Truth Is Absolute Not Relative Essay Example for Free

Truth Is Absolute Not Relative Essay Background of the Topic: Many people nowadays seek for â€Å"THE TRUTH†. I searched up the internet and Google gave me 611 million answers in just a quart of a second. As top answer Google gave me this definition from wisegeek.com, â€Å"An absolute truth, sometimes called a universal truth, is an unalterable and permanent fact. The concept of absolute truths what they are and whether they exist has been debated among many different groups of people. Philosophers have waded in the muck of defining absolute truth for millennia. For example, Plato believed that absolute truth existed, but that truth on earth was merely a shadow of great forms of absolute truth existing in the universe which is now commonly called â€Å"universals†. Alternatively, many believe in relative truths, where facts may vary depending on the circumstances.† Simply put, WHAT’S TRUE TO ME MAY NOT BE TRUE TO YOU. It is however difficult to disprove the concept of absolute truth, since saying that there are no absolute truths that it is absolutely true that no absolute truth exists is itself an absolute truth.† Relationship of the Topic- Main: It will help us to know and recognize the fundamental basis of truth. To me: I firmly believe on absolute truth unlike others. I believe in the absolute truth of the Bible and God as its ultimate source. To the society: Living in a society sharing the same ground that there is an existence of absolute truth would eradicate most of today’s debates on non-significant yet intriguing problems. Also, there is the need of a certain and mutual fundamental basis of the absoluteness of truth and from whence it come forth. Problem: Many of us were blinded about what is truth and a lot of us have different queries regarding what is the real meaning of truth whether it is absolute or relative. Definition of the topic: There are a few things that we all agree are absolutely true, but they depend upon an agreement in definition. ABSOULTE TRUTH: †¢ Truth is discovered not invented †¢ Truth is transcultural: it can be conveyed across different cultures. †¢ Truth is unchanging: it can be conveyed across time. †¢ Beliefs cannot change a truth statement no matter how sincere one may be †¢ Truth is unaffected by the attitude of the one professing it †¢ All Truths are absolute †¢ Truth is knowable In order for truth to be absolute and holding these qualities, it must be grounded in a source that is personal, unchanging, and sovereign over all creation. Relative Truth: Truth is created not discovered. Truth is a matter of perspective and each culture or individual defines for themselves what truth is. †¢ Since truth is invented, there is no universal transcultural truth. Each culture or individual will define truth differently according to their background and perspective. †¢ Truth changes since it is inseparably connected to individuals and cultures which continually change truth perpetually to changes. †¢ Since truth is a matter of a group or individual’s perspective, one’s beliefs can change a truth statement. †¢ Since an individual determines truth, truth is affected by the attitude of the one professing it. †¢ There can be no such thing as absolute truth. †¢ Absolute truth is not knowable. Absolute and objective truth cannot be known since it is built on the shifting foundation of man’s perceptions. As each individual’s perception is different, truth cannot be known. References: Bible and Blogs specifically the Truth Project

Child Poverty Essay Example for Free

Child Poverty Essay Child poverty is one of the major problems today. Poverty can affect anyone but children are most affected. Poverty in children has become big social problem. Poverty is not having enough for needs. Not having enough can bring many concerns. Poverty is long lasting effect and can leave permanent mark on Childs behavior. Poverty can impact children’s performance in school and poverty can bring many health issues. Many children are born in poor family where their family members lack at providing enough for their children. Many children in poor family suffer from hunger and not having enough nutrition. As mansion in Gregory’s essay â€Å"shame† Richard was not able to focus in school because he was suffering from hunger, and teacher thought he was not smart and they never bother to find out, but the truth was he was just hungry because he was poor and wasent able to provide enough food. Poverty can also cause huge impact on Childs performance. While parents are busy trying to make living they cannot provide enough motivational help to their children while some children have to go to work instead of study because lack of money in family. In the essay â€Å"shame† Gregory describes how Richard had to work hard and polish shoes to make little amount of money. Early labor and not having enough help in their academic progress impact on children’s growth and development of child. Withought proper education child lacks at proper understanding of our society. Poverty also brings many health concerns in children. Because of parents cannot provide enough material. Many children born in poor family are often exposed to miner diseases that may prove fatal. In some poor family where parents always drinking problem, children always learn from their parents and adopt their aggressive behavior, drinking problem or drug abuse. These can also lead in fatal health issue in children. Parents always seem to forget â€Å"what we do. They do. † In the essay â€Å"shame† Gregory talks about how Richard did not learn about hate and shame until he went to school. Poverty is one of the most evil situations we have in our society. And it can transform our children’s entire personality and affect our neighborhood and future. we have to work together to ensure bright and healthy future.

