JOB IS JOB-NEW OPPORTUNITIES

Job Alert - Paralegal‏
6:53 AM

BramptonJobForce.ca Job Alert BramptonJobForce.ca Job Alertalert@email4-beyond.com

BramptonJobForce.ca Job Alert for November 21, 2010

** FYI....BRAMPTON IS A CITY IN ONTARIO, CANADA. I LIVE HERE.

TRICK QUESTION: HOW MANY SQUARE PEGS IN ROUND HOLES ARE THERE IN YOUR JOB SEARCH ?

Search Jobs

Dear Prospective Candidate,
Job opportunities were recently posted that match your job criteria.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Resume Distribution
www.ResumeRabbit.com Get on 80 top job sites at once. Takes only 5 minutes!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

New Job Opportunities
Trial Technology Senior Consultant
New York NY

Vice President -Attorney
Newport Beach CA

Paralegal - Corporate
Houston TX

LEGAL ASSISTANT/PARALEGAL
Los Angeles CA

Foreclosure Services Representative
Whippany NJ

Paralegal - Structured Investments
New York NY

AI Asset Acceptance Risk Analyst
San Francisco CA

Assistant Paralegal
San Francisco CA

Pre-Closing Administrator
Jericho NY

Assistant Immigration Paralegal
Philadelphia PA

Paralegal / Legal Secretary
Chatham NJ

Intelectual Property Litigation Paralegal - 529310
San Jose CA

Legal Intern
Roseville CA

Sr. Paralegal, Compliance
Seattle WA

Legal Paralegal
Cleveland OH

Paralegal, Business, Tax and Governance Service
Sacramento CA

Assistant, Legal-Risk Management
Temple TX

Director of Contract Management
New York NY

Controller/CPA
Sacramento CA

Temporary Attorney - Blue Sky
New York NY

Outside Sales Position–Non-Profit
Fresno CA

Production Welder
Fresno CA

Executive Administrative Assistant - Food Manufacturing
Fresno CA

Paralegal Job
Ambler PA

Paralegal
San Mateo CA

Senior Legal Analyst
Fairfax VA

Communications & Legal Support
Golden CO





Show All Matching Jobs

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

JOB INTERVIEW QUESTIONS

KEEPING YOU UP TO SPEED

The Job Interview Questions to Help You Select the Best
Illegal Job Interview Questions
by Susan Heathfield, About.com Guide


Disclaimer
The information in this article is from this website and a variety of online resources. The information provided, while authoritative, is not guaranteed for accuracy and legality. While I have made every effort to provide accurate, legal, and complete information, I cannot guarantee it is correct. Please seek legal assistance, or assistance from State, Federal, or International governmental resources, to make certain your legal interpretation and decisions are correct. This information is for guidance, ideas, and assistance only.





The job interview is a powerful factor in the employee selection process. You can use behavioral-based job interview questions to help you select superior candidates. Ask interview questions that help you identify whether the candidate has the behaviors, skills, and experience needed for the job you are filling.
Ask legal interview questions that illuminate the candidate’s strengths and weaknesses to determine job fit. Avoid illegal interview questions and interview practices that could make your company the target of a U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) lawsuit.
Illegal Job Interview Questions
Illegal interview questions include any interview questions that are related to a candidate’s:
• Age
• Race, ethnicity, or color
• Gender or sex
• Country of national origin or birth place
• Religion
• Disability
• Marital or family status or pregnancy
Especially in the course of a comfortable interview during which participants are relaxed, don’t let the interview turn into a chat session. Seemingly innocuous interview questions such as the following are illegal.
Sample Illegal Job Interview Questions
• What arrangements are you able to make for child care while you work?

• How old are your children?

• When did you graduate from high school?

• Are you a U.S. citizen?

• What does your wife do for a living?

• Where did you live while you were growing up?

• Will you need personal time for particular religious holidays?

• Are you comfortable working for a female boss?

• There is a large disparity between your age and that of the position’s coworkers. Is this a problem for you?

• How long do you plan to work until you retire?

