Connect with us

Business

Amazon ends remote work. Will other firms follow?

Published

on

This is an audio transcript of the Working It podcast episode: ‘Amazon ends remote work. Will other firms follow?’

Kevin Delaney
I think if you look at Amazon specifically, this is not a lay-off. But if you tell people that they need to come in to the office five days a week, you have to expect that you’re gonna lose some number of workers.

[MUSIC PLAYING]

Isabel Berwick
Hello and welcome to Working It from the Financial Times. I’m Isabel Berwick.

Advertisement

[MUSIC PLAYING]

Many of us take flexible and hybrid work for granted. We just accept it’s here to stay. But not at Amazon. In September, the company’s CEO, Andy Jassy, told staff they’d have to work in the office five days a week from January. He may not be alone. A new survey of CEOs carried out by KPMG shows that 83 per cent of them expect a full return to the office in the next three years. So is Amazon’s new policy on remote work a harbinger of what’s to come? Will we all be back in the office five days a week, like we used to before the pandemic? To find out, I’m going to speak to Kevin Delaney, the editor-in-chief of Charter, a media and research company focused on the future of work, and to my friend and colleague, Emma Jacobs. Let’s get started.

There’s been one topic of conversation this week in offices about offices. It’s Amazon CEO Andy Jassy’s memo to staff ordering them back to the office five days a week. Emma, how has that been received internally and externally? You wrote a very well-read column about it.

Emma Jacobs
It is the topic that will never die. I find that anyone you meet is happy to talk about how many days a week they go into the office. But people have positions on it and it’s a way of flexing muscle and looking like you’re a strong leader, characterising the other side as kind of pathetic and all these other things. So it’s become a kind of political potato that people throw between two sides. I’m surprised at how horrible people are about it, really.

Advertisement

Isabel Berwick
Yeah. Kevin, are you surprised by the enduring fierceness of this debate?

Kevin Delaney
Yeah, I am surprised. You know, we’re four-plus years in here and we’re still talking about this. The research is pretty clear that hybrid working — so in the office two or three days a week — leads to more engaged workers. People are more productive. It’s better kind of all around.

And then you have these CEOs who in the face of that don’t have particularly good arguments for why people should be in the office five days a week in the chair, 9-to-5. This is against the backdrop of a workforce that we know from surveys is pretty disenchanted and disengaged. You know, the research shows that a third to 40 per cent of workers actually, given the opportunity, think that they’re gonna look for a new job over the next year.

So it’s that kind of fraught context and the hassle of commute that are reasons, important reasons why this issue continues to be one we’re talking about.

Advertisement

Isabel Berwick
Is it that no one’s telling the CEO they’re wrong? Are they surrounded by yes people?

Kevin Delaney
I think that is probably an issue. The question is whether they’re being told or whether they’re hearing it. And, you know, I think one of the issues is that there are groups for whom hybrid working is particularly welcome. That includes caregivers who are often women employees of colour; there’s lots of research about that.

And that’s not the profile of your average CEO. You know, the average CEO is older than the average employee. So they’re arguing from another era and another demographic perspective. And as a result, there’s a real disconnect there that we’re seeing playing out with this issue.

Isabel Berwick
So, Emma, I wanted to bring you in here because you commented in your FT column that some HR chiefs are under pressure from the CEO to see more physical presence on site due to personal preference or nostalgia. And there’s a great reader comment under that from someone called Forward: “It’s 99% of the explanation. CEOs tend to be extroverts and insecure overachievers who need to see people physically to feel good and to be validated all the time. Of course they want people in the office full time. Many genuinely fail to grasp that an introvert might be more productive at home without the pressures of socializing.”

Advertisement

So is it nostalgia?

Emma Jacobs
It is. I do think that it is. One of the problems of getting older is giving up on the idea that just because you’ve been through something, you have to impose it or it’s the right way to be for younger generations or different kinds of workers.

I got an email from somebody on the back of the column that said, you know, they had been ordered in by a manager because it was good for talking to people. And then when they came in, nobody talked to this person. So it was sort of like wish fulfilment rather than kind of, you know, really kind of getting to grips with what’s going on somewhere. I think one of the biggest frustrations . . . I don’t care if Amazon wants to bring people in five days a week, if they know for sure that that will work better for their workforce.

All sorts of factors play into it, but it’s the lack of evidence that seems so weird in companies that are so keen to talk about meritocracy or talk about sales as being the kind of driving force of how we judge things. And then when it comes to this thing that they’re so desperate to implement, there’s very little in the way of data. And it just does seem odd. Is there like a kind of feeling or a vibe that they want to create?

Advertisement

I just find it very disappointing, really, when they look at the office and say, why is nobody coming in five days a week? They don’t tend to ask anybody. So why are they not asking the people that aren’t coming in? They might have all sorts of good reasons.

Isabel Berwick
Yeah. Kevin, you do a lot of research. What does your research say works?

Kevin Delaney
I mean, the research is really clear in, two or three days a week in the office with your team is a recipe for the most productive, engaged, loyal workforce.

Another thing we know is that periodic off-sites with your team or something like that sort of team gathering actually make a really big difference for distributed teams. And there’s something like a four-month trust halo if you actually spend some concentrated period of time with your team, which research suggests is about half-social and half-professional time.

Advertisement

And so we’ve learned over the last few years the best practices for managing teams like this. And when I hear companies say that workers need to be in the office five days a week, it ignores the fact that workers could be in a hybrid configuration, which is two or three days a week. But it also is, in my view, pretty lazy because it means that they’re not engaging with what the best practices for management in 2024 are, not in 2018 or 2008 or 1998. And that feels like what this whole CEO reflex reflects.

Isabel Berwick
Yes. So the data’s obvious. So why are these leaders not engaging with the data?

Kevin Delaney
I would say there’s one element — and I don’t know this to be true in Amazon’s case — but if you look at tech companies generally, there are lists of lay-offs and there’ve been waves and waves and waves of lay-offs this year by companies that we think of as being among the leading tech companies.

And part of it is they feel like they overhired, you know, during the pandemic and they’re getting rid of some people. And part of it is their practice is just to continuously lay off parts of their company and then hire people who are AI engineers or whatever the next thing they feel they need is.

Advertisement

And so I think if you look at Amazon specifically, this is not a lay-off, but if you tell people that they need to come in to the office five days a week, you have to expect that you’re gonna lose some number of workers. And I’ve seen estimates that this could be somewhere north of 10 per cent of workers who decide to stop working for Amazon because it just doesn’t fit with their lifestyle or the sort of work environment that they want.

And so, you know, there is one critical view of this, which is some CEOs are using this to trim your staff without having to pay severance to people who leave. And what we know from other research in the tech industry specifically is that when you require people to be in the office 100 per cent of the time, it’s the more experienced, longer-tenured workers who tend to leave companies. Researchers have studied this. And so, you know, one way to view this is it’s a way to shed your most expensive staff without having to pay severance.

Isabel Berwick
I mean, certainly on LinkedIn, the prevailing view seems to be that this is a lay-off by stealth. Emma, is that what you’ve been hearing?

Emma Jacobs
I mean, those . . . without knowing Andy Jassy’s inner mind, I mean, he did say in his memo that he wants to lose a layer of management because he talked about meeting bloat — the pre-meetings for the pre-meetings and so on.

Advertisement

So I think that, you know, he didn’t make the connection himself; I think that would be a step too far. But I’d be surprised if he wasn’t using it as a way of doing so, as Kevin says.

Isabel Berwick
Yeah. And on a related topic, I think one of the interesting side effects or the post-pandemic effects has been a bump in women’s ambition and women’s promotion at work. Are we starting to see that women are losing out? A five-day-a-week mandate is gonna affect a lot of women and caregivers, isn’t it?

Emma Jacobs
I mean, I guess that . . . on a general level, people are being much more pragmatic than these kind of headline-making stories suggest. So there is more flexibility, I think, generally across companies. The pandemic has taught most organisations that flexibility works both ways.

And so I think that although there is a kind of creep with companies like Goldman Sachs or Boots saying that they want people back in the office, generally there is more flexibility and I think that is allowing people with caring responsibilities to manage their days better. But I think that if we do go back to the office five days a week, long hours in the office, you know, the kind of greedy job scenario, then it is gonna be difficult for women that have traditionally taken on more of the caregiving role.

Advertisement

Isabel Berwick
Yeah. Kevin, are you hearing from groups of workers who are worried about this sort of trend?

Kevin Delaney
Yeah, in the US context also, caregiving is in a real crisis. And so people would have caregiving responsibilities, which if you look not just about early child care, but also elder care and all the different dimensions this can take is actually a very significant part of the workplace. There’s very little support for them and removing flexibility for this population means that you’re gonna lose some of them.

And so I think, you know, if you require people to be in the workplace five days a week, the profile of your workforce is likely to include fewer caregivers, also fewer people of colour. It’s a less diverse and less caregiving workforce, which, you know, is a choice that organisations could probably make but it’s not one that the research supports as being the best recipe for long-term performance of organisations if they’re so homogenous.

Isabel Berwick
Is there some way in which this plays tangentially into what we might perceive as the retreat of diversity, equity and inclusion in American workplaces, Kevin?