Benefits of Buying a House

Benefits of Buying a House Buying a house is one of the smartest financial decisions a person can make. People have been reluctant to invest in a house for many reasons. Among the reasons are decreasing home values, high student debt, the volatile job market, and other reasons. This reluctance has caused a drop in homeownership, especially by the millennial generation. Many people rent because it is easier and seems cheaper. But, when considering likely resale value, and emotional benefits, the benefits of investing in a house are apparent. When renting a house or apartment from a landlord, the renter pays the landlord a monthly fee at the beginning of the month. When purchasing a house, the purchaser borrows money from the bank to pay for the house. The purchaser must pays back a monthly amount equal to a portion of the borrowed money plus interest associated with the borrowed money. Many people compare the price difference between rent and mortgage payments, and seeing that the monthly rent amount is less, decide to rent. Generally, rent payments are initially cheaper which is attractive. But, if you compare the total long-term financial differences between renting and paying a mortgage, youll likely see the opposite. Rent payments go to your landlord as pocket money. Mortgage payments are an investment to a likely appreciating asset. As a purchaser pays off a mortgage, the purchasers home equity increases. In other words, the purchaser is building his or her retirement account and not a landlords. When comparing rent payments versus mortgage payments, there are a number of variables to consider, including the characteristics of the properties, their location, their condition, and the potential of the properties to appreciate in value. Below is a table showing the average comparison between rent monthly payments and mortgage monthly payments, taking inflation into consideration. As you can see on the table, we are comparing the mortgage of a home that costs $160,000 to renting that home for $800 per month. Rent is cheaper throughout the first five years, which is what causes many people to decide to rent. But, due to inflation, rent becomes more expensive than mortgage would cost after those initial five years. Rent payments and mortgage payments for similar properties are only marginally different. The long-term aspects between the two, however, are significant. A renter is not encumbered with the longer-term responsibilities that accompany home ownership such as maintenance, upkeep, and the potential of having to sell the house before having the ability to relocate. On the other hand, while paying a mortgage, a purchaser is building equity in an asset. While paying rent, a renter is paying a fee to a landlord without any long-term financial benefit. Buying is a financially superior decision. Buying a house is an investment, meaning it is possible that an investor can lose money or make money depending on whether the asset depreciates or appreciates in value. A renter does not have the investment risk associated with owning a house. In the case of real estate, though, it is more likely that an investor will make money. For example, properties sold in cities like New York, DC, and Miami are good investments because those areas tend to attract professional people who plan to stay for a long period of time. Buying in an area like these, where the market is trending up increases net worth. In 2000, a house that cost $300,000 could sell for $500,000 in 2017, which means an investor who bought a house in 2000 and sold it in 2017 made $200,000 from the investment. The likely potential to realize appreciation on the investment in a house is a big benefit to the purchaser. People who invest in buying a house often benefit from more than just financial benefits. When buying a house, the purchaser can redesign and make alterations to the home. In other words, the purchaser can personalize their home in ways that a renter cannot. This gives a homeowner a sense of control that a renter doesnt have over their home. It results in homeowners having a higher satisfaction with life, a more positive mindset, and a home that suites the needs of the entire family that can be modified as needed. There is a sense of pride that comes along with buying a home. Most people who purchase a house plan to stay for a while. So when an investor buys a home, they are also investing in the local community. They are not simply buying a piece of real estate. They are buying a home in a neighborhood, surrounded by people who are all working together for the greater good to make it a fantastic place to settle down and call home. People who rent a house rather than buy a house are not likely to create these interpersonal relationships in the community to the same degree. The renter knows they may have to move when their lease is up and so may not be as invested in the community activities. These relationships create a reliable support system, which is emotionally healthier. Although renting and buying each have pros and cons, buying is a better long term investment. In most places, mortgage and rent payments are only marginally different. Paying a mortgage for a house and building equity in the house has long-term benefits, both financial and emotional, that renting does not provide. Although renters are not encumbered with many of the responsibilities of home ownership, investing in a home is a great long term investment. A purchaser has the potential upside of asset appreciation and emotional attachment. Assuming a purchaser can handle the responsibilities of home ownership, the long-term benefits of home ownership make purchasing a home a great investment.

