Diplomats frazzled by sleeplessness debated into the early hours of Sunday at a U.N. conference over a complex and far-reaching program meant to set a new course for the global fight against climate change for the coming decades.
South Africa’s foreign minister and chairman of the 194-party conference, Maite Nkoana-Mashabane, told delegates that failure to agree after 13 days of work would be an unsustainable setback for international efforts to control greenhouse gases.
“This multilateral system remains fragile and will not survive another shock,” she told a full meeting of the conference, which had been delayed more than 24 hours while ministers and senior negotiators labored over words and nuances.
The proposed Durban Platform offered answers to problems that have bedeviled global warming negotiations for years about sharing the responsibility for controlling carbon emissions and helping the world’s poorest and most climate-vulnerable nations cope with changing forces of nature.
The package must be approved by consensus, and no vote will be called. Determined opposition from even a small group of countries would unravel the deal put together after hundreds of hours of contentious negotiations.
Speakers from many developed countries said the package of documents more than 100 pages thick did not go far enough to help poor nations and did not require industrial countries to make more immediate and serious cuts in their carbon emissions. But most said they would accept it for lack of a better option.
But not Venezuela. “We all know this is a very bad agreement, that it will require more work next year and it cannot be adopted,” chief delegate Claudia Solerno said.
After weeks of being accused of obstructionism and delay, U.S. climate envoy Todd Stern voiced surprisingly strong support for the deal.
“This is a very significant package. None of us likes everything in it. Believe me, there is plenty the United States is not thrilled about,” Stern said. But the package captured important advances that would be undone if it is rejected.
Saturday afternoon, as negotiations dragged on with no sign of breakthrough, some ministers and top negotiators left Durban with no assurance of an agreement.
European Commissioner Connie Hedegaard, drawn and fatigued after two nights with minimal sleep, warned that failure in Durban would jeopardize new momentum in acting against global warming.
Introducing the package late Saturday, Nkoana-Mashabane said its four documents, which were being printed as she spoke, were an imperfect compromise, but they reflected years of negotiations on the most central political responses to global warming.
The package would give new life to the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, whose carbon emissions targets expire next year and apply only to industrial countries.
A separate document obliges major developing nations like China and India, excluded under Kyoto, to accept legally binding emissions targets in the future, by 2020 at the latest.
Together, the two documents overhaul a system designed 20 years ago that divide the world into a handful of wealthy countries facing legal obligations to reduce emissions, and the rest of the world which could undertake voluntary efforts to control carbon.
The European Union, the primary bloc falling under the Kyoto Protocol’s reduction commitments, said an extension of its targets was conditional on major developing countries also accepting limits with the same legal accountability. The 20th century division of the globe into two unequal parts was invalid in today’s world, the EU said.
The package also would set up the structure and governing bodies of a Green Climate Fund, which will receive and distribute billions of dollars promised annually to poor countries to help them adapt to changing climate conditions and to move toward low-carbon economic growth.
But the document made no specific mention of how those funds would be mobilized. Wealthy countries have pledged $100 billion a year by 2020 to poor countries, scaling up from $10 billion today.
The remaining document of more than 50 pages lays out rules for monitoring and verifying emissions reductions, protecting forests, transferring clean technologies to developing countries and scores of technical issues.
In the final hours, talks focused on unresolved differences on a clause encouraging countries to pledge greater reductions of greenhouse gases and to close what is known as the “ambition gap.” More than 80 countries have made either legally binding or voluntary pledges to control carbon emissions. But taken together, they will not go far enough to avert a potentially catastrophic rise in average temperatures this century, according to scientific modeling and projections.
Hedegaard said a lack of ambition could derail progress made on a host of other issues.
Countries had made concessions that they had resisted for years, and it would be “irresponsible” to lose that momentum now, she said.
Strong language on curbing emissions is of prime importance to small islands endangered by rising ocean levels and by many poor countries who live in extreme conditions that will be worsened by global warming.