Advertisement

Kevin Delaney
I think that it plays into a relatively looser labour market. So we’re seeing it in all sorts of numbers, and the number of people quitting their jobs voluntarily has dramatically reduced. We’re seeing the number of open jobs that are not filled, dramatically reduced also. And the result is that employers actually feel that they’re emboldened in this sort of balance of power with employees. And so they can kind of . . . People will have to basically just go along with the policies that the CEO wants for fear of losing their jobs and not actually having great confidence that they would be able to find another job.

So I think I would say that that’s the bigger demographic trend. The broader trend is sort of emboldened employers who are also either underfunding or being more quiet about any DEI initiatives. They just have more leeway to do things like that, given the current state of the employment market, which I think is a very short-term thing, because we know probably unless AI dramatically changes things in the next few years, there will once again be a more acute shortage of labour.

Isabel Berwick
Yeah. And on the AI piece, I wanted to read out a comment from someone called London Reader under Emma’s article: “One of the most interesting aspects of these WFH/RTO discussions is the absence of commentary on how significantly the technology has moved on over the last 5 years. It is almost never cited in these discussions, which all seem to suggest this is just some kind of culture war. Depending on the kind of work you do, many of the collaborative computerised tools now available probably make you more productive when you’re sitting in an online meeting rather than in the office. But instead most of the debate seems to be centred around what the ‘good old days’ were like.”

Why aren’t we talking about tech?

Advertisement

Kevin Delaney
I think it’s a really good question. And the just basic fact is that we shifted to pretty much fully remote using technology that wasn’t necessarily ready for it. And actually, companies did well and were just as productive and showed that we could operate that way. We are now four years into this, and the technology as we all know, has evolved. Our level of comfort with it, the mores and practices around it have developed.

And so I think it is a real blind spot. And I think part of the premise of the CEOs calling people back in the office is that, you know, there’s this great interchange of ideas and there’s the water cooler where people bump into other people. And the truth is, like, the research shows that a lot of that was never actually true. And if you weren’t sitting within 20ft of someone in your office, you barely interacted them, water cooler or not. So a lot of that is this sort of nostalgic.

But technology can be deployed, you know, in some ways even better than relying on some random water cooler encounter that is probably not gonna happen. There are tools and technology that actually can enable even that part of it.

Isabel Berwick
We haven’t touched on Gen Z and their preferences for work-life balance and boundaries. Emma, are Gen Z gonna do for return to office mandates? Is the demographic pressure gonna be in favour of the younger workers?

Advertisement

Emma Jacobs
It all slightly depends on whether, you know, who holds the power. And, you know, Gen Z could like . . . Whatever they want to have, you know, unicorn rides or whatever they want. But, you know, it depends on who’s paying and who’s willing to do it.

Isabel Berwick
Yeah. Kevin, what are you hearing about Gen Z?

Kevin Delaney
Yeah, I think you know, what Emma said, a lot of their data are like fairly contradictory. And I think one thing to think about is a lot of Gen Z workers, my sense from the research is that they are looking for opportunities to learn, to connect with their colleagues, to socialise, to be mentored. And part of that disconnect is that when they’re going into the workplace, they’re actually not experiencing that.

So they’re commuting in and then they’re on zoom calls and these older colleagues, who in theory are supposed to be mentoring them, are not actually doing that. And so I guess what I would say is that you, again, like a sort of hybrid set-up that has deliberate structured approaches to things like connecting people with their colleagues to build trust and engagement and actually mentoring and learning and teaching as part of the time that you spend in your office. That seems like the thing that everybody wants, regardless of generation.

Advertisement

Isabel Berwick
I mean, that is one thing that drives me insane about this whole discussion is this idea that I know that the apprenticeship model where you hear, overhear a lot of how to conduct yourself in meetings or how to learn how to talk on the phone or all these things, you know. It’s so lazy. It’s like the easiest thing to do. I don’t have to invest in your mentoring or your training. All you have to do sit next to me. I mean, it’s the most pathetic thing. Drives me mad. OK, I’m gonna wrap it up. Kevin, to bring it back to Amazon, do you think this move says more about Amazon and how it manages its workforce and about the future of hybrid work? You know, is this a harbinger or an outlier?

Kevin Delaney
So I think if you look at the data about hybrid work, the population that is in a hybrid configuration of workers has actually been pretty flat. And so the data don’t suggest that such a wave has started already. And the question now is whether Amazon and others, sort of embolden other CEOs to try and enforce such mandates.

Amazon is known within the tech industry as a company that compensates its workers very well, but has a culture that’s more hard-driving, less flexible, less worker-friendly in some ways. And so it’s not surprising or inconsistent with that, that Amazon would be really sticking its neck out on this. And that suggests to me that it’s not necessarily an indicator that so many companies will be following Andy Jassy.

Isabel Berwick
Kevin, thank you so much for joining us from New York.

Advertisement

Kevin Delaney
Thank you, Isabel. Thank you, Emma.

Isabel Berwick
And Emma, thank you.

Emma Jacobs
Thank you. Nice to speak to you, Kevin

Isabel Berwick
It’s too early to say whether the tide is really turning on remote work. And as Kevin said, there’s a big difference between saying people have to work in the office and actually getting them there. But employers are in a better position to call the shots this time around. So maybe don’t block book that 2pm yoga class just yet.

Advertisement

This episode of Working It was produced by Mischa Frankl-Duval. The executive producer is Manuela Saragosa, and Cheryl Brumley is the FT’s global head of audio. Thanks for listening.

Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Business

What is the $100bn Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank funding?

Published

on

This article is an on-site version of our Moral Money newsletter. Premium subscribers can sign up here to get the newsletter delivered three times a week. Standard subscribers can upgrade to Premium here, or explore all FT newsletters.

Visit our Moral Money hub for all the latest ESG news, opinion and analysis from around the FT

Welcome back.

Beijing’s answer to the World Bank is backing a wave of renminbi bond borrowing by developing countries, Joseph Cotterill and I reported this morning. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank is looking to capitalise on falling interest rates by supporting more issuance of so-called “panda bonds”, a move that comes after Beijing announced new rules for renminbi debt issuance by foreign entities in 2022.

Advertisement

For today’s newsletter, I took a broader look at how the AIIB has emerged as a key player in overseas development and the largest financing partner of the US-dominated World Bank. Here’s what that means for sustainability.

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Beijing-backed development bank on growth spurt

The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank has grown rapidly since its launch in 2016. It is capitalised at $100bn, with China committing about 30 per cent of the funds and holding 27 per cent of voting power. At 110 members, AIIB is the world’s second-biggest multilateral development bank. While other G7 countries such as Germany and France are members, the US is not.

But the AIIB is invested alongside the Washington-based World Bank in projects ranging from power plants to railways across central Asia — keeping the US-China balance of power in the region in alignment.

AIIB president Jin Liqun said the bank planned to continue expanding its presence across Latin America and Africa. “We define infrastructure in a very liberal manner,” he told me in an interview, including digital skills and healthcare. For now, though, its primary focus remained in Asia.

Advertisement

AIIB’s existing projects

Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan are major exporters of natural gas, and their steppes make large areas well-suited to wind energy. Yet, while they are rich in natural resources, Soviet-era grid infrastructure has strained power systems in central Asia, causing blackouts and potentially deterring foreign investment, as researcher Anna Jordanová has detailed.

In 2019, AIIB approved a $47mn loan for a 100 megawatt wind farm in Kazakhstan, the country where Chinese President Xi Jinping launched the Belt and Road infrastructure investment spree in 2013. The country is a major exporter of coal, oil, and gas, with total energy production that is more than double its domestic demand, as of 2018. Yet, Kazakhstan has endured frequent power outages, which have sparked unrest.

In 2020, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), whose largest capital contributor is the US, announced that it would also provide a $25mn loan for the project, which is based in a country often seen as the focus of the “new Great Game” between Russia and the US, writes Maximilian Hess, a political risk analyst.

China and the US are not the only investors vying to invest in energy infrastructure in countries with geopolitical significance. Gulf countries have also become major investors and developers in the region. AIIB has signed multiple loan agreements in Uzbekistan with Masdar, Abu Dhabi’s renewable energy investment vehicle. Masdar is also building the region’s largest wind farm.

Advertisement

AIIB has supported a string of gas power plants in Uzbekistan, including $100mn in funding to a plant developed by ACWA Power, the Saudi national champion, and a €225mn loan last year. The investments, however, have drawn criticism from civil society groups, such as Germany-based Urgewald, which argued that the AIIB’s lending to fossil fuels “undermines the credibility of its climate and social policies”.

Asked about its investments in gas, Jin said: “We do not rule out gas, but we focus on renewables.

“If we finance a gas project, we should [see] a clear correlation between the gas project and phasing out coal-fired power,” he said. Growing energy demand in many emerging markets should be viewed as a positive development, Jin added, since it was partly the result of poverty reduction efforts.

Pain points

The AIIB and the World Bank’s extensive co-financing arrangements don’t necessarily indicate that it is a tension-free relationship — nor that every project advertised as sustainable is up to that billing, as the fossil fuel financing shows.

Advertisement

As the bank’s profile has grown, so too have concerns about its investments — especially following feedback from local communities.

A report last year by Amsterdam-based campaign group Recourse raised issues with AIIB’s accountability mechanism, noting that “in seven years, with 233 projects funded and over $44bn spent, the AIIB has yet to accept a single complaint from people adversely affected by its investments”.

The report highlighted one rejected complaint from critics of a gas power plant in Bangladesh, which received $60mn from AIIB. The complainants alleged that “middlemen” acquired the land for the plant “with intimidation and coercion, and at lower than market rates”.

The AIIB is also attempting to distinguish itself from the Belt and Road Initiative, which peaked in 2016 and saddled many countries with debt in return.

Advertisement

“The Belt Road Initiative was proposed by China, more or less at the same time as AIIB,” Jin said. “[But] these two different initiatives work by different governance and practice. Multilateral development banks like ours . . . we work like our peer institutions, such as the World Bank, and EBRD.

“Quite a lot of countries are grappling with debt problems. The big issue is, how could we help these countries attract external capital inflows without creating debt problems? Our answer is, we need to push for productive investment,” Jin said.

These issues will have to be tackled in the years ahead, but the collaboration by US- and China-led official sector financial institutions in some of the world’s most geopolitically contested regions may indicate that funding for international development will continue in spite of the increasingly antagonistic relationship between the world’s biggest economies.

Smart read

All the attention is on China’s cleantech manufacturing capacity. But Beijing is also exporting a “tsunami” of investment in renewable energy and transport electrification projects, Edward White and William Sandlund report.

Advertisement

Recommended newsletters for you

FT Asset Management — The inside story on the movers and shakers behind a multitrillion-dollar industry. Sign up here

Energy Source — Essential energy news, analysis and insider intelligence. Sign up here

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Money

PFS and CII relationship ‘blown wide open’ after latest saga

Published

on

PFS and CII relationship 'blown wide open' after latest saga

The already fractious relationship between the Personal Finance Society (PFS) and the Chartered Insurance Institute (CII) has been ‘blown apart’ again.

The CII announced yesterday (1 October) that its chief executive Matthew Hill and three other executives – Trevor Edwards, Mathew Mallett and Gill White – have been appointed to the PFS board.

The move has further increased tensions between members of the PFS and its parent body, the CII.

The debacle started with the ‘Christmas coup’ in December 2022, when the CII imposed its own directors on the PFS board in a highly controversial move.

Advertisement

At the time, the CII said it took action due to “serious and significant” governance failures at the PFS.

The PFS immediately hit back, slamming the CFII’s decision, with former PFS president Sarah Lord condemning the CII’s “aggressive” behaviour.

She also described the move as “disingenuous” and said it had been done without prior consent or warning.

Caroline Stuart resigned from her roles as PFS president and member director of the PFS board on 5 January 2023, saying the pressure was affecting her health.

Advertisement

There were also a series of resignations and appointments in the 12 months that followed.

Last year, the PFS and CII appeared to have resolved the dispute and both parties said they were working together.

However, this week the CII took action to flood the PFS board with its members once again.

In a statement, campaign group Our PFS, set up to ‘save’ the body following the Christmas coup of 2022, blasted the CII’s actions.

Advertisement

“It has been around a year since the last actions of ourpfs.co.uk, with a general feeling that issues between CII and PFS were in the process of being resolved,” it said.

“Unfortunately, this has been blown wide open again thanks to incredibly questionable actions taken by the Chartered Insurance Institute on 1 October 2024.

“OurPFS is urgently investigating and will be writing out with more details as soon as they are known.

“October 2024 may well turn out to be the month that defines the future of our professional body.”

Advertisement

Money Marketing has contacted representatives of the PFS for a comment.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

Iran’s hardliners prevail as regime gambles on Israel attack

Published

on

Shortly after Israel’s assassination of Hizbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah last Friday, Iran’s top political and military leaders gathered to discuss how Tehran should respond.

For weeks after the surprise election of reformist President Masoud Pezeshkian in July, Iranian politicians had been publicly pushing a message of restraint even as Israel increased its attacks on Hizbollah, the Islamic republic’s most important proxy.

But after Nasrallah’s killing it was Iran’s military leaders, bent on revenge and fearful the republic was looking increasingly weak, who won the day at the Supreme National Security Council meeting on Monday, said an Iranian official. With little warning, Iran on Tuesday fired about 180 ballistic missiles at Israel, pushing the arch foes closer than ever to the full-blown direct conflict Tehran has been insisting it wants to avoid.

“Nasrallah’s assassination was the last straw and Iran has come to the conclusion the Israelis are not going to stop; they are taking harsher measures and now they are going to attack and invade part of Lebanon,” an Iranian official told the Financial Times. “The military commanders persuaded [the council] that if Iran does not [retaliate], it will lose its supporters and it will badly damage its reputation.”

Advertisement

In doing so, the supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, whose prime aim is ensuring the survival of the republic, has taken a huge risk. He has so far backed Pezeshkian’s overtures to the west in the belief that it is in Iran’s interests to resolve its years-long nuclear stand-off with the US and European powers in a bid to ease sanctions on the crippled economy, say Iranian analysts.

After a suspected Israeli attack killed Hamas’s political leader Ismail Haniyeh hours after Pezeshkian’s inauguration in Tehran in July, the regime held back from retaliating despite the humiliating security breach.

Iranian officials said the new president urged restraint, with Iranian politicians wary of falling into what they described as Israel’s “trap”. The belief is that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wants to drag the republic into a direct conflict with Israel and the US, and scupper the slim chances of any détente with the west.

But in the weeks since, Israel drastically stepped up its assault on Hizbollah, killing Nasrallah — a close confidant of Khamenei — and other senior commanders, launching waves of intense air strikes on Lebanon and on Tuesday sending troops into the Arab state’s south.

Advertisement

“Hizbollah was the front line of Iran’s defence and if Iran doesn’t protect that line nobody . . . will trust Iran,” the Iranian official said. “[Pezeshkian] is under a lot of pressure, because what the Americans promised him turned out to be wrong, therefore they cannot trust anyone now.”

Major General Mohammad Bagheri, chief of staff of Iran’s Armed Forces, said on Wednesday that Tehran endured “a very difficult period of restraint” that lasted nearly two months. But the Islamic republic concluded that the US had given a “green light” to Netanyahu to escalate, with Iran’s top general saying the situation was “no longer bearable”.

Protesters in Tehran's Palestine Square hold up pictures of Hizbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, who was killed in an Israeli air strike. The crowd includes women in black hijabs, some carrying flags and flowers.
A woman holds up a picture of Hizbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah during a protest in Tehran on Monday © Atta Kenare/AFP/Getty Images

Pezeshkian too spoke of the frustrations after Nasrallah’s assassination.

“The claims made by the leaders of the US and European countries, who promised a ceasefire [to end the war in Gaza] in exchange for Iran not responding to the assassination of Haniyeh, were entirely false,” Pezeshkian told a cabinet meeting on Sunday. “Giving such criminals more time will only embolden them to commit further atrocities.”

The Islamic republic is braced for a response, halting all flights in and out of Iran on Tuesday and Wednesday.

Advertisement

In April, when Iran launched its first direct strike against Israel from Iranian soil, Tehran clearly telegraphed the strike. It sent drones that gave Israel, the US and its allies hours to prepare their defences. This time, the barrage was just ballistic missiles — Iranian media also said “hypersonic” missiles — which travel far faster, giving Israel and its partners a much shorter response time.

Iran claimed that 90 per cent of the missiles had hit their targets, most of which were military facilities in or around Tel Aviv. Video footage suggested one missile may have exploded at or near the headquarters of the Mossad, Israel’s foreign intelligence service.

But an Israeli security official said most of the missiles that Iran fired were intercepted by the air defences of Israel, the US and its allies.

Netanyahu has vowed to retaliate, saying “Iran made a big mistake tonight — and it will pay for it”.

Advertisement
Masoud Pezeshkian stands behind a podium adorned with flowers, reviewing an annual military parade.
President Masoud Pezeshkian was frustrated with western leaders who, he said, made ‘false’ promises about a ceasefire in Gaza in exchange for Iran’s restraint following the assassination in Tehran of Hizbollah’s political leader Ismail Haniyeh © Vahid Salemi/AP

Tehran still hopes the situation can be contained. In April, Israel responded to Iran’s first assault by firing missiles at an air base near Iranian city of Isfahan, which is also close to one of the republic’s main nuclear facilities, but neither side escalated further.

Abbas Araghchi, Iran’s foreign minister, said in a social media post on Wednesday that Tehran’s “action is concluded unless the Israeli regime decides to invite further retaliation”. “In that scenario, our response will be stronger and more powerful,” he said.

For a regime that has long touted its domestically produced missile and drone capabilities, as well as the might of its proxies such as Hizbollah, as powerful deterrents against Israel, the recent weeks of Israeli assaults have been humiliating.

Israel has displayed its military superiority and showed that its intelligence agencies have penetrated deep into Hizbollah and the Islamic republic, with the assassination of Haniyeh in Tehran and the attack on the Lebanese movement’s communications devices last month.

A man walks with a dog past the rubble of a destroyed building. Debris and damaged structures are visible under a partly cloudy sky.
A destroyed building in Hod HaSharon, Israel, following an Iranian missile attack on Wednesday © Jack Guez/AFP/Getty Images

Since Hamas’s October 7 attack ignited the regional hostilities, Israel has also killed at least 19 Revolutionary Guards officers, mostly in strikes on Syria. One senior commander, Abbas Nilforoushan, was killed alongside Nasrallah in Israel’s strikes on the southern suburbs of Beirut on Friday.

The escalation has been a boon for Iran’s hardliners, who were humiliated by Pezeshkian’s election victory. They have seized the moment to criticise the reformist president, his senior diplomats and advisers for acquiescing to US pressure and urging restraint.

Advertisement

Although all key foreign policy decisions are ultimately determined by Khamenei and the Revolutionary Guards, analysts believe presidents and diplomats can influence the leader’s decisions.

“This misguided optimism must end, and the reformists are to blame for trusting the US once again,” said Hamid-Reza Taraghi, a prominent hardline politician. “It’s meaningless to talk about peace. Peace with who? A rabid dog?”

He criticised reformist leaders for “downgrading the promise of ‘hard revenge’ against Israel [following Haniyeh’s assassination] to merely hoping Israel would accept a ceasefire”.

Pezeshkian’s push to drive a reformist agenda, particularly his attempt to engage with the west, which many US and European diplomats were always sceptical of, has suffered a severe blow.

Advertisement

“Pezeshkian is under a lot of pressure himself, and therefore he can’t argue any more and persuade the military leaders not to take any action,” the Iranian official said.

Source link

Continue Reading

Money

Martin Lewis issues ‘ditch and switch’ warning for customers of huge high street bank

Published

on

Martin Lewis issues ‘ditch and switch’ warning for customers of huge high street bank

MARTIN Lewis has issued a warning for customers of a major high street bank.

Santander has cut the rate on its easy-access savings account by 1.1%.

The Martin Lewis MoneySavingBlog is urging customers to 'ditch and switch'.

1

The Martin Lewis MoneySavingBlog is urging customers to ‘ditch and switch’.Credit: ITV

The account paid 5.2% interest when it first launched, but was cut to 4.20% in May and has now been reduced to 4%.

Advertisement

This means customers will get 4% interest on balances between £1 and £250,000.

It applies to customers who have a Santander’s Easy Access Saver Limited Edition (Issue 3).

The deal is no longer open to new customers.

When the deal fist launched last September, it was one of the most competitive on the market.

Advertisement

However, experts from the Martin Lewis MoneySavingExpert blog are urging customers to think twice.

They said: “You can easily beat this new rate by switching elsewhere – which you’re allowed to do without penalty.

The blog stated that even though this account has a 12-month term the rate is variable.

This means that savers are not locked into this account and do not have to stick with it.

Advertisement

They explained: “This account works in a slightly unusual way – it initially had a 12-month term, but the rate wasn’t fixed for this period

PAY DAY Watch Martin Lewis reveal three ways to get cashback on Christmas spending, ITV

“Instead, what happens at the end of the term – which has since been extended by 10 months – is that the account ‘matures’ and your money is transferred to one of Santander’s other easy-access accounts with a much lower interest rate.”

“You can ditch and switch,” they added.

The MoneySavingBlog named two saving accounts for customers which offer higher interest.

Advertisement

These include:

Trading 212’s Cash ISA

This is a type of savings account which offers tax free interest on savings up to £20,000.

There is not mimiumn you have to pay in to receive the interest.

You must be at least 18-years old to open this type of savings account.

Advertisement

Trading 212’s deal offers savers 5.1% AER Variable on customers savings.

An AER Variable rate means that your rate is not guaranteed and that it can change over time.

On this deal, savers can withdraw their cash at anytime without any impact on their savings rate.

The interest is also paid daily.

Advertisement

If you want to read more about ISA’s check out our article here.

Oxbury saving account offer

This bank is offering an AER interest rate of 4.76%.

However, the interest will only on balances above £25,000 and up to £500,000.

It is also worth noting that if your balance falls below £25,000 after opening the account, you will not receive interest on the balance.

Advertisement

You will only receive interest on balances above £500,000, where those balances have resulted from interest being accrued to the account.

Unlike Trading 212’s Cash ISA, where interest is paid daily, here it is only paid one a month.

What other options are available for savers?

There are several types of savings accounts available to customers, so you need to make sure you select one that suits your circumstances.

Easy-access accounts and regular savings accounts, which allow greater flexibility when it comes to withdrawing your cash, but they tend to offer slightly lower interest rates.

Advertisement

If you’re happy to leave your cash in your account for longer then you can consider a fixed-bond or notice savings account.

Before opening a new savings account it’s always worth having a browse on price comparison websites.

Moneyfactscompare, Compare the Market, Go Compare and MoneySupermarket will help save you time and show you the best rates available.