Essay --

Rahim, Sheikh Mr. Seed English III, 6th period 12 NOVEMBER, 2013 In The Zoo If a dwelling place is uncomfortable or people who live there do not like the place, then the house seems like a cage to them. They feel like they are in a zoo which makes a child feel like their own identity is absent. Author Jean Stafford went through this kind of situation in her childhood. Stafford’s personal life was often marked by unhappiness and struggle. Her personal life had a great influence in her stories. â€Å"In The Zoo† by Jean Stafford shows how impactful childhood is to the adult person by using symbolism and characterization. The author uses the zoo to represent a surrounded situation where people are forced to rely on others. In the zoo, animals are kept in cages for entertainment and amusement of people, but the wild animals who are born independent don’t like the environment in zoo. These animals spend most of their existence trying to escape. The author uses the animals in Denver zoo to represent various people from the childhood of the two sisters. In ...

Justice In Orestes :: The Oresteia Equality Justice Essays

Justice in Orestes Aeschylus is primarily concerned with the nature of justice. In the trilogy The Oresteia, the Akhaians evolve from an older, more primitive autocratic form of justice, to a new concept of civil justice devised by Athena. He confronts the contrast between the old and new orders, the lives of the members of the House of Atreus, and the serious moral questions that Orestes' crime presents. The case against Orestes is strong. The son admits to striking down his mother, in violation of the sacred tenant of kinship. "But I came back, my years of exile weathered—killed the one who bore me, I won't deny it, killed her in revenge." (Eumenides lines 476-478) This shows that Orestes was fully aware of the act he was committing, that he willfully committed it, and that he must suffer for it. The bond between mother and child was broken when Orestes murdered Clytaemnestra. Marriage, arguably, is a tenant of Zeus and the Olympians. In the old order of things, family is by blood only. A husband and wife have no blood relation, yet the son is of the same blood as his parents. The Furies right to vengeance cannot be dismissed. Clytaemnestra is one who upheld the laws of the Furies. Agamemnon's murder of Iphegenia at Aulis was pure outrage. "Yes he had the heart to sacrifice his daughter , to bless the war†¦" (Agamemnon lines 222-223) Agamemnon killed his own blood relation in order to sail for Troy. This too, is a terrible crime, seemingly of the same weight as Orestes' act. Clytaemnestra believed she was justified in avenging her daughter, because her husband violated a sacred tenant of the old gods. "Here is Agamemnon, my husband made a corpse by this right hand—a masterpiece of justice. Done is done." (Agamemnon lines 1429-1431) This shows a clear morality behind Clytaemnestra's motives. She appears to have justification for her actions. The curse on the House of Atreus is fulfilled. In the last lines of Agamemnon the chorus foreshadows Orestes' return. Clytaemnestra responds by saying to her new husband, "We will set the house in order once for all." (Agamemnon lines 1708) The chorus's purpose for suggesting Orestes's return is to show that the house is not yet cleansed of the curse.. Like his mother, Orestes possesses what he believes to be a just motive for revenge. Unlike his mother, however, Orestes has reservations about killing. He does not wish to strike down his mother, but realises that he must. The defense of Orestes is rooted in the fact that Apollo ordered him to do so.

Language Development of Deaf Infants and Children Essay examples -- Te

Language Development of Deaf Infants and Children My essay topic is the language development of deaf infants and children. In my opinion, this is an important topic to discuss, due to the lack of public knowledge concerning the deaf population. Through this essay, I wish to present how a child is diagnosed as having a hearing loss (including early warning signs), options that parents have for their children once diagnosed (specifically in relation to education of language), common speech teaching methods used today, typical language development for these children, and some emotional, social, and mental difficulties faced by the deaf child and the child’s family that have an immense effect on the child’s education. When most people think of the process of language development in â€Å"normal† children, the concepts that come to mind are of babies imitating, picking up sounds and words from the speakers around them. Trying to imagine that a child who cannot hear one single sound a person makes can learn to speak a language is absolutely fascinating. These children range from amazin...

How Significant a Role Do Multinational Corporations (Mncs) Play in Today’s Uk Economy in Terms of Their Impact on Employment Relations (Er) and Labour Conditions?

