The question for the stock market will be whether the upside of such strength outweighs the downside. And the government said hiring was actually much stronger in December than it had earlier reported. The unemployment rate unexpectedly did not get worse. Average hourly earnings for workers rose more in January than forecast. After the jobs report, traders shifted some bets even further out the calendar to June, according to data from CME Group.īesides the overall hiring number, the jobs report included several signals showing much more strength than expected. Traders had already pushed out bets for the timing of the first Fed rate cut to May from March following Powell's warning earlier this week. The yield for the 10-year Treasury leaped immediately after the release of the jobs report and climbed to 4.02% from 3.88% late Thursday. "It’s definitely not the type of data the Fed had in mind when they said they wanted to see more evidence that inflationary pressures were under control.” “The Fed threw some cold water on the idea of a March rate cut less than 48 hours ago, and today’s surprisingly strong jobs report won’t dry things off,” said Chris Larkin, managing director, trading and investing, at E-Trade from Morgan Stanley. Fed Chair Jerome Powell said earlier this week that it’s unlikely cuts will begin as soon as traders had been hoping. stock market has surged to record heights. Hopes for such cuts, which can relax the pressure on the economy and goose investment prices, have been a major reason the U.S. That in turn could mean a longer wait for the Federal Reserve to begin cutting interest rates. While the strength is a boon for workers and keeps the risk of a recession at bay, the worry is that it could preserve some upward pressure on inflation. employers hired many more workers last month than economists expected. Stocks felt pressure from much higher yields in the bond market after a report showed U.S. And the Russell 2000 index of smaller stocks fell 0.6%. The Big Tech stocks, which are two of Wall Street’s most influential, also vaulted the Nasdaq composite up by 1.7%.īut the Dow Jones Industrial Average, which has less of an emphasis on tech, rose by a more modest 0.3%, or 134 points. It’s in a torrid run where it’s climbed in 13 of the last 14 weeks. "The employer provided no evidence of any losses they suffered because the employee failed to give three weeks’ notice," tribunal member Sarah Orr's decision said.įurther, in this case, the tribunal found there was evidence that the company had accepted Reyes' resignation, which meant it had "accepted the employee’s breach of contract.TOKYO – Big Tech stocks once again carried Wall Street to a record Friday, even though the majority of stocks fell amid worries about the downside of a hot economy.īig gains for Meta Platforms and Amazon helped drive the S&P 500 index up by 1.1% to its latest all-time high. The company said the figure was equivalent to three weeks of Reyes' salary but – again – the tribunal found that the amount being claimed was not supported and so no damages could be awarded. was claiming $2,400 in damages as compensation after Wendy Reyes quit her job with two weeks' notice instead of the required three. The company provided "no evidence or submissions" about how it arrived at the $3,000 figure – which Rivers said could have included things like "records of the revenue" the employee brought in or evidence "from clients who chose not to do business with (the company) due to Mr. "Damages for breach of contract are generally meant to put the innocent party in the same position as if the contract had been performed as agreed," the decision explains. Rivers said, in his decision, that the issue of whether Mehta had breached the contract was ultimately irrelevant because the company had failed to prove its case. doing business as John Fleming Insurance Agency was asking the tribunal to compensate the company $3,000 after Davik Mehta, a broker, quit with no notice in 2022. Quitting without giving the required notice, the decisions say, can legally constitute a "breach of contract," making an employer eligible to sue for damages.īut – and this proved to be the deciding factor in each case – there must be evidence that the worker's departure resulted in the claimed damages. B.C.'s small claims tribunal has weighed in on two cases where an employer attempted to sue a worker who quit without providing the notice required by their contracts.ĭecisions in both cases were posted online Monday – and while the circumstances were different, the tribunal dismissed the employer's claims in both cases for the same reason.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |