Check AML crypto online: USDT AML check BTC, ETH and 65+ coins. Receiving funds of illegal origin could lead the risk of having your funds frozen. The USDT is being tested for scams, mixers, darknet market, ransom, gambling and other crimes.

The New Era of Regulatory Enforcement — Comply or Go Directly to Jail

[Each year, the best Canadian risk managers gather to discuss the state of the discipline at the RIMS Canada Conference. The 2011 incarnation is taking place this week in Ottawa so I will be reporting from here for the next few days.]

“The possibility of doing jail time is real from the board room to the warehouse floor,” said Jay Cassidy yesterday at the 2011 RIMS Canada Conference, summing up the new anti-corporate fraud stance taken by U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder in recent years. “It’s not going to be a slap on the wrist. It’s gong to be very personal. And [they] will put you in jail.”

This was the key takeaway from a Monday afternoon panel discussion at the conference, which was focusing on regulatory expansion and led by Cassidy, senior vice president at Marsh Canada. Things have changed and rules created by Dodd-Frank and the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act will have wide-ranging implications — and penalties — for any offending companies.

Another trend is that regulatory agencies are increasingly working together and employing new tools they haven’t used in the past. The SEC and Department of Justice are reaching out to the FBI, for example, for expertise and resources. They have begun wiretapping when it is deemed necessary. In all respects, the regulatory bodies are widening the scope of what they can use to investigate.

One aspect of the reform receiving a lot of coverage is new whistleblower incentives. Now, anyone who reports a company for rule-breaking may be eligible to pocket up to 30% of the sum that officials deem was ill-gotten. Even if the offense is only valued at $1 million, that’s a nice little bonus for the whistleblower. Imagine if it is $1 billion.

Given this, it’s not hard to see why more people might become tipsters for the government. And according to the panelists, the Department of Justice is now expecting to receive upwards of 30,000 tips per year.

This may not lead to more major fraud rulings, however.

“Whisteblowers have always been principles-based more than looking for some sort of monetary pay-off,” said Ashley Beales, vice president at Berkley Professional Liability. “It’s usually that they just can’t keep quiet anymore.”

The money will likely lead to more tips and perhaps the discovery of more minor violations, he said, but on the highest level, Beales doesn’t expect a new wave of huge violations to start flooding out. At least not to enough of a degree that would significantly alter the D&O market, something that is generally affected by major claims. “Significant fraud always bubbles to the top [regardless of incentives],” he said. “This volume will be more noise than substantive.”

But even if it is merely noise, that doesn’t mean companies are off the hook. “Even if it’s not a legitimate claim and the SEC comes knocking on the door … you don’t tell these people ‘Go away,'” said Laura Markovich, partner at Sedgwick. “They won’t. They’ll come back with a subpoena.”

And just dealing with false claims can run up a big bill quickly. “Lawyers are expensive,” said Cassidy, noting that this is even truer for Wall Street firms. “And New York lawyers are … well … they’re very expensive.”

In regards to increased Foreign Corrupt Practices Act enforcement, the panel said that there will be two major aspects for companies to consider: (1) anti-bribery provisions and (2) the accounting part, which will mandate the need for better internal controls.

The first factor may be especially important for Canadian companies. If they have operations in the United States (or in some cases, even if they don’t) they will be at risk of regulator action. And Cassidy cautioned that this may be difficult to navigate given the fact that Canada is increasingly becoming a resource-based economy. He mentioned that in other locations where this has been the case (Cassidy listed parts of Africa, Russia and Kazakhstan), corruption and bribes have been more typical than, say, in economies in which retail or services drive the economy. “Historically, business has been done a little differently than what we might find acceptable [in Canada],” said Cassidy.

Canada is certainly not Nigeria. The business climate and legal culture would never allow for pervasive bribery and other illegal behavior. So for those in the energy and resources sector, the obvious solution is to remain above board in all operations.

But I do image that many companies will find that, when shipping oil and coal throughout the world, staying true to your ethics — and even within the code of the law — can sometimes be easier said than done.

