text:
As a result of the war and the large number of refugees in Sambor, there were more orphans. In 1915, after the Austrians reconquered Sambor, two orphanages were built, one for boys and the other for girls, with 108 children in both.
The economic situation of Sambor's Jews continued to worsen, with more Jews in the city during the war than had been there previously. In 1917, of the 7,000 Jews, about 3,000 of them required aid. At the head of the assistance activities were three individuals: the head of the Community, Elimelech Goldberg, the local Rabbi, Rabbi Aharon Levin, and the Zionist leader, Dr. Fishel Rothenstreich. Funds were mobilized from the well-to-do in the Community, from former city dwellers then in Vienna, and from additional sources. A public kitchen was provided which distributed free meals.
In 1918, a nucleus of Hashomer Hatzair was established. At the beginning of 1918, a modern Talmud Torah was founded, with four classes for children aged six to fourteen, and in the middle of the year, a day Hebrew school with 500 students.
After the issue of the Balfour Declaration, on 2 November 1917, a "Society for the Settlement of Eretz-Israel" was organized, with 400 members. The members applied to Jewish land tenants in the vicinity of Sambor to train them in agricultural work, and not a few undertook to train ten to fifteen persons.
At the time of Austria's capitulation in November 1918 and the establishment of
the Western Ukrainian Republic, in whose framework Sambor was included, and up
to May 1919, a Jewish national committee of only Zionists functioned.
[Page XX]
The anti-Semite Dr. Chotitcki was named mayor of the city, to serve with an appointed committee. Three assimilated Jews were appointed to the committee, but even they could not cooperate with the mayor and they resigned. The mayor cut off the city's allocation to the Jewish orphanage and the free kitchen. Some time later, the municipality's help was resumed and 2,200 daily meals out of 6,500 were allocated for the Jews. But this arrangement, too, was not maintained, the Jews in fact receiving on 1,400 daily free meals.
Assistance for the Jews came from the Joint Distribution Committee, and former Sambor Jews living in the United States also mobilized funds there. In 1922 an emissary of those Jews visited Sambor and brought with him sums of money, promising his organization's further assistance.
In 1922 a new appointed committee was named for the municipality, with 26
members, seven of whom were Jews. The new committee and its chairman treated
the Jews fairly.
|No. of Enterprises
|Those Active
|Owners of the Enterprises
|Family Members Working
|Total No. of Employees
|of them Non-Jews
The Jewish merchants set up their own association, and they even established a bank called "Merchants Credit Association." In 1925, 310 members were registered in this bank, in the following occupations: 49 artisans, 127 small merchants, 117 merchants and industrialists, 8 farmers, 13 miscellaneous. In that year, 448 loans were granted, in a sum total of 44,740 zloty. In 1939, the bank gave 1,500 loans in a sum of 500,000 zloty; its annual turnover was over a million zloty.
The artisans were organized in an artisans' union Yad Harutzim, headed by Mr. Fraindel and Mr. Dukatenzailer. They did not succeed in establishing a financial institution of their own, but were assisted by a benevolent fund which the Zionist leader, Dr. Fishel Rothenstreich, had established in the early 'twenties. This fund was one of the first of its kind in Galicia. In 1927 it granted to its clients in Sambor some 310 loans in a total sum of 10,000 zloty. In 1928 about 320 small merchants and artisans benefited from its loans.
|Amount in Zloty
|No. of loans
The two financial institutions received much support from former Sambor people in the United States, who sent money to them from time to time.
Sambor developed significantly in the years between the two world wars. There was active building going on which, in the main, supplied the needs of the relatively large local garrison and those of Polish officialdom. The supply of flats was greater than the demand, and the Jews benefited indirectly from this.
Furthermore, since Sambor was near the area of the oil fields
Borislav-Drohobitz and was a district city, all the oil transactions occupied
the courts in Sambor. Therefore a large number of lawyers were active, over
fifty of them, among them many Jews. On the other hand, the majority of the
Jews continued to live in great distress. Some members of the free professions,
too, were impoverished, and for those an assistance fund was set up with a
founding capital of 23,300 zloty.
Financial assistance to the needy was also provided by the Benevolent Fund. Avraham Krug and Zeiden were those principally engaged in this activity. Every Wednesday, the day preceding market day, they would apply to the well-off merchants, collect money and distribute it as loans to small merchants, who, in this way, would acquire grains, vegetables, fruit, poultry and so on, sell them on market day and thus earn something for the Sabbath and the rest of the week. After market day they would return the money, and if something occurred that made it impossible for one of them to pay his debt, the Benevolent Fund would cover it. In this way many were helped in time of distress.
The most important charitable institution was the orphanage, which, in the
'twenties and 'thirties, cared for some thirty children. Most of the time the
orphanage was financially in trouble, and not seldom was in danger of being
shut down. From time to time a financial contribution was received from former
Sambor people in the United States, or a local campaign was launched on behalf
of the institution. In the newspaper Chwila, which appeared in Lvov, this
orphanage was mentioned occasionally with the comment that if it would not
receive financial help, it would be shut down.
As part of the society's activities, an amateur orchestra would appear as volunteers at its events. Among its members were: Dunek Begleiter (drummer), Shlomo Becker (violin), and Rudek Probst (piano). The society's committee included: Shimon Altbach, Dr. Y Eisner, Dr. A. Gelber, Klements Goldberg, Dr. Alexander Gross, Penina (Tzailer) Holtzman, Dr. I. Kreutzenauer, Avraham Linhart, Melech Shenkendorf, Z. Weber.
