the greater satisfaction of consumers and commercial users.

GRTU appreciates the involvement of the authorities to ensure that an efficient and friction-free system of gas distribution in the Localities that further upgrades the current contractually established system is agreed to as early as possible.

Another issue GRTU has this time is with the Ministry of Finance. This is yet another case where GRTU enters into agreements in good faith with Government and then someone realizes that this agreement is not good for Government and decides to unilaterally force a change. This is the Time line of events:

 

200% TAX CREDIT ON EXPENDITURE MADE BY PHARMACIES TO IMPLEMENT P.O.Y.C. AS PER POYC M.O.U.  signed July 2007.

On page 12, Appenix "B" of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) signed with GRTU on behalf of pharmacy owners together with Chamber of Pharmacists on behalf of Managing Pharmacists, it is stated that:

"Government will implement a Tax Credit Scheme of up to 200% of the actual expenditure on software and equipment necessary for the implementation of the POYC subject to a maximum capital expenditure of LM 3000"

This one time fiscal advantage was given as an inducement to Pharmacies to join the POYC Scheme without going through much unnecessary capital expenditure necessitated by the movement of patients from Government distribution centres to pharmacies in the community.

During the final meeting prior to the signing of this MOU, to which all parties were present including the Permanent Secretaries at the Ministry responsible for Medical Services and the Ministry responsible for Finance as well as the GRTU and the Chamber of Pharmacists, it was agreed that this 200% will be given to Pharmacies in Tax Credit, and was clearly made to be understood that up to a maximum capping of LM 3,000 x 2 (200%) = LM 6,000 (€ 13,976.24) will be deducted from Tax DUE to the  Commission for Inland Revenue (CIR).

Well after the agreement was signed, the CIR contacted GRTU stating that it was technically difficult for CIR to carry out the Tax Credit obligation mentioned in the MOU unless a Legal Notice was published. The CIR also strangely, as other tax credit schemes exist, said that the words "Tax Credit" could not be mentioned in the Legal Notice, therefore this wording had to substituted.

GRTU was therefore called in to find a solution without effectively changing the mechanism. Initially it was agreed that since pharmacies will claim 200% of the amount spent on software, equipment, and furnishings necessary for the implementation of the POYC, the normal depreciation will not apply on the original expenditure. Therefore, pharmacies who may have already claimed such depreciation had to reverse the amount on future Tax Returns. In order however not to disrupt the accounting system on the P/L Tax Returns, it was decided to claim depreciation normally, and minus the amount of Tax saved from the total amount claimed for the Tax Credit.

When the CIR realised that the MOU allowed for a Tax Credit of 200% of the amount on expenditure made, up to a maximum of LM 3,000 (LM 6,000 = € 13,976.24), they decided to oppose the amount and insisted on its renegotiation and needed to arrive to a compromise since the capped amount agreed upon had to be indicated in the Legal Notice.

It was agreed that claim for depreciation will apply normally in addition to a maximum of € 9,000 capping will be deducted from the Tax due.

Another meeting was called MFIN to agree and approve the wording on the draft of the Legal Notice before it was published. MFIN on request confirmed that the original mechanism stated in the MOU will not be changed so that the value to members of what was granted would not be diminished. This implied specifically, apart from the applicable normal depreciation, a maximum amount of € 9,000 capping representing the 200% of the expenditure amount will need to be deducted from the Tax due by each pharmacy owner. The emphasis was clearly on the words Tax Due. The Ministry's senior Budget co-ordinator following requested also confirmed that any remaining balance after deduction from Tax due will be rolled over and be utilised during the following year/s.

Unfortunately, following the publication of the Legal Notice, GRTU and Chamber of Pharmacists were informed that the deduction will be from the taxable amount and NOT from the TAX DUE. As soon as GRTU became aware of this it immediately raised the issue with MFIN. MFIN officials have refrained from taking any responsibility and suggested we raise the issue directly with the Minister.

GRTU Pharmacy Owners Section Committee has since then made repeated attempts to set up a meeting with Minister Tonio Fenech after the issue was raised in September during GRTU's Executive Council meeting with the Prime Minister. Both the Minister and the Ministry seem unwilling to re-discuss the issue and consider it closed.

As things stand today the POYC Scheme is in jeopardy. GRTU did not want to issue directives to pharmacies participating in the scheme within the localities where POYC is already in action and greatly appreciated by patients even though GRTU is under great pressure by its members who have been assured by GRTU that they will be directly refunded through the tax credit scheme. Now the scheme is due to be extended to Malta's largest locality, Birkirkara. Already our members in B'Kara have indicated that they do not wish to fall victims of Governments incorrect interpretation of what was agreed with GRTU on the tax credit issue.

GRTU is greatly aggrieved that repeatedly now Government officials sign and approve something and then there is a Ministerial decision to disregard contracts or agreement signed after months of laborious and lengthy negotiations.  This is not good governance, but it is political dishonesty.

GRTU feels this is a tremendously negative trend in Industrial Relations which will definitely lead to more strife. This is one other case were GRTU is being forced to issue directives. This time GRTU directives will stall the introduction of a scheme of which GRTU is the main backer, and GRTU considers this to be a serious breach not just of the POYC agreement but also of the supposedly good faith there exists between it and the Government.

Or is this just someone stamping his feet?