How significant a role do multinational corporations (MNCs) play in today’s UK economy in terms of their impact on employment relations (ER) and labour conditions? This is the question the paper attempts to evaluate through drawing on academic literature and empirical evidence from the 2004 Wers survey. The first section profiles MNCs in the UK, currently dominated by US and German firms. Following this, there is a brief analysis of employment relations in the UK. The third section reviews literature from leading commentators on the subject, highlighting contrasting views and evidence of foreign IR and ER practices. The fourth section looks at key factors that influence the way labour is managed within MNCs subsidiaries. The country of origin effect, the home country effect, the global dominance effect and a global interaction effect as identified by Edwards and Ferner. This is important to assess to what extent MNCs use these factors in the management of labour. Finally, a conclusion will be drawn and a consideration whether MNCs have diffused home country employment relations practices to their UK foreign subsidiaries and if they have affected labour conditions for the UK workforce. Introduction Foreign direct investment (FDI) as a percentage of GDP (Ferner Industrial) in the UK is the highest of any developed country in the world. Since the deregulation of the labour market in the 1980’s the UK has seen a rise in foreign owned companies. According to the WERS 2004 survey, 19 per cent of private sector workplaces with 10 or more employees had some degree of foreign ownership, an increase of 4 per cent on the 1998 survey. Similarly, a rise from 8 per cent to12 per cent of companies were predominantly foreign owned and controlled. For what reason do MNCs choose to set up subsidiaries in the UK? Could it be to take advantage of the nature of the 1 open and deregulated national business system and transfer home country ER practices? Margaret Thatcher and the conservative government came to power in 1979 and in favour of capital markets rather than labour markets; legislations were put in place to weaken the power of unions. The national business system has changed dramatically resulting in an institutionally weak British system. These factors have altered the employment relationship, weakening the statutory and long established support for collective representation. A small proportion of the UK workforce is now covered by collective bargaining (McDonalds) in the employment relationship, although remains the principal form of pay setting (Primarily in the public sector). Union membership has decreased from 13. 2 million members at its peak in 1979 to 6. 7 million in 2005 and union density1 has declined from 32 per cent in 1995 to 29 per cent in 2005. Commentators suggest that MNCs are an important source of innovative work practices, such as a specialist HRM functions. Moreover, that they are able to transfer business models from parent companies, the ‘country of origin effect’ to UK subsidiaries with relative ease. This has been described as a ‘forward diffusion’ of practices. However, evidence suggests that some MNCs, dependant on their country of origin, will adhere to the host country practices even though they conflict with the parent companies policies and practices. This will be explored in more detail further into the paper. The following section of the paper will profile MNCs in the UK. Profile of MNCs MNCs are not homogeneous but are now heterogeneous and are spread across sectors, although are dominant in the fast food and manufacturing industries in the UK. At the 1 The unionised workforce expressed as a percentage of potential membership 2 turn of the century there were 18000 foreign subsidiaries (Contemporary Employment Relations) operating in Britain, with 5000 of these employing more than 1000 employees. They stem from the US, Europe and Asia. The US is dominant with 25 per cent of total FDI to the UK followed by Germany (Bach) with 21 per cent. Foreign subsidiaries employ 18 per cent (Warwick) of the workforce in the production sector in the UK and the incidence of foreign-ownership of UK workplaces has risen since 1998 (Wers 2004) by approximately a quarter. They tend to have commonality it its products and services across its subsidiaries with 52 per cent (Warwick) having an international product. It could be argued that for these reasons they have significant economic and political power and the potential to significantly impact UK employment relations and labour conditions. Employment Relations and Labour conditions in the UK Throughout the 1980’s the Thatcher government and the neo-liberal labour movement stripped unions of their power, collapsing the traditional IR pluralist system under the previous labour governments. Historically unions played a powerful role in the UK economy, with the emphasis on centralised collective bargaining over the employment relationship. Union recognition and membership has since been on the decline. Although, sectorial shifts from manufacturing industries were unionization was predominant to an increase in the services sector is a possible conclusion. Moreover, the increase in small enterprises were unions find it hard to organise is another possible answer. It is evident that unionisation in the UK has lost its appeal and there is a marked shift towards alternative means by firms to regulate the employment relationship. The emphasis is shifting away from the pluralist view to the unitarist view on the role of the individual. Successive Labour government under Tony Blair 3 supported the regulative reforms of the conservative government, although amended the union recognition procedure. This stipulates that unions must be recognised in a workplace if there is a majority consensus of employees. The UK is now under EU directives, most recently the information and consultative directive (ICE) which came into force in 2005. This stipulates that companies with more than 1000 employees must establish a works council. This gives the workers rights to information and consultation on company decisions. Employees are also protected by many employment legislations in areas such as discrimination, unfair dismissal, minimum wage and working time regulations, directives from both the EU and the UK. With the general trend away from union involvement and collective agreements there has been a rise in union substitution strategies in the form of HRM policies in domestic firms. ER in Foreign Subsidiaries The following section reviews business systems of different countries that have foreign subsidiaries in the UK and their stance towards trade unions and practices and policies on employment relations. The US is similar to the UK with respect to the national business system. The framework for union representation in the US is weak and the support for collective bargaining is declining. Throughout the 1990’s unionization rates have declined rapidly from 30 to14 percent (Policies) in US firms leading to widespread non-unionism and anti-unionism. Do US firms then transfer this stance to their subsidaireis? One argument is that many US MNCs, especially in the services sector, with low paid, low skilled workers will use strong union avoidance strategies, the ‘low road’ approach to industrial relations. McDonalds is a key example of this with union membership (MCDonalds) bordering at zero. UK 4 unions find it impossible to organise in the company. According to Royle, a possible reason is the strength of the corporate culture disseminated by management. The chief executive of McDonalds stated that ‘unions do not bring much to the equation of the company’s philosophy of service and employee motivation’. To many US MNCs unions are seen as conflicting with their corporate strategy, the philosophy geared towards shareholder value. This gives them the competitive edge in terms of financial markets in the ever increasing globalising world. However, this has only been observed in certain sectors and it is argued that strong anti-unionism is only existent in few MNCs. If it is existent then exploitative HR policies are commonplace (Policies) which is a ‘Bleak house’ model. Non-union US MNCs use innovative union substitution polices, introducing incentives such as favourable pay and conditions to gain commitment from employees. US firms are characterised by centralised decision making and formalised procedures stemming from the HQ. There is a high degree of employee participation involving direct communication and individualised HR function and pay is predominantly performance related. In contrast to the US and UK, Germany has a strong institutional framework to protect the rights of workers. Collective bargaining in firms is under the force of the law (Royle) and 80 to 90 per cent of the workforce is covered by collective agreements. Conversely to the US, German MNCs tend to adapt to their host country environment, not recognising unions in their subsidiaries, which is divergent to their home country practices. 5 Influences on Labour Management According to Ferner and Edwards there are key influences that affect the way labour is managed in MNCs. Firstly, the ‘country of origin’ effect as mentioned earlier. This is when the MNC exerts its parent company’s management style to their foreign subsidiaries. This contends that MNCs transfer ER practices to subsidiaries in order to converge the firm’s practices and policies across international boundaries. This comes under the convergence theory, were globalisation is pressurising companies to standardize ‘best practice’ policies across its international operations. According to Bach, the pace of convergence is increasing with growth of international trade and integrated financial systems, resulting in the erosion of distinctive national differences in the field of ER and industrial relations. This theory is argued by Traxler, who states that national differences remain intact and national variances will always occur due to differing cultural approaches. This is important as it determines the way employees are managed. Autonomy is not left to the subsidiary and policy making is in the hands of the parent company. This is evident in the report by Warwick that identified 61 per cent of MNCs having a worldwide philosophy on the management of employees. With a loosely regulated framework in the UK it is possible for MNCs do ‘forward diffuse’ certain practices and are able to circumvent the national business system if it is in their interests. The characteristics of a flexible workforce and the ease of dismissal in the UK is an example. This is taking advantage of the host country’s business system. Whether this is a positive or negative impact is dependant on the parent company’s country of origin, the culture of management and the sector of operations and of course their strategic objectives. The extent to which they are able to impact on UK ER through the country of origin effect is questionable. US MNCs 6 are the most likely to diffuse home country practices such as union avoidance and antunionism, as evidence suggests. It is argued that US MNCs will challenge traditional pluralist industrial relations. Although, it is evident that union recognition has been declining in the UK over the last twenty years so to suggest that US MNCs are at the forefront of this change is unsound. Companies are finding alternative methods of managing the employment relationship without the need for intermediaries (unions). A further example of forward diffusion is that of Japanese work practices transferred in the 1980’s. Renowned