In 1938, when the Self-Help Society of Polish Jewry was founded, 2,335 Sambor
people were registered in it. Klements Goldberg was elected chairman of this
society in Sambor.
In 1921, a Hebrew school, Tarbut, was founded by Dr. Fishel Rothenstreich,
with 144 pupils attending in 1922. This school played a decisive role in
imparting the values of national-Zionist education and a knowledge of the
Hebrew language; it also served at a hotbed for the pioneer youth movements.
Fisher, Frankel, Komorovski and Shuminer taught there. After the free
compulsory education law came into effect, this school could not longer be
maintained for budgetary reasons, and it became only a complementary school.
Adjoining it was a kindergarten.
Attached to this school was a trade-industrial school for girls, which had been
established in the early 'twenties. This was a high school, in which, in the
afternoons, the girls also studied trades, such as sewing, millinery and
artistic handwork. The school was not granted government recognition, so that
its graduates were compelled to be examined in the Cecilia Klaften girls'
school in Lvov. Each year, 15-20 girls graduated.
Connected with the dramatic-musical club there was also a choir, conducted by
Brauner, which appeared on various occasions in public events; and a mandolin
group, established by the Weisman brothers in which, besides them, Herschderfer
and Ida Berelfine played. The Fidler brothers' orchestra would accompany the
club's musical performances. Among those directing the club were: Ida
Berelfine, Dunek Begleiter, Dr. Eisner, Z. Stein, V. Traustein, the Weisman brothers, Oscar Zimbler, Zukerman.
The chief competitor in the Jewish football team was the Polish team in Sambor,
Korona, which also included the Jewish players Dushek Steurman, Fredek
Garfunkel, Orenstein, Berger, and Bruno Werter, who was later taken over by the
Jewish football team Hashmonai in Lvov.
[Page XXVI]
In 1930 the Community administration was dissolved. Non-party Shlomo Margulis was appointed "commissar," and he cooperated with the Agudat Israel. The Zionists who had been named to the administration resigned from their posts.
In the elections which too place in 1934, the General Zionists together with the Hitachdut received five mandates, the Mizrachi with the Revisionists two, the Belz Hassidim two, non-party two. The Zionist Isaac Knepl was elected head of the Community. At first he was a member of Hitachdut; later he went over to the General Zionist camp. During his term of service, the Community's administration succeeded in balancing its budget, repairing the old synagogue, expanding the poultry abattoir, making proper arrangements in the cemetery and building a new purification room.
In 1931, Rabbi Eliezer Mizes was chosen Rabbi of Sambor. The Zionists opposed his appointment because of his connections with the Agudat Israel. The Zionist youth decided to demonstrate on the day Rabbi Mizes was to reach the city, when the Community leaders had decided to arrange a splendid reception for him. The demonstration did take place, and it was with great difficulty that Rabbi Mizes made his way to the synagogue where the reception was held.
Rabbi Mizes was a great scholar, had acquired a secular education by himself, and had received a government matriculation certificate. His two brothers, too, were famous. One, Rabbi Joseph Mizes, was the Chief Rabbi in the Polish army with the rank of colonel, while his second brother, Mattityahu, was a historian, doing research especially in the origin of Polish families among whom, in his opinion, there were Jewish fathers.
The Zionists declared that the appointment of Rabbi Eliezer Mizes was a
temporary one and that when the Community's administration would be in their
hands they would cancel it and appoint a rabbi acceptable to them. They
published an announcement in this spirit in 1936 signed by Isaac Knepl, who was
then head of the Community. The Zionists indeed appointed a committee for the
election of a rabbi and as a candidate suggested Yaakov Levin, the son of Rabbi
Aharon Levin, who was a native of Sambor and a graduated of the University of
Lvov in philosophy and law. But the Polish authorities did not approve this
proposal, and Rabbi Mizes remained in his post until the liquidation of the
Jewish community.
[Page XXVII]
In 1939, one agreed list was submitted, with four Jews included. Dr. Joachim Ferstendig was re-elected.
The Sambor municipality supported the Jewish institutions only to a small
extent. It denied the Jewish suburb of Blich services due them, such as a road
or a sidewalk to the Jewish cemetery. In 1929, it issued a decree against the
coach and cart drivers (most of whom were Jewish) compelling them to leave the
city center and move to side streets, thus affecting their earnings adversely.
Polish merchants distributed proclamations from time to time in which they called for the boycott of Jews, which made it difficult for Jewish merchants to compete with them. Jewish employees were not accepted in the municipal savings bank. Some teachers in the public schools incited against the Jews.
When the decree against Jewish ritual slaughter was approved by all the
committees of the Sejm and the Senate (March 1936) and went into effect, and
many of the Sambor Jewish butchers did not receive permits, the other butchers
mobilized to their assistance. Imposing a tax of ten grush on every kilo of
mean purchased, they handed over the money collected to those butchers who, as
a result of the decree, were left without means.
At that time, one of the emissaries of Hechalutz, who was a member of Hagana in
Eretz-Israel, came to Sambor on a visit. This visit was exploited to arrange a
meeting in the synagogue Roite Kloiz of representatives of all the Zionist
youth movements in the city. There it was decided to organize self-defense in
the event of a pogrom. And, indeed, on the morrow there were to be seen in the
city large gatherings of Ukrainians and Poles, large groups of whom approached
Blich. A warning signal was given at once and the members of the youth
movements and the Jewish coachmen began to organize to ward off the rioters.
