US Investors Repositioning Into Europe
Bloomberg ETF IQ
TV Shows
We're seeing investors pull away from the US and pile into European funds in response to the market upheaval triggered by tariff wars. Bloomberg's Leonard Kehnscherper explains. (Source: Bloomberg)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bloomberg
29 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Stocks Sink, Oil Jumps as Mideast Tensions Build
Bloomberg Television brings you the latest news and analysis leading up to the final minutes and seconds before and after the closing bell on Wall Street. Today's guests are John Bolton, Former US Ambassador, Rebecca Babin, CIBC Private Wealth Group, Stephen Trent, Citi, Bill Curtin, Hogan Lovells, Jess Menton, Bloomberg News, Jason Pride, Glenmede, Christopher Cain, Bloomberg Intelligence, Callie Cox, Ritzholtz Wealth Mgmt, Joe Cirincione, Center for International Policy, Andrew Kline, Park Lane, James Jeffrey, Former US Ambassador to Iraq & Turkey, Wendy Benjaminson, Bloomberg News. (Source: Bloomberg)
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
This Airline Is Going to Start Handing Out $675 Fines to 'Unruly' Passengers: 'It Is Unacceptable'
European airline Ryanair has announced that passengers it removes from its flights for "unruly behavior" will now face an additional fine The fine for £500 — more than $675 — will be presented to anyone whose behavior "results in them being offloaded from the aircraft" 'It is unacceptable that passengers are made to suffer unnecessary disruption because of one unruly passenger's behavior," an airline spokesperson said in a statementA major European airline announced this week that passengers who are removed from flights for "unruly behavior" will now face an additional fine in an effort to crack down on what it calls "unacceptable behavior." On Thursday, June 12, Irish airline Ryanair revealed that it is introducing a £500 fine — more than $675 — to any passenger "whose unruly behavior results in them being offloaded from the aircraft." The newly implemented fines from Ryanair, which calls itself Europe's "most punctual airline," take on an "industry-wide issue affecting all airlines," the airline said in its release. The "minimum" fine comes as the airline vows to "continue to pursue disruptive passengers for civil damages." 'It is unacceptable that passengers are made [to] suffer unnecessary disruption because of one unruly passenger's behavior," a spokesperson for the airline said in a statement. "To help ensure that our passengers and crew travel in a comfortable and stress-free environment, without unnecessary disruption caused by a tiny number of unruly passengers, we have introduced a £500 fine, which will be issued to any passengers offloaded from aircraft as a result of their misconduct." "While these are isolated events which happen across all airlines, disruptive behavior in such a confined shared space is unacceptable, and we hope that our proactive approach will act as a deterrent to eliminate this unacceptable behavior onboard our aircraft," the spokesperson added. PEOPLE reached out to Ryanair for comment but did not receive an immediate response. Michael O'Leary, Ryanair's CEO, previously argued that passengers should be limited to two drinks at airports, telling the Daily Telegraph in August that authorities "don't allow people to drink-drive, yet we keep putting them up in aircraft at 33,000ft." "In the old days, people who drank too much would eventually fall over or fall asleep. But now those passengers are also on tablets and powder," he said. "It's the mix. You get much more aggressive behavior that becomes very difficult to manage." Back in January, the airline took legal action against a passenger in Ireland, seeking £12,500 — or roughly $17,000 — claiming that they disrupted a flight to the Canary Islands, per The Guardian. The 160 passengers on board had to 'face unnecessary disruption as well as [lose] a full day of their holiday," the company said at the time, according to the outlet. Never miss a story — sign up for to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer, from celebrity news to compelling human interest stories. Over in the U.S., unruly passenger incidents reported to the Federal Aviation Administration peaked in 2021, when 5,973 were reported. A total of 2,102 were reported in 2024, with 699 accounted for so far in 2025. From 2021 to 2023, the FAA levied a total of $20.9 million in fines against "unruly" passengers. Unruly passengers can face a felony conviction if referred to the FBI, fines of up to $37,000 per violation and be placed on an airline's internal no-fly list. "Former FAA Administrator Mike Whitaker reiterates that the FAA has zero tolerance for unruly passenger behavior. Dangerous passengers put everyone at risk," the agency shared in a statement on its website. "Threatening or violent behavior can distract and disrupt crew members from their primary responsibility — to ensure the safety of all passengers." Read the original article on People