Throughout the talks, the U.S., China and India remained stubbornly opposed to the EU’s plan to negotiate a successor to the Kyoto accord by 2020 that also would put them under legal obligations. The talks would conclude by 2015, allowing five years for it to be ratified by national legislatures. The plan insists the new agreement equally oblige all countries _ not just the few industrial powers _ to abide by emission targets.
Hours were devoted to arcane but diplomatically important questions of whether the objective of the talks was a legal “framework,” an “outcome,” or an “instrument.”
The expiring of Kyoto’s targets have hung over the U.N. process for years, and was the most contentious issue dividing rich and poor nations.
Developing countries were adamant that the Kyoto commitments continue since it is the only agreement that compels any nation to reduce emissions. Industrial countries say the document is deeply flawed because it makes no demands on heavily polluting developing countries. It was for that reason that the U.S. never ratified it.
Agreement by developing countries to accept binding targets essentially redraws the map. “That’s a very big deal,” said Samantha Smith, of WWF International. “That reflects a major macroeconomic and geopolitical change” in climate negotiations.
Summoned by Congress, Jon Corzine embraced a bold strategy Thursday to distance himself from MF Global’s fall and $1.2 billion in missing clients’ money:
Answer each question. Be courteous. And don’t huddle with your lawyer before replying.
He said very little. Nevertheless, it was a risky strategy, even for a risk-taking financial executive. Anything Corzine might say could be used against him in a courtroom, should he ever be charged in the MF Global case.
Yet the former CEO of the securities firm never declined to answer questions by invoking his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
The one-time senator and New Jersey governor was subpoenaed by his former colleagues to explain how MF Global collapsed just over a month ago in the eighth-largest bankruptcy in U.S. history. It’s the first time in more than 100 years that Congress has subpoenaed a former senator to testify, according to Senate historian Don Ritchie.
Looking strained and speaking hoarsely during nearly three hours of testimony, Corzine said he never intended to break rules that require firms to safeguard client funds. He said he doesn’t know what happened to the missing money, but added that customers’ losses weigh on his mind “every day, every hour.”
He said several times that he did not become aware of the shortfall in client accounts until Oct. 30, one day before MF Global filed for bankruptcy following its disastrous bets on European debt.
“I’m not in a position, given the number of transactions, to know anything specific about the movement of any specific funds,” said Corzine, who took over as CEO more than a year and a half ago.
In his testimony to the House Agriculture Committee, Corzine sought to deflect blame for the company’s collapse, arguing that he inherited a firm already doomed by his predecessors’ bad financial decisions.
Legal experts said they were surprised by Corzine’s decision to answer each question, however vaguely, given the legal risks. The FBI and federal regulators are investigating MF Global.
It’s hard to see how the testimony will benefit Corzine, said Robert Mintz, a defense attorney in Newark, N.J., who specializes in white-collar cases.
Mintz said Corzine’s answers leave him open to “a barrage of questions about facts and circumstances that will no doubt be the subject of review by prosecutors and regulators.”
Two other congressional panels have also voted to subpoena Corzine.
His testimony provided his first public comments since the firm’s spectacular collapse. A lawyer who handles white-collar criminal cases accompanied Corzine and sat behind him during the hearing. But Corzine never turned to seek his advice.
The hearing wasn’t particularly confrontational, though a few members expressed disbelief that Corzine could be so detached as CEO.
Rep. David Scott, D-Ga., told him it strained belief “for you to sit there and say instant payday loans… you know nothing about” the missing customer money. A lot of farmers in Georgia need to know, Scott said. “The key to this is you. You’re the CEO.”
Corzine said he was confident that others at MF Global were checking daily to ensure that the firm’s money and clients’ fund were being kept separate.
“I simply do not know where the money is, or why the accounts have not been reconciled to date,” he said.
He said MF Global toppled, in part, because of a large quarterly loss caused by his predecessors’ accounting moves. Rating agencies responded to the loss by downgrading the firm’s credit rating, which panicked investors and trading partners.