• Have you experienced any serious illnesses in the past year?
During an interview, you must take care to keep your interview questions focused on the behaviors, skills, and experience needed to perform the job. If you find your discussion straying off course or eliciting information you don’t want about potential job discrimination topics, bring the discussion quickly back on topic by asking another job-related interview question.
If a candidate offers information, such as, “I will need a flexible schedule because I have four children in elementary school,” you can answer the question. Do not, however, pursue that topic further. Another candidate informed me recently that his favorite spare time activity is reading the Bible. I asked him to tell me about why he left his most recent job.
Another candidate leaned closer across the table and said, “The reason I am leaving my current job is that I just had a baby two weeks ago and I need a regular schedule for my child care provider.” Another candidate told me he was a native Polish speaker and that he spent his childhood in an area of the city called Pole Town.
Running late at the interview, a female candidate informed the plant manager she had to run because she was late for football practice. His response, "Oh, you play football?" makes me chuckle every time I think about it. (It was her son's practice.) Again, do not pursue the discussion and you may not use such information to make your hiring decision. (As an aside, each of these individuals was hired for the position which is why I am comfortable sharing the examples.)
Interested in legal behavioral based interview questions? I also provide guidance about what you are looking for in your candidate's responses. Read more…
___________________________________________________________________

FAILURE AND SUCCESS

JIM ROHN is an important voice for Human Resource Development.
SUCCESS MAGAZINE ARTICLE [ What Achievers Read ]
(From my net-work Desk – September 14, 2010)

• WELL-BEING


The Formula For Failure And Success


Jim Rohn March 27, 2008
Failure is not a single, cataclysmic event. We do not fail overnight. Failure is the inevitable result of an accumulation of poor thinking and poor choices. To put it more simply, failure is nothing more than a few errors in judgment repeated every day. Now why would someone make an error in judgment and then be so foolish as to repeat it every day?
The answer is because he or she does not think that it matters.
On their own, our daily acts do not seem that important. A minor oversight, a poor decision, or a wasted hour generally doesn't result in an instant and measurable impact. More often than not, we escape from any immediate consequences of our deeds.
If we have not bothered to read a single book in the past ninety days, this lack of discipline does not seem to have any immediate impact on our lives. And since nothing drastic happened to us after the first ninety days, we repeat this error in judgment for another ninety days, and on and on it goes. Why? Because it doesn't seem to matter. And herein lies the great danger. Far worse than not reading the books is not even realizing that it matters!
Those who eat too many of the wrong foods are contributing to a future health problem, but the joy of the moment overshadows the consequence of the future. It does not seem to matter. Those who smoke too much or drink too much go on making these poor choices year after year after year... because it doesn't seem to matter. But the pain and regret of these errors in judgment have only been delayed for a future time. Consequences are seldom instant; instead, they accumulate until the inevitable day of reckoning finally arrives and the price must be paid for our poor choices - choices that didn't seem to matter.
Failure's most dangerous attribute is its subtlety. In the short term those little errors don't seem to make any difference. We do not seem to be failing. In fact, sometimes these accumulated errors in judgment occur throughout a period of great joy and prosperity in our lives. Since nothing terrible happens to us, since there are no instant consequences to capture our attention, we simply drift from one day to the next, repeating the errors, thinking the wrong thoughts, listening to the wrong voices and making the wrong choices. The sky did not fall in on us yesterday; therefore the act was probably harmless. Since it seemed to have no measurable consequence, it is probably safe to repeat.
But we must become better educated than that!
If at the end of the day when we made our first error in judgment the sky had fallen in on us, we undoubtedly would have taken immediate steps to ensure that the act would never be repeated again. Like the child who places his hand on a hot burner despite his parents' warnings, we would have had an instantaneous experience accompanying our error in judgment.
Unfortunately, failure does not shout out its warnings as our parents once did. This is why it is imperative to refine our philosophy in order to be able to make better choices. With a powerful, personal philosophy guiding our every step, we become more aware of our errors in judgment and more aware that each error really does matter.
Now here is the great news. Just like the formula for failure, the formula for success is easy to follow: It's a few simple disciplines practiced every day.
Now here is an interesting question worth pondering: How can we change the errors in the formula for failure into the disciplines required in the formula for success? The answer is by making the future an important part of our current philosophy.
Both success and failure involve future consequences, namely the inevitable rewards or unavoidable regrets resulting from past activities. If this is true, why don't more people take time to ponder the future? The answer is simple: They are so caught up in the current moment that it doesn't seem to matter. The problems and the rewards of today are so absorbing to some human beings that they never pause long enough to think about tomorrow.
But what if we did develop a new discipline to take just a few minutes every day to look a little further down the road? We would then be able to foresee the impending consequences of our current conduct. Armed with that valuable information, we would be able to take the necessary action to change our errors into new success-oriented disciplines. In other words, by disciplining ourselves to see the future in advance, we would be able to change our thinking, amend our errors and develop new habits to replace the old.
One of the exciting things about the formula for success - a few simple disciplines practiced every day - is that the results are almost immediate. As we voluntarily change daily errors into daily disciplines, we experience positive results in a very short period of time. When we change our diet, our health improves noticeably in just a few weeks. When we start exercising, we feel a new vitality almost immediately. When we begin reading, we experience a growing awareness and a new level of self-confidence. Whatever new discipline we begin to practice daily will produce exciting results that will drive us to become even better at developing new disciplines.
The real magic of new disciplines is that they will cause us to amend our thinking. If we were to start today to read the books, keep a journal, attend the classes, listen more and observe more, then today would be the first day of a new life leading to a better future. If we were to start today to try harder, and in every way make a conscious and consistent effort to change subtle and deadly errors into constructive and rewarding disciplines, we would never again settle for a life of existence – not once we have tasted the fruits of a life of substance!