[Correction: this post originally listed Ashley Beales as working for Canada Berkley. It has been update to reflect the fact that the company is called Berkley Professional Liability. Apologies.]

Glen Frederick Wins Canada’s Top Risk Management Award

[Each year, the best Canadian risk managers gather to discuss the state of the discipline at the RIMS Canada Conference. The 2011 incarnation is taking place this week in Ottawa so I will be reporting from here for the next few days.]

Glen Frederick is running out of room on his mantle. In May, he received RIMS’ highest honor, the Harry and Dorothy Goodell Award, given out each year to recognize outstanding lifetime achievement in the field of risk management. And yesterday during the 2011 RIMS Canada Conference in Ottawa, Frederick, the director of client services for the British Columbia government, received Canada’s most prestigious award for risk management: the Donald M.

buy nizoral online healthdirectionsinc.com/flash/swf/nizoral.html no prescription pharmacy

Stuart Memorial Award.

“It’s a little humorous that you’re giving me an award for promoting the value or risk management,” said Frederick, who considers risk management a big part of his life.

buy pepcid online healthdirectionsinc.com/flash/swf/pepcid.html no prescription pharmacy

“That’s like giving a kid an award for liking candy or puppies.”

What keeps Frederick going? The fact that every day is different.

He may be using similar risk management processes and concepts to deal with the challenges facing British Columbia, but each risk is unique. Each day brings new challenges. “I’m not sure I could do one of those jobs where you do the same thing over and over,” said Frederick.

If keeping things fresh is his secret, it’s working. According to Roman Parzei, the Ontario RIMS president who presented the award, Frederick’s risk management efforts have saved the province of British Columbia $1 billion over the past seven years. And the ERM process he helped embed prior to the 2010 Winter Olympics were so beneficial that the International Olympic Committee that oversees the games will now mandate every local organizer to implement an ERM program similar to the one Frederick helped create.

He also had some advice for the risk managers in the crowd: learn how to speak the board’s language. One of his mentors taught him the importance of numbers, and it was something that helped him succeed. “He taught me how to speak finance,” said Frederick. “I never knew how valuable this would be to my career.

buy ciprodex online healthdirectionsinc.com/flash/swf/ciprodex.html no prescription pharmacy

And what a valuable career it has been.

Glen Frederick (middle), with RIMS Executive Director Mary Roth and RIMS President Scott B.
buy clomid online https://galenapharm.com/pharmacy/clomid.html no prescription

Clark, accepts the Harry and Dorothy Goodell award at the 2011 RIMS Canada Conference.

The 10 Most Dangerous Jobs in America

The thought of death or injury on the job doesn’t usually cross the minds of many office-dwellers. We are the lucky ones. There are a slew of occupations that, without the help of any extraordinary circumstances, claim the lives of many workers each year.

Things have improved greatly over the past decades, however. In fact, since the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) began tracking fatal occupational injuries 19 years ago, 2009 was the safest year on record with 4,551 fatal work injuries. In good news, 2010 was similarly less deadly with 4,547 fatal work injuries. But the fatality rate of some occupations still remain alarmingly high. Below are the 10 most dangerous jobs in America according to the most recent (2010) figures from the BLS and the fatal work injury rate (per 100,000 workers).