“The marketplace lost confidence in our firm,” he said.
He disputed media reports that he personally pushed the company to make big, doomed bets on risky European debt using too much borrowed money.
He said he made the high-stakes bets only after discussions with company executives who traded European debt long before he arrived. And he said he reduced MF Global’s investment risks in some ways.
Some outside experts challenged some of his assertions.
Janet Tavakoli, an expert on the transactions MF Global specialized in, said Corzine’s remarks seemed to divert attention from the firm’s fundamental flaw under his leadership: It lacked the cash to cover its bets after investors started to fear that a major European nation would default.
“His entire testimony looks like a very skilled way to try to detract from that key issue,” said Tavakoli, president of Tavakoli Structured Finance.
Lawmakers have heard from farmers, ranchers and small-business owners who are missing money deposited with the firm. Agricultural businesses use brokerage firms to help reduce their risks in an industry vulnerable to swings in oil, corn and other commodity prices.
A Democrat, Corzine represented New Jersey in the Senate from 2001 through 2005. He later served a single four-year term as governor, losing a re-election bid in 2009. Before entering politics, he was CEO of Goldman Sachs.
Several class-action lawsuits on behalf of shareholders have been filed against Corzine and three other top executives, accusing the firm and its leaders of making false statements about MF Global’s stability.
Stephen Gillers, a professor at New York University School of Law, said lawyers typically advise clients in Corzine’s situation not to answer questions.
“When you answer a full day’s worth of questions, you’re committing yourself to a story that could come back to haunt you,” Gillers said.
Mintz added: “It only makes sense if your answers can satisfy those posing the questions. Short of that, the risks far outweigh the benefits.”
Stocks are rising at the open on hopes for a plan to restore long-term confidence in the euro.
French and German leaders are meeting to discuss closer political and economic cooperation between the 17 nations that use the currency. They want tighter control of budgets, to prevent the kinds of debts that might to cause Greece and others to default.
Stocks overseas rose modestly Monday, while the yields on Italian bonds dove, suggesting traders believe that Italy is less likely to default. Italy’s government agreed this weekend on a package of austerity and economic growth measures.
The Dow is up 135 points, or 1.1 percent at 12,154. The S&P 500 is up 16, or 1.3 percent at 1,261. The Nasdaq composite index is up 32, or 1.2 percent at 2,659.
Australia’s ruling party voted Sunday to overturn a long-standing ban on exporting uranium to India, despite fierce opposition from critics who argued such sales are unsafe because India has not signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
Prime Minister Julia Gillard urged members of her center-left Labor Party during its annual conference to allow the exports in the interest of the national economy, arguing there are safeguards in place to ensure the uranium would be used for peaceful purposes.
“We need to make sure that across our regions we have the strongest possible relationships we can, including with the world’s largest democracy, India,” Gillard said. “That’s why today we should determine to change our platform and enable us, under safeguards, to sell uranium to India.”
The party’s vote to amend an executive policy does not need parliamentary approval.
Australia holds 40 percent of the world’s known uranium reserves. It does not sell uranium on the open market and bans nuclear power generation at home.
But it sells uranium only for the purpose of power generation under strict conditions banning any military applications in bilateral trade agreements with the United States, China, Taiwan, Japan, South Korea and several European countries.
Australia’s previous conservative government started negotiations with energy-hungry India on uranium sales. But the Labor government immediately ended the talks when it came to power in 2007, ruling out exports unless New Delhi signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
Gillard had previously noted that the U.S. lifted a “de facto international ban” on nuclear cooperation with India in 2005 when it signed a deal with New Delhi to trade uranium and work together on civil atomic power generation.
But many Labor lawmakers slammed the policy change, arguing that selling uranium to India in the wake of this year’s nuclear disaster at the Fukushima Dai-ichi power plant in Japan, the 1979 partial meltdown of the Three Mile Island reactor in the U.S. and other nuclear accidents was irresponsible and out of touch.
