Jump to content

Whistle-Blowing Seminar - 4 Oct 2011, University of Greenwich, London, UK


Recommended Posts

Speak Up Procedures Seminar:

Challenges and Opportunities of Internal Whistle-Blowing Procedures


Dear Colleague,

Internal speak up procedures are now officially ?good practice? in risk management, as well as in ethics and compliance policies. They are increasingly prescribed as good practice in corporate governance models, and are mentioned in regulatory initiatives such as public interest Disclosure Act and the new Bribery Act.

What to do and what not to do when setting up and running a speak-up procedure in your organization? Get expert accounts and advice on compliance management, employment law, whistle-blowing advice, ethics and academic research.

This seminar offers participants insights into:

 Practice and theory of designing

 Implementing

 Managing speak-up procedures.

This will be useful to anyone involved in designing, implementing, or monitoring internal speak-up or whistle-blowing procedures ? at any level of management (line management, audit departments, HR, members of boards of directors) and in any kind of organization (business, government, NGO).


Speakers:

Prof.Dr. Dave Lewis, Professor Employment Law, Middlesex University: ?Recent developments in law and practice with some predictions for the future'

Cathy James, Chief Executive, Public Concern at Work: ?What to do and what not to do with internal whistle-blowing procedures?

John Garred, Member of Siemens UK Executive Management Board and Compliance coordinator, North West Europe cluster: ?Challenges and Opportunities in setting up a Speak-Up procedure?

Dr Wim Vandekerckhove, Senior Lecturer in Organizational Behaviour, University of Greenwich: ?What research tells us about managing whistle-blowing??


When: Tuesday 4 October 2011 (half day).

Where: Hamilton House, hosted near Greenwich Campus, an historic World Heritage Site on the banks of the River Thames.

Visit the conference website: www.gre.ac.uk/whistleblowing for further information about the programme, venue, and how to register.

We look forward to welcoming you at the conference.


On behalf of Dr Wim Vandekerckhove,

Senior Lecturer in Organisational Behaviour,

University of Greenwich Business School

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Had council stock not been sold off then it wouldn't have needed replacing. Whilst I agree that the prohibition on spending revenue from sales on new council housing was a contributory factor, where, in places where building land is scarce and expensive such as London, would these replacement homes have been built. Don't mention infill land! The whole right to buy issue made me so angry when it was introduced and I'm still fuming 40 odd years later. If I could see it was just creating problems for the future, how come Thatcher didn't. I suspect though she did, was more interested in buying votes, and just didn't care about a scarcity of housing impacting the next generations.
    • Actually I don't think so. What caused the problem was the ban on councils using the revenues from sales to build more houses. Had councils been able to reinvest in more housing then we would have had a boom in building. And councils would have been relieved, through the sales, of the cost of maintaining old housing stock. Thatcher believed that council tenants didn't vote Conservative, and home owners did. Which may have been, at the time a correct assumption. But it was the ban on councils building more from the sales revenues which was the real killer here. Not the sales themselves. 
    • I agree with Jenjenjen. Guarantees are provided for works and services actually carried out; they are not an insurance policy for leaks anywhere else on the roof. Assuming that the rendering at the chimney stopped the leak that you asked the roofer to repair, then the guarantee will cover that rendering work. Indeed, if at some time in the future it leaked again at that exact same spot but by another cause, that would not be covered. Failure of rendering around a chimney is pretty common so, if re-rendering did resolve that leak, there is no particular reason to link it to the holes in the felt elsewhere across the roof. 
    • Hey, I am on the first floor and I am directly impacted if roof leaks. We got a roofing company to do repair work which was supposed to be guaranteed. However, when it started leaking again, we were informed that the guarantee is just for a new roof and not repair work. Each time the company that did the repair work came out again over the next few years, we had to pay additional amounts. The roof continues to leak, so I have just organised another company to fix the roof instead, as the guarantee doesn't mean anything. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...