for the innovative work practice of lean production which was successfully transferred to their UK subsidiaries in the manufacturing industry. The ‘host country effect’ is when the MNC is influenced by the country of operation. Certain factors attribute to the extent to which subsidiaries adopt host countries practices. The regulatory framework of the UK is weak compared to its European counterparts so; therefore, open to MNCs devising policies to suit their strategies and the environment. The global dominance effect is associated with how dominant the MNC is and its country of origin in the global economy. It may either enable or constrain (Edwards, Ferner) MNCs to implement ER practices to foreign operations. This has an effect alongside the home country effect. The US is dominant in the global economy thus its practices of ER are seen as influential and innovative, as did the Japanese form of work organisation. There is evidence to suggest that European countries will adopt such characteristics of this liberal model in order to compete effectively in the ever increasing competitive global economy. The US has brought specialised HRM practices, such as recruitment and training and implemented them across foreign sites. 7 The global integration effect is when the MNC is globally integrated on their policies thus becomes one powerful global company. The best practice to standardise all operations in order to meet their oibjectives. Conclusion It is apparent that MNCs have the economic and political power to impact UK employment relations and labour conditions. Foreign direct investment is crucial in ensuring a progressive economy and creating employment. Margaret Thatcher favoured capital thus deregulated the labour market to encourage FDI. The institutional framework of the UK is now weak and open to the transfer of MNCs IR policies. There is evidence that foreign companies will take on union avoidance strategies but there are few that openly challenge the UK IR system. A possible reason to adhere to the national system could be to ‘keep the peace’ with employees and to maintain good community relations within the areas they operate. The UK environment is such that models of unionism, non-unionism and the ‘Bleak house’ exist in MNCs in the UK and that a cross fertilization of these strategies are forming. There is little impact on the UK framework for IR as it is already evolving from collectivism since the 1980’s towards individualism. Although, there is an increase in the services sector were MNCs are dominant and non-unionism is the preferred strategy. The global dominance effect is a crucial factor on the impact of employment relations in the UK. This is closely related to the country of origin effect and global integration effect. The US at present is the most dominant. The main emphasis is now geared towards the shareholder and a short-termist view is the leading strategy. This is impacting on the labour force as MNCs will use their power to dismiss employees if 8 the strategy is focused on shareholders returns. ER is fairly regulated in the UK, workers are protected by legislation, although MNCs do have the power to circumvent some areas. However, there is evidence that they have been influential in terms of HRM in the UK. There impact can be seen in other foreign subsidiaries and indigenous MNCs in creating specialised HR. The main issue is the speed of globalisation and firms will want to compete in countries that have a weak institutional framework, as capital is favoured compared to labour. It will be difficult for countries to keep their national identities with regard to their IR and ER framework. 9 References Alpin, C, Kersley, B (2006) Inside the Workplace: Findings from the 2004 Workplace Employment Relations Survey, Routledge Chapter 2, 11. Clark, I and Almond, P (2004) ‘Dynamism and embeddedness: towards a lower road? British subsidiaries of American multinationals. Industrial Relations Journal (IRJ), 35:6. Edwards, T. , Ferner, F, Bach, S (2002) ‘The renewed ‘American Challenge’: a review of employment practice in US multinationals’. Industrial Relations Journal, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 94-108. Edwards, T and Ferner, A (2005) ‘Managing Human Resources in Multinational Companies’. Managing Human Resources: Personnel Management in Transition (4th Edn), Oxford: Blackwell, Chapter 3. Ferner, A (2003) ‘Foreign Multunationals and Industrial Relations in Britain’, in Edwards, P (2003) Industrial Relations Theory and Practice (2nd Edn), Oxford: Blackwell, Chapter 4. Ferner, A et al (2005) ‘Policies on Union Representaion in US Multinationals in the UK: Between Micro-Politics and Macro-Institutions’, British Journal of Industrial Relations, 43:4. Lee, E (1997) ‘Globalisation and Labour Standards: a review of the issues’, International Labour Review, 136:2. Michael Muller-Camen, Phil Almond, Patrick Gunnigle, Javier Quintanilla, Anne Tempel (2001) Between Home and Host Country: Multinationals and Employment Relations in Europe Industrial RelIations Journal 32 (5) , 435–448 doi:10. 1111/1468-2338. 00210 Royle, T (1999) ‘The reluctant bargainers? McDonalds, unions and pay determination in Germany and the UK’. IRJ, 30:2. Tuselmann, H. , McDonald, F. , Heise, A. (2002). ‘Globalisation, nationality of ownership and employee relations – German multinationals in the UK’. Personnel Review, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 27-43. Williams, S and Adam-Smith, D (2006) Contemporary Employment Relations: A Critical Introduction, Oxford, Oxford University Press, pp 61-82. http://www. berr. gov. uk/files/file11423. pdf http://www2. warwick. ac. uk/fac/soc/wbs/projects/mncemployment/conference_papers/ voice_in_mncs. pdf http://www. certoffice. org/annualReport/index. cfm? pageID=annual 10 11