Workers’ compensation is the only means for workers to be able to support their families monetarily during the time of injury, which sometimes may be for a few months to a few years.

Many workers across America have had a negative, perhaps even slightly hostile, experience with workers’ compensation and have had the need to dispute certain aspects such as compensation, medical bill payment, and level of disability rating among other issues.

For this assignment, write an essay describing the benefit of the dispute process for the state that you live and/or work in. Think about these questions when writing your essay:

• Why is the dispute process even needed?
• What are common causes of injured workers disputing the level of benefits or compensation?
• What are the workers’ rights and responsibilities when dealing with disputes?
• What is the root cause of disputes? Is it a basic viewpoint of the accident situation in general, or is it a lack of communication, or inaccurate communication between many different groups?
• How does the dispute process fit into the claims management process?

Your essay should be a minimum of four pages. At a minimum, the resources you identified in your Unit IV annotated bibliography should be used in your paper. The annotated bibliography itself will not be included as a part of the assignment, just the resources you identified. All sources used, including your textbook, must be cited and referenced following APA guidelines, and your essay should be formatted in APA style to include a title page and reference page

CAN SOMEONE PLEASE DESCRIBE THIS ARTICLE EFFICIENTLY FOR ME IN 2 OR THREE PARAGRAPHS :

What Happened When the U.S. Got Rid of Guest Workers? Farms Used Less LaborA study finds scant benefit for the native-born after a program for seasonal workers from Mexico was terminated

ByJEFFREY SPARSHOTT

Feb 8, 2017 3:09 pm ETThere’s an economic argument to limiting immigration to the U.S.: Cut down on the supply of foreign labor and wages will improve for native-born Americans.

But new research shows the equation isn’t that simple.

A team of economists looked at the mid-century “bracero” program, which allowed nearly half a million seasonal farm workers per year into the U.S. from Mexico. The Johnson administration terminated the program in 1964, creating a large-scale experiment on labor supply and demand.

The result wasn’t good news for American workers. Instead of hiring more native-born Americans at higher wages, farmers automated, changed crops or reduced production.

“We find that bracero exclusion failed to raise wages or substantially raise employment for domestic workers in the sector,” the Center for Global Development’s Michael Clemens and Hannah Postel, and Dartmouth College’s Ethan Lewis said. Instead, “employers adjusted to foreign-worker exclusion by changing production techniques where that was possible, and changing production levels where it was not, with little change to the terms on which they demanded domestic labor.”

Indeed, wages in states with the heaviest concentration of braceros—Arizona, California, Nebraska, New Mexico, South Dakota and Texas—rose more slowly after the program ended than wages in states that had no such guest workers. Employment of local workers rose at the same pace in bracero as nonbracero states.

Evidence is scant that illegal or other legal immigrants simply replaced the braceros, the researchers said. For example, U.S. Border Patrol apprehensions rose little in the years immediately following the exclusion. The number of non-Mexican foreign seasonal agricultural workers, meanwhile, hardly rose.

“It’s true that several years later, illegal migration in the mid-1970s and 1980s expanded greatly and one could say that it began to substitute for some of the legal flows during the bracero program,” Mr. Clemens said. “But that just can’t explain the lack of immediate effects on U.S. workers.”

There are signs the labor experiment has played out again in U.S. history. A Wall Street Journal article last year detailed the impact of Arizona’s tough anti-immigration laws on the state’s economy. Rob Knorr, owner RK Farms LLC, said he sharply reduced his acreage and invested $2 million developing a machine to remove stems from his jalapeño peppers following their passage. His goal was to cut the number of laborers he needed by 90%.

Mr. Clemens and his colleagues, who started their project almost two years ago, take the evidence beyond the anecdotal. The research takes a deep dive into records from the 1930s through the 1960s housed at the Dwight D. Eisenhower Presidential Library in Abilene, Kan. Once the researchers ran the numbers, Mr. Clemens said, the results were surprising.

Presidents “Kennedy and Johnson did this explicitly to improve wages and employment for American workers,” Mr. Clemens said. “Nothing like that happened.”

The findings apply to the present day and a broader set of sectors, he said, though exact outcomes are difficult to predict. “There isn’t a simple mechanistic relationship between removing workers and labor conditions,” he said.

Of course, research results remain mixed on the impact of arriving immigrants on native-born wages. Harvard University’s George Borjas, for example, estimated the immigrant influx from 1980-2000 lowered wages by 3% for the average native-born U.S. worker and by 8% for native-born high school dropouts.