The gentiles began to attack the Jews, but, absorbing heavy blows themselves,
were pushed back to the center of the city. There, however, they received much
reinforcement; they had the upper hand and the Jews began to retreat. Then the
young Jew Zeiler pushed forward, and, holding in his hand a club, began to hit
out left and right, being almost the only Jew in the fight. Thus, however, he
gave the signal for a renewed attack. The Jewish youth who had been retreating
returned immediately and the Christians were pushed back. But when the
Ukrainians and the Poles were at a disadvantage, the police appeared and began
to arrest Jews!
|Total Population
|NN Number of Jews Jews
The founders of Agudat Israel in Sambor were Isaac Schneid and the Religious Court Judge Rabbi Hertz Bombach. The party's leaders and main activists were: L. Dranger, L. Finsterbusch, A. Lamet, W. Lindenwald, I. Schneid, S. Shuminer, H. Tzan; and there were some others.
Agudat Israel conducted a sharp struggle against Zionism and the Zionists. In
1937 they were accused by the Sambor Zionist Organization of libel against the
Zionist leaders. The matter reached the courts, but the results are not known.
(Chwila, 22 August 1937).
In the last years before the destruction of the Jewish Community, Dr. Moses
Frischer was head of the Revisionist Party.
The most outstanding personality among those who founded and led the party in
Sambor was Michael Fromm, who was the recognized leader of Hitachdut.
|General Zionists
|Poalei Zion
|Radical Zionists
In the period of the First World War, there were still the two parallel
movements, Hashomer and Hatchitya, in Sambor. Their members established the
nucleus of Hashomer Ha'zair only in 1918. The first Hashomer Ha'zair group to
emigrate to Palestine, in March 1920, numbered ten who called themselves Bilu;
they were among the founders of Kibbutz Beit Alpha.
Also active in Sambor were the Association of Jewish Women, and the Ezra Society. The latter succeeded, in 1924, in financing emigration to Palestine of 95 halutzim (apparently most, or some of the, refugees from Russia).
In 1935, a coordination committee of all the Zionist youth movements in Sambor
was established which was called Youth Center.
[Page XXXIII]
Sambor and Stari-Sambor and their surroundings were at first under the rule of Russia; in 1340 they were annexed to Poland.
In the opinion of the Polish historian Alexander Yablonovski, there were only 105 inhabitants in Stari-Sambor in 1568.
There are no exact historical sources pointing to the date of the arrival of the first Jews in Stari-Sambor. Since, however, in 1519 the Polish King Zigmunt the First informed the Starosta of Sambor, among other district governors, that the Jews were permitted to live in any place they chose, it may be assumed that they began to settle in Stari-Sambor as well, constitution part of the Sambor Jewish Community. This history of the little Jewish Community of Stari-Sambor was from its beginnings bound up with the history of the Jewish Community of Sambor, for better or for worse. The same events that occurred in the Sambor Community in the days of the kings of Poland, in the Austrian period and in the period of Polish independence between the two world wars occurred also in the Stari-Sambor Community, separated from Sambor by only eighteen kilometers. During all those years, there was close contact between the two Communities. For instance, there was no hospital in Stari-Sambor the one in Sambor served also Stari-Sambor; there was no high school in Stari-Sambor the Jewish youth there attended the Sambor school. Sambor was a kind of older sister of Stari-Sambor.
Not only a common history united the two Jewish Communities in Poland, but also
destruction and a common grave, dug for them by the Nazi oppressor in
Radlovitze and Belzitz [Belzec].
One long street crossed the entire city. In its center was a square from which
side streets branched off.
[Page XXXIV]
Every Jew in the villages was in contact with the Jewish Community of Stari-Sambor, and with its rabbi.
In the years preceding the First World War, Yitzhak Horowitz served as head of the Jewish Community. In the 'twenties, 500 Jewish families lived in Stari-Sambor and by that time some 500 additional families had already managed to emigrate to the United States. Approximately ninety percent of the inhabitants were Jews, eight percent Ukrainians, and two percent Poles.
There were some well-to-do Jewish families, rich in possessions, such as the families Lamm and Averdam, who, during Austrian rule, had the concession on entry to the city which they had leased from the government.
(For entry into the city, the coaches had to pay a fee.) The Lamm family also
had a private synagogue in a house of theirs in the center of the city, which
was known as "Lamuvka." The judge, Dr. Yosef Lamm, member of the
First Knesset, was a descendant of this family.
When the Poles came to power, there was an appointed Polish mayor. So as to
reward his friends who had helped him attain this post, he leased them kiosks
in the city square opposite Christian shops, and those kiosks hid the
Christians' shops. The latter applied to the courts claiming that at the time
they rented the shops the Jewish mayor, Aharon Averdam, had promised them that
they would face the front in the city square, and Averdam testified in their
favor. The Polish mayor argued that, with the change of regime, the new regime
had the right to act as it wished, and that arrangements that had been in
effect in the period of Austrian rule could not apply. Then Aharon Averdam
declared that, according to the law, he was still the legal mayor, since
elections to the municipality had not yet taken place. He said: "I am the
mayor and no one will rob me of this title."
In 1918 a branch of Poalei Zion was set up; its members began to prepare themselves for aliya by arranging work group for training.
The first oleh from Stari-Sambor was Menachem Greulich, who emigrated to Eretz-Israel with the Second Aliyah in 1911. He was among those who surrendered to the Turkish Government in October 1917 in order to ransom the workers in Petach Tikva. He and two of his companions, Shmuel Streifeld and Isaac Mehring, were tortured to death by the Turkish police in a cell in the Damascus prison when the refused the demand to reveal the names of Jewish spies and shomrim in Petach Tikva. The collective settlement Givat Hashlosha is names after them.