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Amazon's Return-to-Office Mandate Sparks Disability Complaints
(Bloomberg) -- Inc.'s hard-line stance on getting disabled employees to return to the office has sparked a backlash, with workers alleging the company is violating the Americans with Disabilities Act as well as their rights to collectively bargain. Shuttered NY College Has Alumni Fighting Over Its Future Trump's Military Parade Has Washington Bracing for Tanks and Weaponry NYC Renters Brace for Price Hikes After Broker-Fee Ban Do World's Fairs Still Matter? NY Long Island Rail Service Resumes After Grand Central Fire At least two employees have filed complaints with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the National Labor Relations Board, federal agencies that regulate working conditions. One of the workers said they provided the EEOC with a list of 18 'similarly situated' employees to emphasize that their experience isn't isolated and to help federal regulators with a possible investigation. Disabled workers frustrated with how Amazon is handling their requests for accommodations — including exemptions to a mandate that they report to the office five days a week — are also venting their displeasure on internal chat rooms and have encouraged colleagues to answer surveys about the policies. Amazon has been deleting such posts and warning that they violate rules governing internal communications. One employee said they were terminated and another said they were told to find a different position after advocating for disabled workers on employee message boards. Both filed complaints with the EEOC and NLRB. The company's use of artificial intelligence to help it manage employee requests for disability accommodations has also stirred internal opposition and could open the company to legal challenges. Company spokesperson Zoe Hoffmann said Amazon's Disability and Leave Services team ensures employees have access to the accommodations and adjustments they need to be effective and advance their careers. The process is empathetic, and the interactions aren't automated, she said. 'Amazon respects employees' rights to organize and doesn't interfere with these rights. We don't discriminate or retaliate against employees for engaging in organizing activities,' Hoffmann said in an emailed statement. 'We're committed to supporting our employees by providing effective accommodations that meet their individual needs and the needs of the business.' Bloomberg reported in November that Amazon was making it more difficult for staff with disabilities to win approval to work from home. The company implemented a more rigorous vetting process, both for new requests to work remotely and applications to extend existing arrangements. Affected employees had to participate in a 'multilevel leader review' and some were told monthlong trials would be used to determine if accommodations met their needs. Several employees told Bloomberg then that they believed the system was designed to deny work-from-home accommodations and prompt employees with disabilities to quit, which some have done. Amazon denied the system was designed to encourage people to resign. Since then, workers have mobilized against the policy. One employee repeatedly posted an online survey seeking colleagues' reactions, defying the company's demands to stop. The survey ultimately generated feedback from more than 200 workers even though Amazon kept deleting it, and the results reflected strong opposition to Amazon's treatment of disabled workers. More than 71% of disabled Amazon employees surveyed said the company had denied or failed to meet most of their accommodation requests, while half indicated they faced 'hostile' work environments after disclosing their disabilities and requesting accommodations. One respondent said they sought permission to work from home after suffering multiple strokes that prevented them from driving. Amazon suggested moving closer to the office and taking mass transit, the person said in the survey. Another respondent said they couldn't drive for longer than 15-minute intervals due to chronic pain. Amazon's recommendation was to pull over and stretch during their commute, which the employee said was unsafe since they drive on a busy freeway. Bloomberg couldn't verify the responses to the anonymous employee survey. Amazon didn't dispute the accounts and said it considered a range of solutions to disability accommodations, including changes to an employee's commute. Hoffmann, the spokesperson, said that when appropriate, Amazon adjusts schedules, lighting and desk assignments. It also offers job coaching. If warranted, the company might provide commuting adjustments. In rare circumstances, she said, employees with disabilities are allowed to work from home full time or part time. AI Risks Using AI to parse accommodation requests, read doctors' notes and make recommendations based on keywords has also generated internal opposition. Bloomberg reviewed