Related posts:No related photos. Comments are closed. EU directive to increase employees’ rights could be law by next yearOn 13 Feb 2001 in Personnel Today The European Commission’sproposals to force all employers with more than 50 staff to consult theirworkforce on key business decisions could become law in Europe by next year. A European directive onconsultation and information is due to be discussed at a meeting of the socialaffairs ministers of the European Council on 7 May 2001. Sweden, which assumedthe European Union presidency in January, has put the directive firmly on theEU’s agenda. Advocates of the directive suchas the European Parliament Socialist Group are pressing the commission for aEuropean law on information and consultation for all firms by next year.Germany and the UK havepersistently blocked the directive, drafted by the European Commission in 1998.At present, only firms with more than 1,000 staff and employing more than 150in two or more countries have to consult with staff through European workscouncils.Convener of the EuropeanParliament Socialist Group on employment Stephen Hughes said, “Germany isnow ready to vote for a common position. With German and Danish ministers nowbacking the law, Ireland and the UK do not constitute a sufficient blockingminority.”The CBI, however, argues thatthere is little possibility of the EU directive on information and consultationbecoming enshrined in UK law. Simon Blake, employee relations policy adviserfor the CBI, said, “There has been a sustained campaign ofrumour-mongering by proponents of the directive. We know that the members ofthe blocking minority such as Germany, the UK and Denmark remain opposed to thedirective. I think it is highly unlikely that the directive will be passed nextyear.” The CBI is strongly opposed to thedirective being incorporated into UK law. Blake said, “Our first objectionis on the grounds of principle. We already have legislation in place whichgoverns transnational issues such as the European Works Councils directive. “Second, the directive woulddamage good practice in employee relations. It will ride roughshod overpractices that companies already have in place by forcing a ‘one size fits all’policy on them.”The Government argues forsubsidiarity over employee consultation, with these matters being dealt with anational level. The Union of Industrial and Employers’ Confederation of Europe(Unice) supports this stance. Social affairs director Therese De Liederkerkesaid, “Legislation on information and consultation in purely national firmsshould not be regulated at a European level. All European countries havepolicies in place which cover employee consultation and this directive willupset national industrial relations policies.” The CIPD also opposes thedirective. Diane Sinclair, employee relations adviser for the CIPD, said,”Our position is that effective involvement is based on trust.”By Karen Higginbottom Previous Article Next Article
Previous Article Next Article Being able to arrange a replacement in limited circumstances did not mean asports instructor was self-employed. Thismonth we look at constructive dismissal, disability discrimination andpsychiatric injury, plus, is an employer liable for discrimination when theincident took place outside the course of employmentContractual right to delegate personal services MacFarlane & another v Glasgow City Council IDS Brief 678, EAT MacFarlane was a sports instructor. Initially, she was responsible for herown tax and national insurance contributions but when she started workinglonger hours the council made PAYE deductions. Although MacFarlane was engagedto teach sessions at specific times she was only paid for the sessions actuallyworked. If she was unable to work, she could arrange for a replacementinstructor from the council’s approved list who would then be paid by thecouncil direct. MacFarlane was not entitled to holiday or sick pay nor did she enter intoany written contract with the council, although she received its standardletter relating to the terms upon which instructors were engaged. The councilissued new terms and classified the instructors as self-employed. MacFarlaneresigned and claimed she had been constructively and unfairly dismissed. At a preliminary hearing, the tribunal held MacFarlane was self-employedbecause an essential element of an employment contract, namely the obligationof “personal service” was lacking. MacFarlane successfully appealed.The EAT held MacFarlane’s right to arrange a replacement in limitedcircumstances was not incompatible with a contract of employment. Failure to make reasonable adjustments Fu v London Borough of Camden Unreported, January 2001, EAT Following an accident at work in 1993 Fu, a housing officer, could only walkwith the aid of a walking stick. She had another accident and was off work fora year. When her condition deteriorated, she was provided with a special chair.She subsequently suffered another injury and was on sick leave from the summerof 1997. In May 1998 the council offered her ill-health retirement or dismissaland she accepted the former. Her tribunal claim for disability discriminationwas unsuccessful. The tribunal held the council was justified in offeringill-health retirement because on the medical evidence adduced, Fu was permanentlyincapable of performing her contract even if the requirement to make homevisits was removed. The EAT allowed Fu’s appeal. The tribunal had failed to consider whether thecouncil could have made reasonable adjustments to retain Fu in some other capacityor to make any adjustments before offering dismissal. Accordingly