Mr. Clemens and his colleagues attempt to look at what happens when you take those foreign workers away.

***THE PICTURE OF THE GDP IS IN ATTACHED FILE.

help me finish this 7 questions, for the calculate questions, please show me the steps, and i provided the formula sheet if applied thank you very much!

• Attachment 1
• Attachment 2

Income Statement: Balance Sheet:SalesExpensesAssets = Debt + EquityDepreciationEBITEFN = Assets – (Debt + Equity)InterestAT operating income = EBIT(1 – Tax rate)EBTTaxesNet Income Total invested capital = Debt + Equity Current CurrentNotes NOWC assets liabilitie s payable Current yield (CY) Annual coupon paymentCurrent price Capital gains yield (CGY) Change in priceBeginning price ROE Expected total return YTM Expected CY Expected CGY NWC = CA – CLROE = PM * TAT * EMROA = PM * TATEPS = Net Income/# of sharesEquity Multiplier = TA/TEEquity ≈ StockLiabilities ≈ DebtCAPM: r = rRF + (rm – rRF)b FCF EBIT(1DGM: Po = D1/(r – g) WACC = wdrd (1-T) + wPrP + wSrSbL = bU[1 + (1 – T)(D/E)]Stockholer E = Paid-in capital + RetainedearningStockholder E = TA – TLiabilities Profit Totalasset sEquity marginturnover multiplier ROE (NI/Sales) (Sales/TA) (TA/Equity)ROA Profit Totalassets marginturnover TIE= EBIT/Interest chargesDebt ratio= Total debt/Total assets BEP=EBIT/TAT) Depr.and Capital NOWCamortization expenditures NOPAT = Operating Income x (1- Tax Rate) Market value of equity = P0 × Common shares outstandingEVA = (EBIT)(1 – T) − (Operating Capital)(WACC)

Create a 6 pages page paper that discusses retail marketing. The retailing industry is essential to the modern consumer culture that depends on the speedy delivery of goods to the consumer in the market. A typical retail outlet may range from a handful of goods to entire shopping lists depending on the size of the retailing company. Historically retailing businesses in Great Britain have often diversified their total offered lineages as well as putting a focus on expansion since long. The first appreciable move towards assuming a large retailer framework is evident from the early business strategies of John Lewis Partnership that has been chosen for the sake of analysis. The company started out as a simple store but soon the owner John Lewis procured a few other stores before the First World War. Later his son introduced a novel framework for retailing by introducing an employee led partnership. After his death the entire business was bequeathed to the employees of John Lewis Partnership and this has continued as is since 1925. 1.1. Current State of the John Lewis Partnership At this point in time the John Lewis Partnership has diversified its business interests such that it owns and operates John Lewis departmental stores, the Waitrose supermarkets as well as a number of other services. The company is still owned by its current employees who are designated as partners. These partners all have an effective say in the manner in which business is conducted. Moreover each partner is provided with a piece of the annual profit of the company which generally ranged between 5% and 20% of the pays of partners throughout an average year between 2000 and 2011. 1.2. Market Standing Currently John Lewis Partnership stands out as the third largest private company in the United Kingdom with a revenue of 6.74 billion pounds in 2009-2010 (The Sunday Times, 2010) along with some 76,500 employees on the pay roll in 2010 (Madelaine, 2011). In addition to the above, John Lewis Partnership has become the United Kingdom’s “best high street” website after it took the place from Marks and Spencer’s in October 2010 (Bold, 2010). John Lewis also serves as the supplier for the Ocado web supermarket chain. Ocado is supplied with the Waitrose brand food products as well as with other non food items from John Lewis directly. Overall the image of the John Lewis Partnership brand and its affiliate’s image are upmarket. Historically John Lewis has appealed to the more fiscally independent customers namely customers present within the middle and upper classes. 2. Retailing Issues 2.1. Drop in Purchasing Power The downturn that has been visible in the global economy since 2008 has had the consequence of lowering the spending levels available to the average consumer. The drop in purchasing power has been all the most noticeable in the North American and Western European markets that were deemed as the markets with the greatest consumer purchasing power. The British market has felt similar problems as well when it comes to purchasing power. Overall consumers are spending less and less when it comes to commodities that are often stocked by retailers. In this respect the overall trend in the British retail industry reflects a slowdown as well. The emergence of other phenomenon related to the recession based phenomenon such as the Euro zone crisis have also shaken consumer confidence in spending at previous levels.