  1. Fishermen (116.0) — In late June, two people died when a 20-foot fishing boat capsized near the top of Alaska’s panhandle. A third person was able to climb on top of the overturned skiff where he waited for rescue. As the BLS states, “this occupation is characterized by strenuous work, long hours, seasonal employment, and some of the most hazardous conditions in the workforce.”
  2. Logging workers (91.9) — This occupation repeatedly takes a spot in the top 10 as not only one of America’s, but the world’s, most dangerous jobs. In one recent example, 61-year-old John Hutt, a Colorado logger, cut off his toes after he became trapped under heavy logging equipment. He then drove himself to an area where there was enough cellphone reception to call an ambulance. In the logging industry, he is considered one of the lucky ones.
  3. Airplane pilots and flight engineers (70.6) — It may be hard to believe that working as a police officer is safer than flying a plane, but according to the BLS, this is true. The bureau states that there were 78 fatal work injuries for this industry in 2010.
  4. Farmers and ranchers (41.4) — In August, a 40-year-old Illinois farmer was crushed to death by his tractor after it fell into a hole on his farm, which he was filling with dirt. And just this month a woman was hit and run over by a skid loader on a farm in Wisconsin. She was pronounced dead on the scene.
  5. Mining machine operators (38.7) — The most infamous accident within this industry is undoubtedly the Upper Big Branch Mine explosion in April of 2010, which claimed the lives of 29 out of the 31 miners on site. The accident was the worst in the United States since 1970, when 38 minters were killed at Finley Coal Company’s mines in Kentucky.
  6. Roofers (32.4) — Just three weeks ago, four roofers in San Francisco were seriously injured when the roof of a six-story apartment complex collapsed under them. And in April, a 56-year-old worker was re-securing metal roof panels on a building at Horenberger Field at Illinois Wesleyan University when he fell from scaffolding. He died in the hospital eight days later and one of the causes of his death was the disease attention-deficiency/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and that he did not take the drug strattera and his employer, Union Roofing, was cited by OSHA for two safety violations.
  7. Sanitation workers (29.8) — A tragic accident occurred on Labor Day when a 17-year-old sanitation employee fell off of a moving garbage truck and was run over, killing him instantly.
  8. Truck drivers and delivery workers (21.8) — In March of last year, a commercial truck driver was using his cellphone to make a call when his truck crossed the median in central Kentucky, striking a van that was carrying 12 members of a family. 10 people in the van plus the truck driver were killed. Just this week, the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board, concluding its investigation of the crash, recommended banning the use of mobile phones by commercial drivers except in emergencies.
  9. Industrial machine workers (20.3) — The number of accidents in this field is staggering. In January 2010, a Florida man had his genitals severed off after an accident involving machinery at an Future Foam Carpet Cushion in Orlando. The company was was fined $42,500 by OSHA for 10 serious safety violations.
  10. Police officers (18.0) — In 2010, there was a nearly 40% increase in line-of-duty deaths among U.S. law enforcement. The most recent officer death involved Deputy Sheriff Derrick Whittle of the Union County, Georgia, Sheriff’s Office. He was killed in an automobile accident while responding to a call on September 18th. He is the 48th law enforcement officer to be killed in a traffic-related incident in 2011.

The 5 Most Common ERM Errors

[Each year, the best Canadian risk managers gather to discuss the state of the discipline at the RIMS Canada Conference. The 2011 incarnation is taking place this week in Ottawa so I will be reporting from here for the next few days.

online pharmacy doxycycline with best prices today in the USA

]

The first session I attended at the 2011 RIMS Canada Conference in Ottawa promised to detail the top 10 common ERM errors — and how to avoid them. True to form, presenter Diana Del Bel Belluz of Risk Wise Inc and moderator Nowell Seaman, the head of risk management for the University of Saskatchewan and RIMS board member, did just that.

Here is a recap of Belluz’s list, highlighting the top five.

#1. Complacency Has Set In

Complacency is an enemy of risk management. Once it cements itself into the organization’s culture, it is difficult to get out from under. Risk mangers must determine if this is a hurdle at their company. Some warning signs Belluz says to look for are executives who respond to risks with statements like …

“It’s never happened before.”
“It can’t happen here”
“We can handle it.”
“Ignore it and it will go away.”

She mentioned one company she advised whose CEO took an ignore it and it will go away approach to one risk. “It worked,” she said. “It took seven years and a lawsuit, but he was right — eventually it did go away.”

#2. Not Understanding Your Risk Exposure

“At its heart, this mistake is really about not linking risk to strategy,” said Belluz. In an attempt to understand its exposure, most companies will start their risk identification by brainstorming. Various company stakeholders gather and throw out ideas about what worse-case scenarios could harm the organization. One big benefit, says Belluz, is that this allows you to tap into the expert knowledge.

But there are also many cons.