Baruch Schechter was the next oleh from Stari-Sambor, in 1920; he was one of the first workers in Jaffa port and one of those who fought for Jewish labor in the port.
Avraham Bek was one of the first to settle in Afula. For forty-six consecutive years he worked as a medical orderly, responsible for the Kupat Holim clinic in Afula. His son, Uriel, fell in the War of Independence in 1948.
In 1925 Yosef Halprin emigrated to Eretz-Israel, and in 1926, David Waltzer.
Among the founders of Gordonia were members of this movement in Sambor, Aryeh Ben-Yosef (Shuminer) and Mordechai Shahar. A gathering of youth that they had announced beforehand would take place was attended by 30-40. But at the start of the meeting, police appeared, claiming that it was illegal, since a permit had not been obtained. After a long and exhausting argument, the police finally allowed the meeting to proceed.
In 1935, the Revisionist Party and its youth movement Betar were founded, led
by Itzik Furman, Dr Greifinger, Krebs and Rappaport.
Each year, Aharon Friedmand, the Admor from Sadigura, would come to the
recreation place Spaas, near Stari-Sambor. On the Sabbath, he would stay in
Stari-Sambor and many Hassidim from Poland, as well as from outside the Polish
borders, would flock to him. At the end of the Sabbath, Benyamin
"Klezmer" Glick and his orchestra would play, and the singing and
dancing would continue until early morning. And Stari-Sambor would rejoice and
be merry.
A few days later, they gathered together by force about a thousand two hundred Jews in the Stari-Sambor church, stood them up in rows of four, and led them to the village of Strzelbice, six kilometers from Stari-Sambor. There they made them enter the village church, where they remained for a whole night. In the morning, the Gestapo ordered them to dig pits, and a German officer informed them that they were to be shot. But immediately a rumor was spread among the Germans that the Russians were coming. They returned the Jews to the church and in the afternoon released them.
On the way to the village Ushziki-Dolne, the Germans met Jewish refugees from
nearby towns and murdered some forty of them.
Armed Ukrainians overran the Jewish houses, rounded up Thirty-two Jews, gave them photos of Lenin and Stalin affixed to sticks to hold up and dragged them along the length of the streets to the Jewish cemetery. There the Ukrainian intelligentsia, with the priest at their head, and a large crowd from the neighboring villages were gathered. In view of all of them, the Ukrainians put on a show of bestial cruelty to the Jews. They tore off heads, hands and feet, opened stomachs and threw the bodies into pits.
Among those who were known to have been thus murdered were: Mordechai Glick, Itzik Greulich, Yaakov Greulich, Yaakov Hibner and his son, Shlomo, Mordechai Ratzman, Benyamin Reiter, Moshe Reiter, Asher Schwartz, Yehoshua Shpinner, and Zoles Hirsch.
In the first mass action on 4 June 1942, about a third of the Jews were evicted from Stari-Sambor, a hundred or so packed into cattle cars and taken to the extermination camps in Belzitz, near Lvov.
In September 1942, when the ghetto was set up in the Blich quarter of Sambor,
Jews from Stari-Sambor as well were transferred there, and with the liquidation
of the ghetto on 9 June 1943, they were to be found with the rest of the Sambor
Jews in a wood in the village of Radlovitze.
[Page XXXVIII]
After having suffered under the brief German occupation, the Jews received the Russians with feelings of easement. But after a few weeks, with the consolidation of Soviet rule, there began to be changes in the life of the Sambor Jews. Wholesale commerce was stopped immediately and retail trading gradually decreased. At the beginning of 1941, only a few private shops remained. Private factories were nationalized. Administrative restrictions were imposed on formerly well-to-do Jews and on all political activists, and some of them met with difficulty in obtaining work. At the end of June 1940, Jewish refugees in Sambor who refused to accept Soviet citizenship were deported to the interior of the Soviet Union. Rich Jews of Sambor began to be transferred to Siberia.
The suicide of the pharmacist Rela Zelinger, with her husband and small daughter, from fear of being deported to Siberia, made a terrible impression. Deportation to Siberia frightened the middle-class people.
Life was grim, an atmosphere of dread and depression prevailed. People stood for many hours in line to receive food supplies the lack of which was very much felt.
On the other hand, many Jews joined city and government services. The Russians trusted the Jewish population more than the Poles and the Ukrainians, and, therefore, the higher posts were allotted to Jews. Because of that, the Ukrainians and the Poles became even more furious against the Jews.
A few days before the German occupation of Sambor in June 1941, the Russians
arrested many leaders of the Ukrainian nationalists and murdered them. Their
corpses remained in the prison.
At the same time, the Germans began to organize their own actions against the Jews. Their first command was that every Jews place on his right sleeve a white ribbon with a blue Magen David on it. Later, they ordered them to hand over their possessions, first furs, radio sets, silver and gold; anyone refusing would be shot.
Then followed searches of houses, curfew hours and no riding on trains. At the end of June 1941, a Judenrat was set up, with Dr. Simon Schneidscher chairman, and among his colleagues, Becker, Dr. Frei, Dr. Halprin, Lerer, Shnur, Dr. Zausner. A Jewish police force was also established headed by Stahl.