Fu hadsuffered from pre dismissal discrimination pursuant to section 5(2) of theDisability Discrimination Act. No “constructive dismissal” in disability claims Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v Harley Unreported, February 2001, EAT Harley had suffered from bulimia nervosa for a number of years. Disciplinaryproceedings were commenced against her and she was formally disciplined. Sheappealed against that decision and wrote to her manager stating that unlessthere was a satisfactory outcome to her appeal she would consider heremployment to be terminated. Notwithstanding her letter, Harley resigned before the appeal wasdetermined. She brought a successful disability discrimination claim on thebasis that she had been constructively dismissed and this constituted a”dismissal” within the meaning of Section 4 (2) of the DisabilityDiscrimination Act 1995. The commissioner successfully appealed. A constructive dismissal arises whenan employee resigns in response to a repudiatory breach of contract by theemployer. Whilst the definition of “dismissal” in otherdiscrimination legislation had been construed or amended to includeconstructive dismissal this is not the case with the DDA. “Dismissal”as defined by the DDA was to be given its natural and obvious meaning and itdoes not encompass constructive dismissal. Request to work from home refused Lockwood v Crawley Warren Group Limited EOR Discrimination Digest 47, EAT On her return from maternity leave, Lockwood worked three days a week andtook two days holiday each week from her annual entitlement. Consequently, shewas deemed to be working full-time. When problems arose regarding her childcarearrangements Lockwood suggested that either she work from home and pay for thenecessary equipment herself or that she take unpaid leave of up to six months.CWG rejected both proposals but agreed to Lockwood having two weeks’ paidleave. Lockwood resigned and claimed she had been indirectly discriminatedagainst on the grounds of her sex. The tribunal dismissed the claim. No new requirement or condition had beenapplied to her by CWG because her job had always involved full-time working.Lockwood successfully appealed. The EAT found that a request to work from homeat one’s own expense is “conceptually similar” to a request to workpart-time. Moreover, CWG’s proposal that following the two weeks’ paid leaveLockwood would work full-time did impose a requirement or condition. The casewas remitted back to the tribunal for it to consider whether the requirement orcondition could be justified. Care needed when conducting disciplinary proceedings Whitbread v Hall Unreported, February 2001, Court of Appeal Disciplinary proceedings were commenced against Hall following allegationsof gross misconduct. At the disciplinary hearing Hall admitted the allegationsand was then dismissed. He brought a successful unfair dismissal claim.Although the tribunal held that the dismissal fell within the “band ofreasonable responses” Whitbread’s disciplinary process had been so flawedthat it rendered the dismissal unfair. The EAT upheld this decision. Whitbread appealed unsuccessfully to the Court of Appeal. The issue waswhether the requirement of “reasonableness” pursuant to Section 98 ofthe Employment Rights Act 1996 was relevant only in relation to thedisciplinary sanction imposed, or whether it was also relevant to the processleading to the employer’s decision to dismiss. Notwithstanding Hall’sadmission, Whitbread was still obliged to act in a reasonable manner. The court held that the appropriate test in misconduct dismissals todetermine if an employer had acted reasonably was that established in Burchelland confirmed by the Court of Appeal in Foley and Madden last year. Did theemployer hold a reasonable suspicion that the employee was guilty ofmisconduct, was that suspicion based on reasonable grounds and was a reasonableinvestigation carried out? Discrimination resulted in psychiatric injury Lawrence v JL Distribution EOR Discrimination Digest 47, Employment Tribunal Lawrence was of Afro-Caribbean origin. From the time his employmentcommenced, until his dismissal seven weeks later, he was subject to constantracist abuse from his colleagues. After complaining to his manager about thetreatment he was told that he “didn’t fit in” and was dismissed. Hewas subsequently diagnosed as suffering from depression. He brought a successful race discrimination claim. The tribunal held thatLawrence had suffered direct discrimination and had been dismissed because theother workers did not want to work with him. In addition, he had beenvictimised because his dismissal arose directly as a result of his complaint tothe manager. The tribunal awarded compensation of £19,425 which included£10,000 for psychiatric injury and injury to feelings. The tribunal wassatisfied that Lawrence’s depression constituted “moderate”psychiatric damage. His family life had suffered, he had been prescribed antidepressants and offered counselling, and his lack of self-confidence affectedhis ability to look for alternative employment. Care needed when settling proceedings Gloystarne & Co v Martin I RLB 658, EAT Martin’s application form for an unfair dismissal claim did not specifywhether a representative was acting on his behalf. Shortly before the hearingJones, a trade union official, telephoned the tribunal to say that the partieshad reached an agreement and Acas would be preparing a COT3. Jones thenconfirmed this by fax. The tribunal stayed the proceedings but no COT3 wascompleted and Martin subsequently informed the tribunal he wanted his casere-listed for hearing. Gloystarne argued that there was an enforceable oral agreement in place eventhough Martin had not signed the COT3. The tribunal learned that the termsdiscussed between Jones and Acas were without Martin’s knowledge and it foundthat Martin had merely authorised Jones to report back on any settlementproposals. In going beyond this, Jones had acted without Martin’s knowledge andconsent and the case was re-listed. Gloystarne appealed unsuccessfully to theEAT which held that Jones had no actual or ostensible authority to conclude asettlement for Martin. Ostensible authority would only arise had Martin himselfheld out Jones as having the authority to act on his behalf. Council liable for discrimination Rawat v Kirklees Metropolitan Council EOR Discrimination Digest 47, Employment Tribunal Ms Rawat, who was of Asian origin, reported directly to Singh, the council’sequal opportunities adviser. Singh was responsible for organising an eveningevent celebrating the independence of India and Pakistan. The council fundedthe event which took place at a local town hall. Singh instructed the town hallmanager that men and women were to be seated separately, women upstairs and mendownstairs. The manager, a council employee duly notified the stewards, all ofwhom were council employees. On arrival, Rawat was told to sit upstairs. Rawatargued that by this segregation Singh and the council had discriminated againsther on the grounds of her sex and she brought a sex discrimination claim. The council argued that it was not liable because the event was not duringthe course of Rawat’s employment, but the tribunal upheld the claim. Singh and the other employees were acting the course of their employment,the event took place at the council’s premises, it was funded by the counciland, irrespective of Singh’s actions being in the course of his employment, theseating arrangements at this public event were entirely under the council’scontrol. Comments are closed. Related posts:No related photos. Employee can delegate servicesOn 1 Apr 2001 in Personnel Today
Conference tackles safe needle practiceOn 1 Jun 2001 in Personnel Today Previous Article Next Article Related posts:No related photos. The Government’s stance on the use of “safe” needles designed tocurb needlestick injuries has been put under the spotlight at a conference inLondon. The conference, held between 31 May and 1 June, looked at ways of reducingthe number of needlestick injuries suffered by health workers. It was attended by doctors, nurses, occupational health practitioners andother health professionals. UK health workers suffer more than 100,000 needlestick injuries a year andin Europe the number of injuries is even higher in Europe according toFrontline for Europe, which represents “frontline” health workers. Comments are closed.
Previous Article Next Article Why should you attend Boardroom HROn 18 Sep 2001 in Personnel Today Nextmonth, Personnel Today and TMP Worldwide launches the Boardroom HR conferencein Birmingham. To whet the appetite of delegates and get the debate started,Professor Amin Rajan presents preliminary findings from research based oninterviews with chief executives which turns a lot of assumptions aboutboardroom HR priorities upside downChief executives are often accused of not having a clear business strategyto which their HR directors can align their activities. That may well be so.But from a forthcoming study, one thing is very clear – most CEOs do know whatthey want from HR. Typical responses include: – “Help me build a global organisation” – “Make our business model work” – “Enhance shareholder value” – “Raise the performance bar” – “Attract and retain the best talent” – “Leverage knowledge” – “Promote creativity and innovation” – “Focus employees on customers” – “Get the basics right” The above list is indicative, not definitive. But it is enough for us todraw the three main factors on the CEO wish list. To start with, like everyone else, CEOs have their dreams and nightmares.These are the “big issues” that keep them awake at night. Typicalexamples include market downturn, drop in share prices, mergers andacquisitions, organisational change, loss of key personnel, to name but a few. These concerns are so widespread that personal insecurity – manifested byfear of failure and loss of office – is a major factor in life at the top. There is a clear expectation that HR should be involved in the design andimplementation of the strategy in these and other areas. However, there is alsoa perception out there that this happens in a minority of cases. In a majority,however, HR is perceived as carrying the proverbial bucket behind the circuselephant. Whether this perception is justified is open to debate. On the positiveside, though, it is clear that the extent of HR’s involvement in big issues isdirectly related to the personal credibility of senior HR professionals. Theyhave got into the driving seat by example and achievement. Not only are theygood at their craft, but they have sound business awareness backed by a masteryof influencing skills. Thus, being in HR is important – but it is even moreimportant to have the willingness and ability to make an impact. The second requirement identified by CEOs is shareholder value. In companiesof all sizes, there is a clear recognition that their market value is the sumof “book value” plus intangible assets. Book value, of course,relates to all the physical and financial assets that can be quantified.Intangibles, on the other hand, are more observable than measurable.Specifically, they cover four classes of assets: – Market assets, eg customer loyalty, company brand – Intellectual property, eg patents, trademarks, design rights – Cultural assets, eg can-do mentality, transformational leadership andalliances – Physical assets, eg management process, reward systems In each of these categories, CEOs see an added value role for HR who canhelp to develop the essential shock-absorbers in a climate of change whileenhancing overall corporate capability. In short, many CEOs perceive a growingconvergence between HR and organisational development. The final area covers the day-to-day bread and butter issues: the basics ofpeople management. These are viewed as being akin to a plumbing system. When itfunctions effectively, nobody notices it. When it doesn’t, all hell is letloose. On CEOs’ reckoning, HR has come a long way in the past 10 years inmastering the operational issues, working far better alongside line managers.Of course, there are tensions in their relationships, but these are morecreative than destructive in the majority of our sample. To sum up, when asked what strategic HR meant to him, one CEO was rathergraphic, “I’m in business to kill or destroy my competitors. What can HRdo to help me accomplish this historic mission?” In the aftermath of lastweek’s terrorist attack on the World Trade Center, such sentiments may be put onhold. But it remains the case that in today’s dog-eat-dog culture, few CEOscare about regular headline-grabbing subjects like skills shortages, flexibleworking and employee diversity. That is not because they are irrelevant, butbecause they are not central to the management of two key imperatives intoday’s unforgiving marketplace – change and performance.Message from the editorIf you have not already registeredfor the Boardroom HR event, I strongly recommend that you consider doing sonow. For some years, feedback from senior HR people has suggested that whilethe profession is well served by conferences covering niche subjects, typicallyemployment law, there has been no event that satisfactorily enables those atboardroom level or equivalent to debate the issues that take top priority intheir own organisations. The Boardroom HR event, together with the launch of BoardroomHR magazine next month, are designed to address the concerns of those of you atthe top of the HR profession, whether those concerns relate to strategic issuesin your organisations or to the challenge of developing your role, influenceand career potential. A note on the launch of Boardroom HR magazine: this does notmean that Personnel Today will ignore the challenges facing senior HR people.Rest assured, we will continue to increase our focus on senior issues in theway that many of you will recognise we have done over the last couple of years.Why should you consider registering for the Boardroom HRconference? One reason is that we already have an impressive list of HRdirectors in large organisations on the delegate list and the conference hasbeen designed so that there will be plenty of opportunities to network and comparenotes with your peers in HR. Great effort has been put into organising a verydifferent experience to the standard HR conference, and we have employed theTom Peters Group to ensure that the conference is fully interactive rather thana series of presentations followed by brief Q&A sessions. There are still a few places left and we are offering them atthe early booking rate. I hope to meet many of you at the event.Noel O’Reilly, Editor, Personnel TodayBoardroom HR – the key event forsenior HR people1-2 October 2001International Convention Centre BirminghamOrganised by Personnel Today and TMP WorldwideAn opportunity to spend two days exchangingexperiences with top level HR professionals and to focus on the core boardroomHR priorities of:– Developing and implementing HRstrategy– Influencing both the board and the business– Measuring the effectiveness of the HR contributionThespeakersClare ChapmanGroup HR director, Tesco Stores A discussion of how the people strategies of a retail businessare kept to the fore at board level and an insight into the accompanyingleadership challenges.LesleyJamesVice-president, CIPDEarning boardroom space – using leadership and a businessfocused approach to influence your organisation.Andrew KakabadseDeputy director, Cranfield School of ManagementProvocative views on resourcing and outsourcing based onin-depth international research and how these impact on HR in the businessworld.VanceKearneyVice-president for HR, EMEAOracle Corporation UK How HR professionals can have high impact in atechnology-driven business world.PaulKearnsSenior partner, Personnel WorksPractical advice on how HR’s contribution can be measured incash terms and how it can influence the board.NickStarritFormer group HR director, BPGetting the most from outsourced HR – how to partner with yourprovider for the most effective business resultsPaulCarter Managing director, Rolls-Royce Combustion SystemsCredible HR contribution – a line manager’s perspective.www.boardroomhr.comAn innovative formatBoardroom HR is an intensive two-day experience which willleave you inspired to drive change in your organisation and equip you with thetactics and tools to really deliver. You will be able to challenge the speakersand compare experiences and issues with your peers from other organisations.The event has an innovative format which will give you a chance to:– Shape the content so that it meets your needs– Take part in break-out sessionswith other senior HR leaders to solve real business issues– Benefit from the latest technologyin the UK’s top convention centre Related posts:No related photos. Comments are closed.