A CASE OF HUMAN RIGHTS

CAN GROSS MISCONDUCT PLAY SCRABBLE WITH YOUR HUMAN RIGHTS ?


By CBC News, cbc.ca, Updated: August 4, 2010 1:31 PM
Abdullah Khadr released after court ruling

Abdullah Khadr, accused by the U.S. government of procuring weapons on behalf of al-Qaeda, is a free man after an Ontario court ordered his release Wednesday from a Toronto detention centre.

Khadr, the elder brother of Omar Khadr, the only Canadian held at the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, was originally detained by Pakistani authorities before his arrest by RCMP at the request of U.S. officials upon his return to Canada in 2005.

U.S. authorities paid a $500,000 US bounty to Pakistani police to hold him for 14 months before he was returned to Toronto.

He has been detained without bail since Dec. 23, 2005, while the courts dealt with the U.S. request to extradite him.

On Wednesday, Superior Court Judge Christopher Speyer granted a stay of proceedings in his case — effectively shelving it, meaning the extradition request was denied. Khadr, 29, was then released from custody.

Speaking to reporters on the courthouse steps, Khadr was relieved by the ruling. "I think this is going to be a new beginning for me in life," he said. "What can I say? I want to start new now. I don't want to think about it anymore."

Speyer cited the fact Khadr was denied prompt access to Canadian consular officials when initially detained in Pakistan. He said he granted the stay because of "gross misconduct" by governments in the case, and he hoped the ruling would act as a deterrent to other countries acting similarly.

Ottawa will have a chance to appeal the decision, and must do so within 30 days.

Khadr's lawyer, Dennis Edney, said he welcomed the ruling. "This government has been totally unreasonable," he said. "[The judge] reviewed the facts and did what he's supposed to do."

Justice Minister Rob Nicholson, speaking to reporters in Montreal, said the government would look at the decision before deciding what to do.

"We have a look at all cases and we deal with them very carefully. I never comment publicly before we look at them," he said.

Khadr's lawyers say the case against their client relies on statements he made to officials in Pakistan and repeated when he arrived in Toronto in December 2005. His lawyers say those statements were made under duress, while he was tortured and compelled to say what authorities wanted to hear.

EMPLOYMENT-EQUITY

HUMAN RIGHTS VS HUMAN RESOURCE

From the Desk of South Asia Mail, Wednesday, July 28, 2010





Tories take aim at employment equity





Joe Friesen

The Conservative government is taking aim at an employment-equity policy that favours applicants from historically disadvantaged groups, saying no Canadian should be barred from applying for a job based on race.

Stockwell Day, president of the Treasury Board, ordered a review Thursday into a government job-application process that restricts some jobs to one or more of the four groups targeted by Canada’s employment-equity policy: aboriginal people, visible minorities, women and people with disabilities.

The move came in response to the story of a Caucasian woman who tried to apply for an administrative assistant’s job in the federal ministry of Citizenship and Immigration, only to find the competition was restricted to aboriginals and members of a visible minority. Such a practice is permitted under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and is intended to help government meet diversity hiring targets.