screenshots from an in-house coding tool showing what appeared to be prompts designed to guide AI software through the process of evaluating and pulling data from documents filled out by employees and their physicians. The bots are given context — such as the fact that injuries can occur on one or both arms — suggestions of follow-up questions and a lengthy list of potential accommodations for employees with low vision. There's also extensive guidance that may be intended to keep the software from asking unnecessary questions or generating irrelevant data. Amazon has long used automation to more efficiently manage its enormous workforce. But deploying such tools for sensitive personnel matters risks missing nuances about an employee's situation that a human might spot and take into consideration. Doing so also could lead to legal complications should employees claim the software introduced errors into the process. And the use of AI risks further alienating employees, who are already expected to engage with chatbots and automated systems, rather than colleagues, for a wide range of workplace tasks. 'It's impossible to imagine that companies will not be using AI for any number of needs, including this one,' said Chai Feldblum, a former commissioner with the EEOC. But in the event of a legal challenge, she said, Amazon would have to prove that providing an accommodation to an employee placed an unreasonable burden on the company. 'I would not leave that final judgment to AI,' Feldblum said. Amazon's partly automated accommodation and internal job transfer processes are key elements of the employee complaints to the EEOC, with workers arguing that it is insufficiently interactive to provide a complete picture of a person's physical limitations and whether reasonable accommodations could help them do their jobs. 'If there's an indication that Amazon is using some rote artificial intelligence process to manage these requests, that's not interactive,' said David Hutt, legal director of the National Disability Rights Network. 'Courts are pretty skeptical of these kind of boilerplate accommodations that aren't specifically tailored around the person's disability and their job function.' Two employees said Amazon cited its 'solicitation' policy when deleting their posts from employee communication channels. The policy prohibits personnel from asking others for financial contributions, disseminating advertising materials or gathering signatures on petitions unless they have permission from the company, according to documents reviewed by Bloomberg. Preventing employees from discussing the workplace could backfire if the NLRB determines that doing so interferes with their protected rights to organize and debate working conditions, said Kate Bronfenbrenner, the director of labor education research at Cornell University. 'If two or more people are in any way penalized or coerced against exercising their rights, it's a violation,' Bronfenbrenner said. 'Whether this gets enforced is another question,' she added, citing budget cuts to various federal agencies. With internal communication channels being scrutinized, Amazon employees posted a petition to calling on the company to reform its policies. The dispute could affect thousands of Amazon workers. An internal Slack channel for employees with disabilities has 13,000 members, one of the people said. Amazon said it doesn't track the total number of disabled workers since employee disclosure is voluntary. The rise of remote work during the pandemic helped boost the number of disabled people with jobs to almost 23% last year, close to a record high since the US Bureau of Labor Statistics began tracking the metric in 2008. Working from home can benefit people with a range of disabilities, including chronic allergies, limited mobility and anxiety disorders. Amazon employees have lodged complaints about workplace conditions in the past. The EEOC as recently as last year was investigating allegations that the company discriminated against pregnant warehouse workers in California, Connecticut, New Jersey and North Carolina by denying their accommodation requests. An agency spokesperson declined to provide an update regarding the status of the investigation. In 2021, Amazon settled a dispute with two workers at its Seattle headquarters who alleged they were fired in retaliation for their workplace activism regarding climate change and working conditions, which included inviting colleagues to a virtual event meant to connect tech employees with warehouse employees. Their allegations led to a labor board complaint accusing Amazon of unfair labor practices. American Mid: Hampton Inn's Good-Enough Formula for World Domination New Grads Join Worst Entry-Level Job Market in Years The Spying Scandal Rocking the World of HR Software US Tariffs Threaten to Derail Vietnam's Historic Industrial Boom As Companies Abandon Climate Pledges, Is There a Silver Lining? ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Sign in to access your portfolio