Labor Sen. Doug Cameron won a standing ovation from the crowd after a fiery speech in which he called the amendment “nonsense.”
“Prime Minster, you are wrong! Ministers, you are wrong!” he shouted to thunderous applause. “This is a bad move for the Labor Party, it’s a bad move for international peace.”
Others argued that India was too important an economic power to ignore.
“India, like China, is a rising superpower and it has to be upfront and center in our foreign policy and our foreign trade,” said Labor member Richard Marles. “(This amendment) will pave the way for our two countries to fulfill our shared destiny as nations and friends.”
The motion passed by a vote of 206 to 185.
Lawmakers, responding to pleas from industry and foreign governments, have tentatively agreed to block the Obama administration from requiring that lithium batteries be treated as hazardous cargo because of the danger of fires during flight.
The deal came in talks on a long-term funding bill for the Federal Aviation Administration, Rep. Nick Rahall, D-W.Va., told The Associated Press. The bill will effectively block new battery-shipment rules by insisting the U.S. follow international standards, which are less stringent, said Rahall, top Democrat on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.
Pilot unions said the international standards don’t provide enough safety and are weaker than rules the administration proposed nearly two years ago but never made final. The unions and the National Transportation Safety Board for several years have sought new rules on air shipments of the batteries to prevent fires that can cause air crashes and deaths.
“We’re very concerned that unless this issue is addressed we’ll continue to see accidents and we’ll continue to see fatalities,” said Mark Rogers, who heads the Air Line Pilots Association’s committee on hazardous cargo.
The U.S. shouldn’t “adopt an existing international standard on lithium batteries that’s generally recognized as inadequate,” Robert Travis, president of Independent Pilots Association, which represents UPS pilots, said in a statement.
The FAA bill “is an opportunity for the U.S. to lead by setting a higher standard on the carriage of lithium batteries,” Travis said.
A fire broke out five years ago in cargo containing lithium batteries and other goods on a United Parcel Service plane, forcing an emergency landing in Philadelphia. No one was killed, but one of the pilots said he was able to escape with seconds to spare. The cause of the fire wasn’t conclusively determined, but batteries were suspected.
Last year, another UPS plane with a fire raging on board, and carrying thousands of lithium batteries, crashed near Dubai in the United Arab Emirates, killing both pilots. The accident is still under investigation, but preliminary reports indicate investigators have focused much of their attention on the batteries.
The use of rechargeable lithium-ion and non-rechargeable lithium-metal batteries has soared since the late 1990s. Millions of products from laptops to cellphones to watches contain the batteries. And, in an age of increasing globalization of trade, those products are often shipped by air to and from the United States and other countries.
But the batteries can catch fire if they are damaged, exposed to high temperatures or packaged incorrectly. Lithium-ion battery fires can reach 1,100 degrees, close to the melting point of aluminum, a key material in airplane construction. Lithium-metal battery fires are far hotter, capable of reaching 4,000 degrees.
The administration proposed regulations that would have threated lithium batteries and goods containing the batteries as hazardous materials requiring special labeling and training of workers who package and handle them.
But they were opposed by a broad swath of powerful industries, including battery-makers, electronics manufacturers and retailers, cargo airlines, and at least a half dozen foreign governments who said they would disrupt international trade. The opponents said the regulations would cost them hundreds of millions of dollars in added packaging, paperwork and employee training. The rechargeable battery industry alone says the rules would cost more than $1 billion in the first year.
Opponents of the proposed rules turned for help to Congress, where House Republicans passed an FAA funding bill that requires the U.S. to follow standards set by the International Civil Aviation Organization, a UN agency, effectively blocking the rules. The Senate did not include the measure in its version of the funding bill, but under the tentative deal reached Friday, the House-Senate compromise bill would include it.
Kara Ross, a spokeswoman for United Parcel Service, said the cargo carrier wasn’t aware of the agreement reached by lawmakers but supports the House provision.
A spokesman for PRBA-The Rechargeable Battery Association declined to comment.