Jason Kenney, the minister of Citizenship and Immigration, said he was shocked by the woman’s story and consulted with Mr. Day, who has oversight of the public service. Hiring should be decided on merit, not ethnicity, Mr. Kenney said.

“We can continue to achieve greater diversity in the public sector without prohibiting people from applying for jobs on the grounds of their race or ethnicity,” Mr. Kenney said. “It’s a very simple principle and I think it’s something the vast majority of Canadians would appreciate.”

The review raised concerns with the Opposition, who accused the Conservatives of abandoning vulnerable groups for the sake of motivating their political base.

The woman who applied for the job is Sara Landriault, an Ottawa-area blogger and mother.

“The question was my race and gender, I answered white and the application as a whole stopped and said I did not meet the criteria for this position,” Ms. Landriault said in an e-mail Thursday. “I do not wish to take anyone’s job, my only wish was to be allowed to apply based on my qualifications. No government should have the right to ask you your race or gender to see if you are qualified for a job. That is discrimination.”

NDP MP Pat Martin said he supports extraordinary measures to get the federal government closer to its employment-equity targets.

“We shouldn’t apologize for doing that. Sometimes the pendulum has to swing the other way before it finds balance in the middle,” Mr. Martin said. “I think Stockwell Day and Jason Kenney are pandering to their neo-conservative base. They’re using an anomalous incident to attack the whole notion of employment equity and affirmative action.”

Liberal MP Marcel Proulx also attacked the Conservative position.

“If they do what they’re trying to do then there won’t be any protections for aboriginals and visible minorities,” he said. He accused the Conservatives of using this controversy to try to divert attention from the resignation of the head of Statistics Canada over the census. The Liberals said the two controversies, taken together, suggest the Conservatives don’t want to see the country as it really is.

Mr. Kenney scoffed at that notion.

“Excluding Canadian citizens from applying for employment in their government is profoundly illiberal. What we’re articulating here is an essentially liberal value of equality of opportunity and equality under the law. If the Liberals were true to their liberal values they would see that,” Mr. Kenney said. “I don’t have any problem with employers taking into account the objective of diversity in the hiring process. If someone merits the job we don’t object to that being a consideration.”

Myer Siemiatycki, who teaches politics at Ryerson University, said the policy review raises alarm bells.

“It’s an announcement that has echoes of the politics of the census decision. It’s about optics, it’s about sending a signal to the traditional base of the Conservative Party about the kind of harder line social conservative positions that the Conservative party has tended to say they’ve left behind but seem to be returning to,” he said.

“The reality is that this Act is in place for a reason. There is a dramatic under-representation of these groups to whom it applies in the public service. ... This Act is intended to remove barriers and level the playing field.”(The Globe and Mail)

EMPLOYEE RESIGNATION

Susan Heathfield's information about the employee who has resigned from his company may put some light for employees and employers on this delicate issue.
Maybe you'll get some ideas...



How to Handle an Employee Resignation
Dealing With an Employee Resignation Depends ...
By Susan M. Heathfield, About.com Guide