On 4 August 1942, the first mass action too place. Preceding it, Jews from the neighboring town had been brought in and compressed into the former stables of the Polish army, near Blich. Leading the action, which began towards morning in Blich, was Kriger, head of the Gestapo of Stanislavav. Shouting and screaming, the Jews were conveyed to the railway station in Sambor, whence they were driven, crushed together in cattle cars, to the death camp in Belzitz.
From the city center hundreds of people were brought to the sports square near the railway station. They were all lined up in fours, the old, women and children, without distinction. Since the cars were not sufficient for them all, the Germans divided the lines in half the first half directed to the cars and the second transferred to the Polish army's stables. Some thousand people were crowded into this place, guarded from around it by armed Nazis and Ukrainians. On 6 August, all the Jews held in the stables were moved to the railway station and pushed into the cars which led them to Belzitz.
In the autumn of 1942, all the Jews living in the villages were ordered to leave their homes and move to the Sambor ghetto by 30 November. As thousands were bring transported in the cattle cars to the gas chambers in Belzitz, the slaughter being perpetrated by the Germans in Sambor was done with the full cooperation of the local population. The Poles and the Ukrainians saw to it that any Jew who fled would, through them, fall into the hands of the Germans. The railway station and the railways swarmed with Jew-catchers. To activate and encourage those cooperating with them, the Germans posted in public places placards in bold letters, in German, Polish and Ukrainian, announcing the grant of a litre of vodka and five kilograms of sugar to any one catching a Jew or indicating where he was to be found.
At the onset of spring, in April 1943, another mass action took place in the Sambor ghetto. This occurred when a large German army on its way to the Russian front and returning from it was temporarily in Sambor. The Gestapo used these army units to help it destroy and murder. Hundreds of soldiers, fully armed, surrounded the ghetto, and a large number entered it. Outside the door of each house stood three to four soldiers. Other groups broke into the houses with shouts, dragging out any who sought hiding of any kind. They pulled them out from cellars, from cupboards, from every possible hiding place even from soot-filled chimneys. All those rounded up were pushed into prison cells.
On 14 April 1943, the Germans' trucks arrived at the Jewish cemetery to remove the clothes of the Jews they were to murder. Later, they led the Jews from the prison to the open grave which had been prepared for them by the Polish and Ukrainian collaborators. The Nazi criminals hurried on the Jews by foot men, women and children, as well as women with infants in their arms under heavy guard. The shooting began approximately at one o'clock in the afternoon and continued until sunset. The clothes of the murdered Jews were loaded onto the trucks by the Ukrainians.
It was not accidental that the April 1943 mass slaughter took place on Passover. The Nazis did their evil work on the Jewish holidays, so as to intensify the humiliation and the cruel treatment. The mass action in Sambor in October 1942, too, had been carried out on the Jewish holiest day, on Yom Kippur.
After the terrible slaughter of 14 April 1943, it was clear that the liquidation of the ghetto was approaching. But one evening in early June, it was announced that Dr. Zausner, deputy to the Judenrat chairman, would give a public lecture. In great tension, the Jews who still remained in the ghetto waited to hear what he would say. His speech was full of optimism. He said that the Judenrat's contacts had returned from the Gestapo's offices in Drohobicz, where they had brought gold, diamonds, furs and leather goods, in exchange for which they received a promise that the group of people still in the ghetto would remain alive and would work for the Germans "not only hand in hand but heart to heart!" The majority believed these find words, because they wanted to believe them. Tension eased in the ghetto, for the first time in a long time.
About two o'clock in the morning, men of the Gestapo and Ukrainian police surrounded the ghetto. In order to reveal those who had hidden, they destroyed houses, even burning down some of them. They dragged out the people from every hiding-place and concentrated them in the prison. At dawn on the first day of Shavuot (9 June 1943), they opened the prison cells and drove the remnant of the Jews of Sambor and the vicinity on their last way. In the trucks on which they were loaded, the Jews were ordered to bend their knees and raise their hands over their heads. In four corners of the trucks stood Ukrainian militia with rifles at the ready. Whoever dared to move or raise his head was struck by a rifle butt. The remnant of the Sambor Jewish Community was thus led to the wood near the village of Radlovitze and there murdered. The city was declared "judenrein." In the ensuing weeks, too, the hunt for hidden Sambor Jews went on. Those who were caught were concentrated in larger groups and brought to the Jewish cemetery to be killed.
At the beginning of August 1944, with the Russian army advancing, Sambor was
transferred several times, during the course of the battles, from one army to
the other. In those days as well, a number of Jews who had succeeded in hiding
almost up to the liberation were denounced by the local population, fell into
the hands of the Nazis and were murdered by them.
[Page XLI]
|1 September 1939
|Outbreak of the Second World War; many refugees arrive in Sambor.
|8 September 1939
|The German army occupies Sambor and makes plans against the Jews.
|20 September 1939
|The Germans retreat and the Soviet army enters Sambor.
|29 June 1941
|The Russians evacuate the city.
|30 June 1941
|The Germans enter Sambor.
|1 July 1941
|The Ukrainian population carries out a progrom in which some 200 Jews are murdered.
|July 1941
|A Judenrat set up, headed by the lawyer Dr. Shimon Schneiderscher.
|December 1941
|A decree issued compelling the Jews to wear a white ribbon with a blueMagen David on it and to hand over valuables.
|January 1942
|Jews prohibited from living in certain streets in the city.
|March 1942
|Start of concentrating the Jews in a number of streets in the Blich suburb.
|4-6 August 1942
|First mass action, in which some four thousand Jews led to slaughter in the Belzitz concentration camp, among them about a third of all the Jews of Stari-Sambor.
|4 September 1942
|A hundred old people taken to be annihilated.
|Second mass action; about two thousand Jews moved to Belzitz.
|22 October 1942
|Continuation of mass action.
|November 1942
|About 400 old and sick people taken to be killed.
|1 December 1942
|The Jewish quarter Blich turned into a closed ghetto, where all the Jews from the towns and villages in the Sambor district concentrated.
|January 1943
|Attempts at Jewish underground organization and acquisition of arms.
|10-14 April 1943
|Mass action in the ghetto; 1,200 men, women and children taken to the Sambor cemetery to be killed.
|22-23 May 1943
|Over a thousand Jews led to their end in the death camp of Belzitz.
|9 June 1943
|Last mass action. Final liquidation of the ghetto and the remaining Jews brought out to be killed in the wood of Radlovitze village.
Liquidation of the Remnant
|23 June 1943
|The last of those who had managed to hide, about 100 persons, caught and murdered in the Jewish cemetery.
|6 July 1943
|About forty Jews discovered and murdered by the Germans.
|22 July 1943
|About twenty-five Jews caught and murdered by the Germans.
Following are the minutes of the founding meeting:
"The founding meeting of the 'Society of the Supporters of the Sick' of Oldstadt was held on 10 May 1898 at the home of Mr. Pfeffer at 81 William Street. Brother Louis Hartman opened the meeting. Those present proposed renting a hall immediately and calling a general meeting for the following week. It was also decided that each new member enrolled would pay twenty-five cents, and twenty-five cents as a membership fee.
The following undertook to bring to the next meeting the materials required for
the meetings: Brother Louis Hartman promised to bring two hammers, Brother Sam
Greulich a minutes book, Brother Leventhal a file and Brother Avraham Fuchs a
rubber stamp.
With the arrival of more immigrants in 1889, the society was reorganized on a new basis, and its activities were expanded.
At the beginning of the 20th century, a new wave of immigrants reached the United States, the majority young people with higher education. Since the existing organization was not sufficient to meet the needs of the new arrivals, a parallel society was organized, on 15 September 1910, called the Progressive Sambor Society (Y.M.B.S.).
The main purposes of both organizations was to render assistance to their fellow Jews from Sambor arriving with the various waves of immigration, in the event of sickness or lack of employment, and also to maintain contact with the Jewish Community in Sambor.
After the First World War and the ruins left in its wake, the need grew for aid for the Sambor Jews still in newly-independent Poland. The organizations in the United States decided to rebuild and equip the Gotthelf hospital. Between 1919 and 1923 over #20,000 [sic] were collected. This money was sent from the United States to the Sambor Jewish Community through a special emissary, Mr. Ginsburg, a member of the first Sambor organization. In addition, a special committee was set up to render financial assistance to the Sambor Jewish Community's orphanage.
Thanks to the initiative of Berl and Shaindel Kamerman, a roof organization of the existing parallel societies was set up, on 30 January 1937, known as the United Sambor Relief Society for Mutual Help. Berl Kamerman was elected president, and he headed the organization for many years. In the period of the Second World War, the main contributors were: A. Begleiter, S. Begleiter, U. Begleiter, Z. Begleiter, Y. Gottlieb, Sam Saunders, N. Solomon and A. Zimbler.
In 1950, when quite a large number of Holocaust survivors from Sambor reached the United States, the newcomers took over administration of the organization. Max Dachinger, the president they elected, served for two years. His successor was Yehiel Hirsch, who is serving in that post up to the present [1980]. Naftali Ben-Shlomo Solomon is still its secretary.
Every year the United Sambor Relief Society holds a memorial gathering for the martyrs of the Sambor Jewish Community.
Members of the organization also make contributions to Israel. One of their most important activities on behalf of Israel was the planting, on 21 March 1977, of a grove, consisting of 2,500 trees in the Martyrs' Forest near Jerusalem.
Members of the present [1980] Executive Committee are: Avraham (Bunck)
Weisbart, president of the community organization; Yehiel Hirsch, president of
the united organization; Naftali Ben-Shlomo Solomon, secretary; Avraham
Linhart; Oscar (Asher) Zimbler (former president); Max Dachinger.
With great reverence I honor the memory of the distinguished man Berl Kamerman, of blessed memory, a dear colleague and a loyal friend. He worked harder than any other person to help those who had come to the United States from his home town Sambor. His loyalty to them knew no limits. It was to him that anyone in distress and anyone requiring assistance turned. And he treated me as a brother.
In the meetings of the organization, during which there were sometimes fiery arguments, Berl Kamerman knew how to bring about compromise, how to make peace, and to arrive at friendship and love among the members.
Berl Kamerman served as president of the United Sambor Organization for many years. In 1950, when new immigrants arrived from our city, these younger people took upon themselves the administration of the organization. They elected Max Dachinger president, and he served very successfully for two years. He was followed as president by Yehiel Hirsch, who enlarged the number of activists, to include, among the most outstanding in their work and their devotion, Avraham Linhart, Avraham Weisbart, and Sam Geles. The latter was taken from us when he was still in his full strength.
Asher Ben-Israel Zimbler
All this is true of his wife, Shaindel, as well. She distinguished herself during all the years in her activities in the special organization of Sambor women when it existed.
In rain and snow, Oscar Zimbler and his wife ran about Greater New York to collect funds for the Sambor organizations. No difficulties would stop them. To save expenses, the couple would arrange meetings of the organizations' committees in their own home. At times, they were hosts to several scores of people, preparing the refreshments themselves. And with all this, they always displayed modesty and humility, avoiding conspicuousness and publicity they cared not for words of praise, they thought only of helping others.
Besides Berl Kamerman, of blessed memory, no other person did so much for the benefit of the Sambor people as did Oscar Zimbler with his wife Shaindel helping him.
Avraham Linhart_________
JewishGen, Inc. makes no representations regarding the accuracy of
the translation. The reader may wish to refer to the original material
for verification.
JewishGen is not responsible for inaccuracies or omissions in the original work and cannot rewrite or edit the text to correct inaccuracies and/or omissions.
Our mission is to produce a translation of the original work and we cannot verify the accuracy of statements or alter facts cited.
Sambir, Ukraine Yizkor Book Project JewishGen Home Page
Copyright © 1999-2023 by JewishGen, Inc.
Updated 10 Apr 2016 by JH


text:
Captain Freedom: A Superhero's Quest for Truth, Justice, and the Celebrity He So Richly Deserves (Paperback)
February 2009 Indie Next List
"Captain Freedom may be super strong and able to fly, but that doesn't seem to help him make the right choices with his career, secret identity, sidekick, or political decisions. (Can you say, 'Governor Freedom of California'?) This fantastic fantastical novel brings superherodom into a whole new light."
— Calvin Crosby, Books Inc., San Francisco, CA
Freedom's fifteen minutes are over!
Software pirates! Mostly extinct dinosaurs! Giant barbarians! Crooning criminals! Captain Freedom's beat them all, saved the world, and looked fantastic doing it—but he couldn't fend off middle management.
The Superhero lifestyle is all that Captain Freedom has ever known. What's he supposed to do now? Enter politics? Write a children's book?
Freedom's in a bad way and he's only a stint in rehab away from a lifetime of celebrity reality shows. But with the guidance of his new life coach, maybe Freedom can stumble in a new direction—even if it means having to make peace with his parents . . . or finally commit to a single long-term archenemy.
G. Xavier Robillard writes for several humor sites, including McSweeney's Internet Tendency and Comedy Central. He lives in Boston. Captain Freedom is his first novel.
"Captain Freedom is a truly funny and energetic romp of a social satire, a terrific send up of not only of super heroes, but the cult of personality in general." — -Christopher Moore, author of Lamb and Fool

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Ekahau RTLS Improves Resident Safety in Danish Elderly Care Center
Ekahau's wearable safety badges and alerting software reduce emergency response times at Skovhuset Elderly Care Apartment Center in Hillerod, Denmark
RESTON, Va. – Ekahau Inc., the high-performance leader in Real-Time Location Systems (RFID-over-Wi-Fi™) announced today the implementation of Ekahau RTLS in the Skovhuset Elderly Care Apartment Center in Hillerod, Denmark. Skovhuset ensures the safety of its elderly residents and helps caregivers respond to emergencies quickly and efficiently by using Ekahau's Wi-Fi-based, active RFID badges and location tracking, mapping and messaging software.
Danish IT specialists at Neuco IP selected Ekahau RTLS because it provides a flexible emergency alerting solution across multiple buildings. The expansive Skovhuset apartment complex is managed by 135 employees and houses more than 100 elderly residents and an outpatient day care program. Residents wear Ekahau's wristband tags which, together with Ekahau Vision™ software, help caregivers locate residents on virtual, web-based floor plans. Caregivers use Motorola Wi-Fi phones, which are tracked in the Ekahau system, and can be used to trigger a panic alarm in case of emergencies. Ekahau wristband tags also include a panic button which residents can push to instantly request help from the closest caregiver and Ekahau RTLS has been integrated with the facilities' existing alarm system, routing text alerts to caregivers' Motorola phones.
"By keeping elderly residents safe using Ekahau's location-based alerting solution, the existing Wi-Fi network and Motorola's handsets, Skovhuset serves as a positive example of what's achievable with RTLS technology," notes Mark Norris, President and CEO of Ekahau.
About Neuco IP
NEUCO IP, is an IP company that designs, develops and markets technology solutions based on IP network solutions that enable companies to create an intelligent end-to-end service on an Ethernet or MPLS network. These solutions support services with a high degree of reliability, safety and guaranteed quality. This ensures customers a good and reliable user experience, lower total operating expenses and supports customers with innovative service-oriented positioning and real-time location systems based on existing Wi-Fi networks.
With a strong focus on end-to-end solutions that create value for customers and helps them to realize the potential of an industry that is constantly evolving, NEUCO IP's solutions are focused on three primary parameters - Business Critical Services, Real Time Location Systems for the healthcare industry and leading Wi-Fi Technologies. Please visit www.neuco.dk for more information.
About Ekahau Inc.
Ekahau Inc. is the performance leader in providing Real-Time Location Systems (RTLS) using RFID-over-Wi-Fi™ technology. Ekahau RTLS includes the Ekahau Vision™ business intelligence software platform and active RFID tags and Wi-Fi badges, which give staff and managers unprecedented visibility into the location, condition and status of assets, people and workflows. Thousands of Fortune 500 companies, hospitals and other facilities rely on Ekahau's patented technology to reveal business intelligence that drives decision-making. Ekahau partners include Aruba, Ascom, Cisco, HP, IBM, Schneider Electric and other leading wireless software developers, systems integrators and WLAN providers. Learn more about Business Intelligence Through Location at: www.ekahau.com or on the Ekahau Blog, Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn.
Paul C. DiPerna
Ph: +1-781-684-0770
Ekahau Inc.