Besides Rahall, the other lawmakers involved in negotiations were Rep. John Mica, chairman of the House committee, Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., and Kay Bailey Hutchison, senior Republican member of the Senate committee.
FORT WORTH, TEXAS
OTTAWA
The U.S. Justice Department expanded an investigatioin into Puerto Rican shipping Thursday, announcing a $14.2 million fine for a Florida-based company and a criminal charge against its former president.
Sea Star Line LLC agreed to the fine and a guilty plea to one felony count of conspiring to fix prices on cargo moving in and out of the U.S. island territory, the Justice Department said in a statement.
A federal grand jury in San Juan indicted the company’s former president and chief operating officer, Frank Peake, on a charge of conspiring to fix prices on Puerto Rico routes from late 2005 until April 2008. Peake, a New Jersey resident, is now a shipping company executive with a company affiliated with Sea Star.
Sea Star, based in Jacksonville, Florida, issued a statement apologizing to its customers, and noted the agreement provides that the Justice Department will not bring criminal charges against its parent companies, Saltchuk Resources Inc. and American Shipping Group Inc.
Sea Star employees engaged in the price-fixing scheme in violation of company policies, but the company is still responsible for the conduct under antitrust law, said Anthony Chiarello, President of American Shipping Group Inc.
“We extend sincere apologies to all of our loyal customers and the consumers who were affected by this conduct,” Chiarello said in the statement. “It was contrary to everything that Sea Star stands for and will not be tolerated in the future.”
He said by email that he was unable to answer questions because he was traveling.
David Oscar Markus, a lawyer for Peake, said his client denies wrongdoing and expressed confidence his client will be cleared of a charge that carries a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison.
“Frank is innocent. He is never going to do a day in jail because he didn’t do the things they said he did,” said Markus, based in Miami. “It’s a real shame that the government is wasting its resources on something like this.”
Peake is accused of meeting with unidentified others in his industry to allocate customers and set prices for freight services for government and commercial clients, according to the indictment.
As part of the agreement, which is subject to court approval, Sea Star admitted conspiring to set prices and rig bids between May 2002 and April 2008, according to court papers.
Last April, the investigation brought a $15 million fine for Horizon Lines LLC of Charlotte, North Carolina. Five former executives of Sea Star and Horizon have received fines and jail sentences stemming from the probe.
By day, Wade Brosz teaches American history at an A-rated Florida middle school. By night, he is a personal trainer at 24 Hour Fitness.
Brosz took the three-night a week job at the gym after his teaching salary was frozen, summer school was reduced drastically, and the state bonus for board certified teachers was cut. He figures that he and his wife, also a teacher, are making about $20,000 less teaching than expected to, combined.
“The second job was to get back what was lost through cuts,” said Brosz, a nationally board certified teacher. “It was tougher and tougher to make ends meet. I started personal training because it’s flexible hours.”
Second jobs are not a new phenomenon for teachers, who have historically been paid less than other professionals. In 1981, about 11 percent of teachers were moonlighting; the number has risen to about one in five today. They are bartenders, waitresses, tutors, school bus drivers and even lawnmowers.
Now, with the severe cuts many school districts have made, teachers like Brosz, who hadn’t considered juggling a second job before, are searching the want ads. The number of public school teachers who reported holding a second job outside school increased slightly from 2003-04 to 2007-08. While there is no national data for more recent years, reports from individual states and districts indicate the number may have climbed further since the start of the recession.
In Texas, for example, the percentage of teachers who moonlight has increased from 22 percent in 1980 to 41 percent in 2010.
“It’s the economy, primarily,” said Sam Sullivan, a professor at Sam Houston State University, which conducts the survey.
Rita Haecker, president of the Texas State Teachers Association, said cuts in education have forced many teachers to take furlough days. It’s an extra strain because, unlike in the past, many teachers are now the primary breadwinner, either because they are a single parent or their spouse is unemployed, Haecker said.
“It affects their morale in the classroom,” she said. “The last thing we want is our teachers worried about how they are going to pay their bills.”