Face it. Sooner or later, even the best employer has employees resign. They think they've found a better opportunity or their spouse has accepted a job out-of-state. The reasons are endless for an employee resignation. But, each employee resignation poses the employer with a series of questions. How do you announce the employee's resignation? Who needs to know what about the employee's resignation? When do you tell your employees about the employee's resignation? Here are answers to the questions you may have about employee resignation.
An employee has just resigned. The norm is that the employee tells you verbally that he or she is resigning from your company. Immediately ask the resigning employee for a resignation letter in writing with their final date of employment stated. This protects you from unemployment claims and other charges of impropriety.
Dealing With Employee Resignation
An employee resignation always causes some disruption in the workflow, however, if the employee resigning is valued and you decide to let him or her work their final two weeks, they can do a lot to make the transition successful. This assumes that you have assessed that the individual will remain a positive contributor until their final day.
They can wrap up loose ends, provide details about ongoing projects, and email friends and coworkers about their leaving. Make sure you assign employees to pick up the work of the departing employee. They will have a head start if they can confer with the person leaving to understand the challenges and details of their job. Additionally, if the employee resigning has customer contact responsibilities, they can provide an introduction to the person who will be picking up their responsibilities.
You might ask administrative employees, and others who have jobs with clear and documentable responsibilities, to create a procedure manual prior to their departure. But, hopefully, you already have these procedures documented and in place.
Notification to Coworkers and Customers About an Employee Resignation
To notify other employees about an employee's resignation, start by telling the employee's own department about the employee�s resignation. Perhaps call a quick meeting and inform the other employees that the employee's last day is in two weeks. Tell them that you will appreciate their help to pick up any loose ends and inform them to whom the various responsibilities have been assigned.
Your other employees will also want to know the timeline for replacement of the departing employee. Generally, good employees are quite willing to perform extra work or work longer hours to fill in, but they appreciate knowing the time frame during which this will be expected.
With a trusted, valued employee who will be working out their two week's notice, send out an email to notify the other employees immediately of the employee's resignation. You might say something such as: Mary is leaving us to pursue new opportunities at x company. Her last day at our company is: date. Please join me in wishing Mary tremendous success in her future endeavors. We will hold a say good-bye party at Tom's Tavern on Mary's last day. Please join us to wish Mary success in her new employment and to say good-bye.
Of course, before you send this information out, check with Mary to see if she is comfortable with all of the above. She may even have a personal email address that she wants to share so people can stay in touch.
Many of your employees probably knew that Mary was looking and they also know why. Employees like closure when a valued colleague leaves so your graciousness is not only appreciated, it sends a powerful message to the employees who remain. Of course, you will hold an exit interview during which you will become clear about why the employee is leaving.
I am not a believer in making counter offers or in enticing Mary to stay. In her mind, she has already moved on.
How to Notify Employees When the Employee Resignation Is Welcome
The scenario changes if the employee resigning is not valued or you don't trust the person to carry out their responsibilities successfully during their two week's notice. In these cases, tell the employee that you will pay him or her for their time, but their services are no longer required. Follow the additional guidelines in this employment ending check list. And, ask yourself why you continued to employ this individual under any circumstances to avoid repeating your mistake in the future. Firing an employee can be ethical, legal, moral, and appropriate.
To announce the employee's resignation, send out an immediate email to all employees stating that Mary has left the company to pursue new opportunities effective on today's date. You might add that you wish her success in her new opportunities. Communicate also, where any of her responsibilities have been reassigned. You may want to add some details about how and when you plan to seek a replacement due to the employee resignation.

DISCRIMINATION IN THE WORKPLACE

DISCRIMINATION in the workplace is not a phenomenon when it comes to the working environment. It is commonplace to the extent that it is almost irrelevant whether the workplace is a family-owned business, a business operated solely by family members, who themselves are the only employees, a mid-size company with 25-50 employees, or a large corporation. It is commonplace to the extent that it HAPPENS EVERYDAY IN ALMOST EVERY WORKING ENVIRONMENT – small, medium or large. It is like one size fits all.

With the present under-current of economic gloom and doom of nations globally , and with the alarming unemployment rate in the United States of America flagging at 10.4 %, in Canada at 8.2%, and more at home in Ontario at its highest, since 2007 at 9.1%, discrimination has certainly come out of the cobwebs in the workplace. The fresh take for employees now is how to keep their jobs and do their assigned ( or sometimes unassigned ) tasks for a pay-cheque. No longer, it would appear , anyone who is on a 9-5+ hour work-day can tell his boss to "take this job and shove it" ; or more enterprisingly " take this job and promote me" . The fact that food has to be on the table, bills have to be paid, shelter and clothing for themselves and their families are prerequisites for survival, means that, in the eyes of the worker, discrimination has to be thrown out of the window, rather than take a back-burner at work.

Many of us today who are in the unemployment snapshot, whether we have been laid off, terminated or let-go because companies have filed for bankruptcy, or simply quit ( not likely to hear an unemployed person simply saying this to a fellow unemployed person at a local restaurant or bar—or else your local TV station may have the pleasure of running this news longer than it takes a health reform bill to successfully pass through the senate ), are now becoming more conscious of what discrimination means in trying to obtain a job. Re-hiring may be a thing of the past, and new employment is fraught with the government’s untiring effort to create new jobs, opening up opportunities for second career programmes , encouraging people out of work to find ways to develop new skills, further their education … and the list goes on. The bottom line is this: once you think you’re ready, and you have your resume in your hand, you’re very likely to face discrimination at the door of the employer.