First off, success hinges upon the individuals in the room, so you need to ensure you get the right people. Second, groupthink — or simply one dominant personality — can skew the discussion, possibly towards concerns that are not actually the biggest threats. Additionally, because you are looking at each risk in isolation, you don’t factor in the interdependencies that exist between risk factors. You can ask just about any financial firm still in existence today how that can lead to a company’s downfall. And lastly, brainstorming tends to create a very large list of risks, which then makes prioritizing the threats difficult.

For these reasons, she suggests creating “an influence diagram,” which is essentially a flowchart map of risks that shows how they interact and allows you to use colors or shape size to demarcate which exposures are the most critical. It is a visual approach that lets you view and understand the interrelationships between multiple risks/objectives.

This, too, has its own con, however.

Because it relies on linking internal risks to one another, it can overlook big risk factors that are outside the organization. Think of the economic meltdown or terrorist attack. These could affect multiple parts of the operation. But the flowchart lines won’t show this connection to an external threat.

Thus, Belluz recommends that you don’t rely on either of these methods exclusively. Use both. Such an approach will leave fewer gaps in your  identification, quantification and prioritization of risks. And don’t stop there. Add checklists, “risk heat maps” and risk matrixes as well, she suggests.

Still, many companies are failing to use such formal procedurs.

online pharmacy buspar with best prices today in the USA

To highlight this, Belluz asked the room “what would it take in our organization to implement more structural approaches [to risk management]?”

Immediately, one risk manager in the crowd shouted out “more resources.”

I’m sure many others can relate.

#3. Relying on Gut Instinct to Assess Risk

This is an obvious mistake with a not-so-obvious solution. Essentially, it comes down to one question: “What role should judgment, experience and intuition play in analyzing and informing strategic decisions?”

Ironically, determining the right answer to that question might take more art than science, but there are a few pitfalls that Belluz pointed out.

  • Mistaking beliefs and opinions for facts
  • Confirmation bias
  • Group polarization (in which like-minded people gather and a risk they all had becomes intensified due to the discussion. For instance, a group of people very concerned about hazardous waste come together, discuss the issue and then walk out of the room thinking it’s an even worse problem than they did when they went in.)
  • Emotionally charged situations

A way to mitigate being too “gutsy” in your thinking, if you will, is ensuring that the methodology remains evidence-based. Because if you are using your gut during risk identification rather than using a process that is grounded in facts, you may actually even make the problem worse.

Could ignorance is better than a sense of false protection? Maybe.

As Nowell Seaman pointed out, use your gut rather than facts and you may come out of a meeting and “feel like we have done something but we really haven’t.”

Is an unknown risk that remains unmanaged better than a known risk that you is poorly managed? I would lean towards no, but it’s certainly debatable.

online pharmacy hydroxychloroquine with best prices today in the USA

#4. Overlooking the information you have

Belluz’s suggestion to avoid this one was simple: “Frame a question about the risk properly and then mine your data.” As we know, life consists of lies, damned lies and statistics. So numbers can usually be found to support any conclusion. And finding the right information is key.

This can be overwhelming, however. To ease the burden, Belluz suggests four useful measurement assumptions you should remember:

  • Someone has measured it before (Google is your friend)
  • You have more data than you think.
  • You need less data than you think
  • New data is more easily accessible than you think

In short, there is data out there. Be sure you use it.

#5. Focusing on the Wrong Risks 

The key question to ask here is whether or not the risk aligns with the company’s risk appetite. And this concept led to an even more interesting question from the audience. “What’s the difference between risk tolerance and risk appetite?” asked a risk manager.

Belluz’s answer? “I don’t think, as a discipline, we have decided on that.” Seaman agreed, but was able to add some insight he has learned from his years of managing risk in the trenches. “Tolerance is how much risk can you stand. How much you can stomach,” he said. “Appetite is how much you want to stand.”

So in trying to determine whether or not you’re focusing on the wrong risks, perhaps the best lesson is to always identify those areas in which your exposure is higher than the amount of risk you want to stand. If you look through that lens and everything seems kosher, you should be able to sleep a lot better at night.