These sites let you tailor your searches to an account type that suits you.

Advertisement

Where to find the best savings rates

Many savings accounts offer miserly rates meaning that money is generating little or no return.

However, there are ways to get your cash working hard. Sun Savers Editor Lana Clements explains how to make sure you money is getting the best interest rate.

Easy access savings accounts offer flexibility for customers, meaning they can dip in and out of cash when needed. However, the caveat is that rates can change at any time.

Advertisement

If you’re keeping your money in an easy access account, you’ll need to keep checking whether it’s the best paying account for your circumstances and move if not.

Check in at least once a month to see what is happening in the market.

Check what is offered by your bank – sometimes the best rates are for customers only.

But do search the wider market as often top savings accounts are offered by lesser known providers.

Advertisement

Comparison sites are a good place to check for the top rates. Try Moneyfactscompare.co.uk or Moneysupermarket.

You can search by different account type. You’ll usually get a better interest rate if you can lock your money away for a fixed amount of time, but it’s always a good idea to keep some money in an easy access account in case of emergencies.

Don’t overlook regular savings accounts often pay some of the best rates, but you’ll need to commit to monthly payments. This can be a great way to get into a savings habit while earning top rates at the same time.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Travel

Escape lounge set to open at Edinburgh Airport

Published

on

Escape lounge set to open at Edinburgh Airport

The 135-seat space will be located next to gate 4 and is scheduled to open in spring 2025

Continue reading Escape lounge set to open at Edinburgh Airport at Business Traveller.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

An extra juicy, very fancy lamb gratin you can make in advance  

Published

on

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

This week’s recipe comes to you with a promising lineage: it was suggested to me by Café Deco’s Anna Tobias, who developed it with her sous-chef Augusta Hood, who first ate it at Le Baratin in Paris. You may be reluctant to do anything with a big bit of lamb other than serve it whole, but let yourself be persuaded, Anna says: this gratin retains all the juiciness, but has the advantage that it can sit happily in the fridge for a few days once fully assembled. No last-minute prep required.

For time-efficiency, make the tomato sauce while the lamb is cooking, and also the aubergine if you have two ovens.

Advertisement

Drink
A medium-bodied red (not pictured!). When Anna tested the recipe for a home kitchen, she served it with Pedres Blanques, a Grenache.

TIP
Anna prefers to buy whole olives and pit them herself as the olives are less waterlogged and more flavourful.

© Andy Sewell. Styling by Hattie Arnold

Café Deco’s Lamb & Aubergine Gratin

To serve four

  1. Preheat the oven to 160C fan. Season the lamb well with salt and pepper and place skin side down on top of all the other lamb ingredients in a roasting dish. Cover with foil and roast for three hours, until tender.

  2. Strain off the gravy and refrigerate. Discard the onion, garlic and herbs. Flip the lamb and return to the oven for 15 minutes to crisp the skin. Remove and allow to cool.

  3. Make your tomato sauce. Put the olive oil and garlic in a saucepan on a medium heat and fry the slivers until they just start to colour. Add the tin of tomatoes, season and bring to a simmer. Turn the heat to low for half an hour. Check seasoning.

  4. Turn the oven up to 180C. Slice the aubergines lengthwise into 2cm thick slices. Drizzle two tablespoons of olive oil on the base of the baking trays and season the trays with salt and pepper. Lay the aubergines on top in a single layer. Drizzle with another two tablespoons of oil and season the top as well. Roast in the oven for 15-20 minutes or until a nice golden brown.

  5. Once the lamb is cool enough to handle, pull the meat from the bone and flake into mouthful-sized pieces. Remove any fat/gunky bits. Mix the lamb with the tomato sauce. Check seasoning.

  6. Take the lamb gravy from the fridge and scrape off the fat.

  7. Now it’s time to assemble. Using a 22 x 28cm baking dish, place half of the lamb and tomato mix on the bottom of the dish and ladle over 30ml of gravy. Scatter half of the olives and basil and a third of the grated parmesan on to the lamb. Lay over half of the roasted aubergine slices with a bit of overlap.

  8. Place the rest of the lamb, another 30ml of gravy, olives and basil on top of the aubergines along with another third of the parmesan.

  9. Lay the rest of the aubergines on top and sprinkle with the last of the parmesan, then drizzle with the remaining olive oil.

  10. Reduce the oven to 175C and cook the gratin for 25-35 minutes until the top is golden and it is hot throughout.

  11. Allow it to sit for 15 minutes before dishing out. Serve with a green salad and bread.

Follow @FTMag to find out about our latest stories first and subscribe to our podcast Life and Art wherever you listen

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2024 WordupNews.com