There are many variables which can be considered, more so from a macro socio-economic platform, why unemployed people may face a wave of discriminatory elements in trying to get a job ; not even considering finding a job. Among these variables may be age, gender, physical conditions such as health, family commitments, transportation ( think of some more, if you wish). And whether there is such a thing as justifiable discrimination will certainly raise a hornet’s nest with the Human Rights Commission of Ontario. And certainly lawyers who are specialized in labour laws may frantically litigate in every case that knocks at their door. Perhaps in many instances, workers ( unemployed or employed ) may not even be aware of any form of discrimination affecting them. So then, the big question for us lay workers, is to ask: WHAT IS DISCRIMINATION ? And the probability of 1 in 10 “workers” ( without any scientific study ), may be most of the time, if not all the time, uncertain of the answer to this question.

According to the book: “Human Rights At Work”, Third Edition (2008), which is an introduction to the Human Rights Code, DISCRIMINATION is not defined in the HUMAN RIGHTS CODE. But elements of discrimination are certainly explained ( not defined, I suppose) to warrant the comprehension of what DISCRIMINATION means at the workplace. This obviously invites philosophic debate as well as legal definition as a scholarly undertaking.

However, in my own understanding, and according to information in the book, Human Rights At Work, discrimination may be a factor if (a) consideration is not given to the worker, regarding his “unique merits, capacities and circumstances” (b) if a person (employer or co-worker) makes “stereotypical” remarks in relation to another individual’s attributes, and (c) consideration of situations that impact the individual’s rights. This explanation of discrimination , as it relates to the worker, is by no means comprehensive, or definitive ; it is intended to be used for discussion only.

This brings me to a report in the South Asia Mail, an independent internet daily, dated March 20, 2010 which I would like to add to this post for readers’ information and discussion:

AN ELOQUENT EXAMPLE OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION IN CANADA


C. Grover

Racial discrimination is very much alive in Canada. It is highly prevalent in the federal public service. Human rights laws exist in Canada and they are expected to protect employees from discrimination in the workplace based on factors that do not relate to personal merit or requirements for the job. These include, workplace policies, the Canadian Human Rights Act, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Canada is a signatory.

These legislative outlets are expected to serve as deterrence against discrimination and to provide lasting remedies to the victims of discrimination, but this is rarely the case in the Canadian setting, specifically where federal government agencies are the alleged perpetrators. The puny victim, oftentimes jobless and without any financial backing, is pitted against the mighty Canadian government with limitless public funds at its disposal, a truly David and Goliath fight, which is almost impossible for David to win. Dr. Chander Grover is the living example -- He has been fighting against his racial discrimination in employment for over 23 years, won many times in courts, but his plight has continued because of the government�s intransigence and disrespect for its own laws.

The UN Human Rights Committee (UNHRC) has given failing grades to Canada and has recommended that amendments are needed in the Canadian legislation at the federal, provincial and territorial levels and the legal system enhancement so as to allow victims of discrimination full access to competent tribunals and effective remedy. The UNHRC has been saying for over a decade that Canada is in violation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights because the Canadian Human Rights Act does not allow direct access to a competent tribunal.

Former Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney has recently said � �If the government comes after you and uses resources, financial and otherwise, of the state, they can crush any Canadian citizen. This is the greatest threat to the individual liberties of the ordinary Canadian citizen that can exist anywhere, and we have to fight it.� (CTV, September 9, 2007). Clearly, Mr. Mulroney, who was Prime Minister for 9 years, knows about the Canadian government�s operations. The paradigm in the Grover case manifestly confirms Mr. Mulroney�s assertions.


To commemorate 2010 UN International Day for the Elimination of Racism on March 21st, South Asia Mail Daily will publish a series of articles which highlight the racial discrimination of Dr. Grover by the National Research Council of Canada (NRC). This is not a simple employee-employer dispute, but involves the entire management of the NRC, several Central Agencies of the Government of Canada, the federal Minister of Industry and, above all, the Auditor General of Canada, AND AN ESTIMATED COST TO THE CANADIAN TAXPAYER OF 60 MILLION DOLLARS!!