I'm pretty sure I can find some analysis on the issue if i google enough but I'd like to pick the brains of the eminent(cough) personalities visiting this blog.

Okay, Racially aggravated crimes are crimes which are motivated partially or wholly due to race issues. They are treated as more serious than similar crimes which are not racially motivated and criminals are therefore given harsher punishments. This is case law in the UK.

Considering that this is a distinction and an exception to "equality under the law" rule, is there enough justification for the same? Furthermore, why is equality under the law such an important principle? Especially since we live in a society rife with distinctions?

Expanding from here, is it good to have such distinctions in law where the enormous public interest value is taken into account? Should celebrities, for example be given harsher punishments due to their role model status and the extensive media coverage such trials receive?

Posted by sushil at 12:25 pm | Permalink | Comments

Being a third year undergraduate student on internship I come into contact with several corporate types everyday. Although this is usually on the lift to work (23rd floor) where I am making fun of their atrocious attire (pink is NOT a formal colour!), I sometimes google the companies to find out a little more about them. I'm surprised at the range of attitudes of different companies which reflects in their website (check the faq's, really gives you an idea).
Some of them actively solicit future employees. Others are brash. Others are extremely humble.

A study in contrast are PWC and AP Moller's (Maersk) websites. While PWC is good, although theyre huge they make a genuine effort to answer queries. (FAQ: Since PWC is so huge will I just be an insignificant player?) . AP Moller meanwhile says that after their two year training program its possible you might not even get managerial responsibility. They talk about long hours and a corporate culture of facing "brutal facts". PWC talks about an active social life and sports events.

Not so long ago I was looking for an internship for 6 weeks in the period of June-July. I called up several companies to find out if they can accomodate me since summer internships usually last 10-12 weeks. The responses of certain companies can only be characterised as "nice". I spoke to HR of Deutsche Bank (DB) and DBS in Singapore. DB was great, they said they realised that third year undergrads are on internship and they tried to accomodate them but due to rotation issues here they just couldnt. They were also straightforward and asked me not to apply. DBS went a step further and said they could accomodate me for 6 weeks so could I please submit my resume.

The others were not so great particularly Goldman Sachs and Lehmann Brothers. Goldman Sachs replied saying that they dont take calls unless I know who I want to talk to. I said I have a genuine query and am not a madman (who does that anyway?). I was asked to leave my query on voicemail and if someone picks it up and is not busy then theyll try to get back. They didn't.
Lehmann Brothers said their summer internships were closed although their website clearly stated that it was open. When I asked about this they said "Sorry, internships are closed". Not once but twice. Basic Tip: maybe you should update your website then.

Posted by sushil at 9:36 am | Permalink | Comments