The average salary for a public school teacher nationwide in the 2009-10 school year was $55,350, a figure that has remained relatively flat, after being adjusted for inflation, over the last two decades. Starting teacher salaries can be significantly lower; compared to college graduates in other professions, they earn more than $10,000 less when beginning their careers.
“I think people have felt the need to supplement their teaching salaries in order to have a middle class lifestyle,” said Lawrence Mishel, president of the Economic Policy Institute, which published a study this year concluding the average weekly pay of teachers in 2010 was about 12 percent below that of workers with similar education and experience.
The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, which collects data on student performance across the globe, advised the United States earlier this year to work at elevating the teaching profession in order to improve student performance. The recommendations included measures like raising the bar for who is selected to become a teacher, providing better training and better pay. In many nations where students outperform the U.S. in reading, math and science, including Japan and South Korea, teachers earn more than they do in the United States.
“International comparisons show that in the countries with the highest performance, teachers are typically paid better relative to others, education credentials are valued more, and a higher share of educational spending is devoted to instructional services than is the case in the United States,” the OECD report concluded.
While moonlighting isn’t unique to teachers, they do tend to have second or third jobs at a higher rate than other professionals. One researcher estimates their moonlighting rates may be four times higher than those of other full-time, college educated salaried workers.
Eleanor Blair Hilty, an education professor at Western Carolina University, said most teachers make around $5,000 through outside work. Yet when asked if they would quit if given a raise in the equivalent amount, most said no. Her conclusion: teachers are getting something more from their second job other than an extra paycheck.
“A lot of it has to do with what I think is wrong with the teaching profession,” Hilty said, noting that teachers have little autonomy and control over what and how they teach. “They found their moonlighting jobs to be satisfying.”
Policies on moonlighting vary by district; some have no written guidelines, while others merely advise teachers to ensure any outside work doesn’t interfere with their duties at school.
In North Carolina, a survey conducted in 2007 found 72 percent of teachers moonlight, whether it’s an after-school job or summer employment.
“There’s a culture of silence,” Hilty said. “Everybody knows that moonlighting goes on and they know it’s part of what teachers do but nobody likes to talk about it very much.”
Michelle Hartman, a language arts and science teacher at a Plantation, Fla., elementary school, is balancing two other jobs, one as an organist with the local Presbyterian church, playing at church services, weddings and funerals, and another doing janitorial work twice a week at her father’s accounting firm.
The single mother has a master’s degree in educational leadership and has been a teacher 15 years. But she says she cannot afford to leave any of her extra jobs, which she said brings in about $6,000 year, in addition to her $46,000 teaching salary.
“I’m tired some days,” Hartman said. “But no matter what, it doesn’t matter because I know I need to be there for the students.”
Yet working an extra job inevitably does take a toll. On top of their work in the classroom, teachers have to grade papers and plan lessons _ work they often do at home. One study on teachers who moonlight in Texas cited the case of a teacher who ended up grading papers at the restaurant where she worked. The same study found that all the teachers interviewed reported that moonlighting had a negative effect on their health. In the Texas survey, a majority said moonlighting was detrimental to their work in the classroom.
“Yes, they go 100 percent, but they’re still tired,” said Dave Henderson, a retired professor who worked on the study for many years.
Albert Ochoa, a middle school art and publications teacher in Austin, Texas, works at least five hours a night at UPS as a shipper, a job he’s had since graduating from college in 1977. Even though he is now toward the higher end of the teacher salary schedule, he said he cannot afford to quit either job.
He said he’d have to earn another $2,000 a month in order to support his wife, who is on medical disability, and son, and not work a second job. “I’ve had opportunities to go work full time at UPS and do other things,” Ochoa said. “But I enjoy what I do. I like teaching.”
Who feels like a panini?
Sorry, this column isn’t about the panini you eat, rather the one you are — that is if you are a member of the sandwich generation with aging parents or other family members who need assistance and children, often into their mid to late 20s, still partially or completely dependent financially.
In 2002, Statistics Canada estimated that 2.6 million Canadians between the ages of 45 and 64 had children under 25 living with them and approximately 27 per cent of them were also providing some kind of elder care. After the financial collapse and recession the trend has accelerated.
Many of my friends are being sandwiched, as am I. My youngest daughter, nearly 26, is deaf. She’s still at college and may require financial help for some time to come. Until recently, my parents also needed considerable care. My mother died in 2009 and, fortunately, my father is relatively healthy and able to live in a nice retirement home. But now and then, the needs of daughter and father collide with my own busy life and I feel pulled in a dozen directions.
Most of those sandwiched between two generations are baby boomers, the first of whom started collecting their old-age pension in 2011. The advancing wave of this group is bringing with it a whole set of new financial challenges. “My daughter and son have student loans of $42,000 between the two of them. Despite their best efforts they’re semi-employed and living in an expensive city (Toronto),” Helen, 59, emailed recently. Helen is widowed and lives in a small northern Ontario town where jobs are limited. “I have enough to retire in a couple of years but not if I help them, especially if their situations don’t improve pretty fast. But I can’t see turning my back on them.”
The choices being forced on the sandwich generation often leave the caregivers feeling damned if they do or don’t. Should I stop RRSP contributions to help my family? Do I postpone my retirement? Will my employer let me go if I take time off to care for my parents? Should I withdraw from my savings? Do I kick out my kids so I can downsize?
Many of the difficulties facing sandwiched boomers are magnified for entrepreneurs. Even with great employees the buck stops with the boss and stepping away is rarely a satisfactory option.
Winnipeg-based bestselling tax author and president of the Knowledge Bureau, Evelyn Jacks juggled a successful business while being the primary caregiver of two ailing family members and also involved with the care of two others. All four died over an 18-month period. “Caring for the sick and the dying is difficult and exhausting and so sharing the journey with your support network is very important,” she says in retrospect.
“A strategic, consistent and all-inclusive communications plan within the family is very important. When everyone stays in the loop in an orderly way — we used email a lot to cover all the time zones — everyone can seamlessly step in as required. It also means everyone needs to work hard to stay healthy — physically and emotionally — in very stressful times.”
Being sandwiched between the needs of two and sometimes three generations isn’t a new phenomenon. My parents brought “the grannies,” as we called them, from England while I was young. One drank like a fish and gave away money to whomever asked and the other frequently wandered off only to be found settled on someone’s porch happily singing “It’s a Long Way to Tipperary”.
But the extended care-giving facing the boomers is unique because this generation is so large, our parents are living longer and our children carry a far higher student debt load than past generations. According to a 2010 Vanier Institute of the Family Study, university graduates have $18,000 in student loans, not including family debt or lines of credit.
To compound the problem young adults are also earning less relatively. Statistics Canada figures show that the wages of those 20 to 34, across all levels of education levels declined significantly in the 1980s and the trend has continued to present day, though at a slower pace.
These financial and emotional stresses prompted Credit Canada, the country’s leading not-for-profit credit counselling charity, to choose the sandwich generation as the theme for its fifth Credit Education Week — part of November’s Financial Literacy Money, which kicks off on Nov. 14.
“Credit Canada has seen more and more people trying to support their children and aging parents who don’t have the income to support themselves while struggling to pay their own bills including their children’s education,” notes executive director Laurie Campbell.
Credit Education Week Canada has published a very useful magazine, The Sandwich Generation. Among some of the do’s and don’ts to avoid being crippled emotionally and financially:
1. Set up a power of attorney
2. Update wills and ensure health-care directives are in place
3. Consolidate the debts and assets of the elderly to make management simpler
4. Don’t bleed your own savings, especially RRSPs, or increase your debt load (except in the direst circumstances) for the young or the old
5. Don’t allow unemployed kids to hang out at home doing nothing.
6. Don’t excuse siblings or other relatives from their responsibility
Powered by WordPress -- XHTML 1.0