Union deal gives Co-op Bank more flexible attitudeOn 16 Oct 2001 in Personnel Today Related posts:No related photos. A partnership agreement bet-ween management and unions at the Co-operativeBank has led to improved industrial relations and profitability, delegates weretold at the conference last week. Tony Britten, director of HR and planning at the Co-op Bank, explained thatthrough the partnership, project teams were established which developed a rangeof family-friendly and equal opportunity policies. As a result, the company moved from fixed to variable pay, introducedfamily-friendly and flexible working policies, reward schemes and new ways ofdealing with change. Britten said, “The teams made up of management and union reps havetaken these sort of issues beyond legislation and brought about fundamentalchanges.” Initiated in 1997, the partnership deal has been extended to 2003. “Ithas reduced the time spent by HR in having to deal with employeerelations,” explained Britten. Previous Article Next Article Comments are closed.
Comments are closed. SH2 success relies on outcome-based targetsOn 1 Jan 2002 in Personnel Today Related posts:No related photos. The framework used to help OH meet Securing Health Together (SH2) targetsneeds to be outcome-based, Elizabeth Gyngell of the HSE told the conference. She explained that attention needed to switch from how the profession iscomplying with the guidance, to how it manages sickness absence. Speaking about the criteria for success in getting people back to work, shesaid, “We will know we’ve got there when employers see the advantage inrehabilitation. At the moment most managers see it as an absolute pain, it ismuch easier to give ill-health retirement.” Another problem that needs to be solved, said Gyngell, is ensuring employeestrust the process of rehabilitation. “A lot of employees see it as a wayof forcing people back to work before they are well.” Employers need more guidance in developing return-to-work policies, shesuggested, and there is a need to work on sharing best practice. OH nursesshould join working groups to get advice on the decision-making process, sheadvised. Previous Article Next Article
Previous Article Next Article Related posts:No related photos. I want to return to work after illnessOn 22 Jan 2002 in Personnel Today I have more than 16 years HR experience, am FCIPD qualified and my last postwas as HR director. I am under 40, but unfortunately have had to give upworking full time due to ill health. I work voluntarily for a charity one day aweek but would like to do the occasional day in HR as I miss the challenge. Howbest should I go about trying to identify organisations which might beinterested as the kind of work I’m seeking isn’t strictly temporary or interim.Clive Sussams, recruitment consultant, Malpas Flexible Learning In view of your level of experience, I would envisage you have a reasonablysubstantial network of HR contacts and suggest you use this initially, togetherwith contacting specialist recruitment consultancies. While I note you would prefer a permanent part-time position, it may beadvantageous to undertake interim assignments as these can often lead topermanent job offers. With the change in work practices there are moreopportunities for part-time or job share candidates, although less so at seniorlevels. You will need to decide what type of role will be acceptable and howflexible you can be. In addition to checking the appointments sections of the HR journals andquality press, it would also be sensible to approach small businesses (SMEs)direct as these often cater for flexible working arrangements. Allison Sheard, consultant, Chiumento There are many options open to you and which you take is going to depend onhow much time you are able to give to working and how much you want to beinvolved in the process of creating work opportunities. There has been an increase in the number of opportunities to work part-time,even as an interim manager. However, most interim posts are full-time. One wayto overcome this is to create your own opportunities by contacting formercolleagues, professional contacts or organisations directly, to see if theyneed your skills. It is essential to keep up with trends in HR and be aware ofwhat is likely to be of interest to them. You might even consider linking upwith other people already working as HR consultants so you could share theworkload with others. Your wealth of experience is a great advantage and it is important to beable to market yourself effectively. You may find it more useful to prepare aCV that outlines your key achievements and projects, rather than using thetraditional chronological format. If working for yourself appeals, you could contact small, local, firms thatmay not have an HR function to offer operational advice. Jo Selby, associate director, EJ Human Resources While this is not the kind of opportunity most recruitment agencies focuson, it may be worth speaking to a couple of interim consultancies and makingthem aware of your situation and your availability. Having said that, in myexperience most of this type of work is secured through personal contacts, so Iwould suggest you network extensively with organisations and individuals youknow. If there is a particular sector that you are keen to work in or haveconsiderable experience of, then you may wish to consider sending out a letterand CV offering your services. Comments are closed.
The US is changing its immigration laws on spouses to attract skilledworkers from abroad. Overseas executives have been discouraged from taking senior positions inthe US because the law prevents their spouses from having a job, unless theyindependently qualify for a visa. Two new laws changing the Spousal Work Authorisation regulations will allowthe married partners of those employed in the US to get jobs. In a related change, large employers with blanket US visa petitions will beable to transfer staff to the US after only six months of employment ratherthan a year. Julia Onslow-Cole, immigration partner at CMS Cameron McKenna, said:”It is vital businesses can appoint the right person for key jobs in theUS, especially with skills shortages in executive and IT areas. “This is one of the biggest problems for corporate moves to the US andthis change of law could act as a real stimulus for people to take on thesejobs.” New immigration laws to tap into spouse skillsOn 1 Mar 2002 in Personnel Today Previous Article Next Article Comments are closed. Related posts:No related photos.
Pay rise increases mask fall in cash valueOn 3 Sep 2002 in Personnel Today Previous Article Next Article Payawards have increased to 2.7 per cent for the three months to the end of July2002 – a rise of 0.2 per cent on the revised June figure, according toIndustrial Relations Services (IRS).Despitethe increase, acting editor of IRS Pay and Benefits Bulletin, Charles Cotton,said stock market volatility is likely to dampen-down pay expectations asuncertainty clouds much of the private sector.Theresearch shows that settlement levels in the service sector, at 3 per cent,continue to run ahead of those in manufacturing (2.8 per cent), although thegap has narrowed. It also reveals that pay deals are generally worth less thana year ago. An analysis of a matched sample of 49 awards monitored by IRSreveals that two-thirds of settlements with effective dates between 1 May and31 July 2002 are worth less than the comparable deal in the same period lastyear. Only 16 per cent of reviews are worth more, with a similar percentagepitched at exactly the same level.www.irsonline.co.uk Comments are closed. Related posts:No related photos.
Share via Shortlink Brokers think the situation will get worse. (Photo Illustration by The Real Deal, photos via Getty) Vacant office and retail space in the United Kingdom is rising at a pace not seen since at least 1999, when the metrics were first kept.The coronavirus has devastated the two sectors. The number of brokers reporting rising vacancies is the highest since the Great Recession, according to Bloomberg, citing a survey by the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors.Around 73 percent of respondents said they see retail vacancies rising, while 54 percent said they see office space emptying. Conversely, about seven in 10 said they see demand rising for industrial space and expect those rents to rise.That’s in line with trends in the U.S., especially in major cities like New York and Los Angeles. Manhattan retail rents sunk to a record low in the fall and office leasing tanked.New deliveries of retail and office space could be contributing to rising vacancy rates in the U.K., but some tenants are simply vacating. London-based serviced-office provider Workspace Group reported that 18 percent of its space was vacant at the end of 2020, up from 10 percent in late June.Giles Hall, an asset manager at Orchard Street Investment Management, said that government intervention has staved off some of the pain.“As the support and protection from debt recovery unwinds, I expect office and retail rents and values to fall further, unfortunately, as the full extent of tenant distress becomes clear,” he said.[Bloomberg] — Dennis Lynch TagsCommercial Real EstateCoronavirusIndustrial Real EstateRetail Real EstateUnited Kingdom Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on LinkedinShare via Email Share via Shortlink