Web Site: http://www.ekahau.com


text:
COFFEYVILLE, Kan. (AP) — Four workers at an oil refinery in southeast Kansas were burned Tuesday in an early morning fire, the Texas company said.
CVR Refining said in a news release that the fire at its Coffeyville refinery was reported at 12:30 a.m. and extinguished by 1:18 a.m. The refinery was shut down and initial reports indicate there was no impact to the surrounding community.
The company isn't naming the workers who were hurt and taken to an area hospital, but said all other employees were accounted for at this time.
"CVR Refining personnel express their deepest concern for and are currently providing assistance to the injured employees and their families," the company said.
The Sugar Land, Texas-based limited partnership owns and operates petroleum refining and auxiliary businesses. Its crude oil refinery in Coffeyville has a rated capacity of 115,000 barrels per day, according to its website. The company also owns a refinery in Wynnewood, Oklahoma, which can produce 70,000 barrels per day.
Its Wynnewood refinery was the site of an explosion in September 2012 that killed two Oklahoma workers, Billy Smith and Russell Mann, when a large boiler exploded.
The Coffeyville refinery was the site of an oil spill during the 2007 flood that blanketed about a third of the southeast Kansas community. The city was flooded when the Verdigris River topped its banks in late June 2007. A malfunction while workers were trying to shut down the inundated refinery caused a massive oil leak into the floodwaters, coating homes and businesses.


text:
Available carbon budget is half as big as thought if global warming is to be kept within 2C limit agreed internationally as being the point of no return, researchers say. Climate News Network reports
Smoke billows from a coal fired power plant in Shanxi, China. Photograph: Kevin Frayer/Getty Images
Tim Radford for Climate News Network, part of the Guardian Environment Network
Climate scientists have bad news for governments, energy companies, motorists, passengers and citizens everywhere in the world: to contain global warming to the limits agreed by 195 nations in Paris last December, they will have to cut fossil fuel combustion at an even faster rate than anybody had predicted.
Joeri Rogelj, research scholar at the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis in Austria, and European and Canadian colleagues propose in Nature Climate Change that all previous estimates of the quantities of carbon dioxide that can be released into the atmosphere before the thermometer rises to potentially catastrophic levels are too generous.
Instead of a range of permissible emissions estimates that ranged up to 2,390 bn tons from 2015 onwards, the very most humans could release would be 1,240 bn tons.
Available levels
In effect, that halves the levels of diesel and petrol available for petrol tanks, coal for power stations, and natural gas for central heating and cooking available to humankind before the global average temperature – already 1C higher than it was at the start of the Industrial Revolution – reaches the notional 2C mark long agreed internationally as being the point of no return for the planet.
In fact, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change summit in Paris agreed a target "well below" 2C, in recognition of ominous projections − one of which was that, at such planetary temperatures, sea levels would rise high enough to submerge several small island states.
The Nature Climate Change paper is a restatement of a problem that has been clear for decades. Carbon dioxide proportions in the atmosphere are linked to planetary surface temperatures and, as they rise, so does average temperature. For most of human history, these proportions oscillated around 280 parts per million.
The global exploitation, on a massive scale, of fossil fuels drove the expansion of agriculture, the growth of economies, a sevenfold growth in human population, a sea level rise of 14cms, and a temperature rise of, so far, 1C.
To stop temperatures increasing another 3C or more and sea levels rising by more than a metre, humans have to reduce fossil fuel emissions. By how much these must be reduced is difficult to calculate.
The global carbon budget is really the balance between what animals emit – in this context, the word animals includes humans with cars and aeroplanes and factories – and what plants and algae can absorb. So the calculations are bedevilled by uncertainties about forests, grasslands and oceans.
To make things simpler, climate scientists translate the target into the billions of tons of carbon dioxide that, ideally, may be released into the atmosphere from 2015 onwards. Even these, however, are estimates.
There is general agreement that a limit of 590 bn tons would safely keep the world from overheating in ways that would impose ever greater strains on human society. The argument is about the upper limit of such estimates.
Dr Rogelj says: "In order to have a reasonable chance of keeping global warming below 2C, we can only emit a certain amount of carbon dioxide, ever. That's our carbon budget.
"This has been understood for about a decade, and the physics behind this concept are well understood, but many different factors can lead to carbon budgets that are either slightly smaller or slightly larger. We wanted to understand these differences, and to provide clarity on the issue for policymakers and the public.
"This study shows that, in some cases, we have been overestimating the budget by 50 to more than 200%. At the high end, this is a difference of more than 1,000 billion tons of carbon dioxide."
The same study takes a closer look at why estimates of the "safe" level of emissions have varied so widely.
One complicating factor has been, of course, uncertainty about what humans might do, and another has been about the other more transient greenhouse gases, such as methane and the oxides of nitrogen.
Although short-lived and released in smaller quantities, some of these are potentially far more potent than carbon dioxide as an influence on planetary temperatures.
Complex calculations
But Dr Rogelj and his colleagues found that a significant cause of variation was simply a consequence of the different assumptions and methodologies inherent in such complex calculations.
So the researchers have re-examined both the options and the approaches, and have worked out a global figure that, they suggest, could be relevant to "real-world policy".
It takes into account the consequences of all human activity, and it embraces detailed outlines of possible low-carbon choices. It also offers, they say, a 66% chance of staying within the internationally-agreed limit.
"We now better understand the carbon budget for keeping global warming below 2C," Dr Rogelj says. "This carbon budget is very important to know because it defines how much carbon dioxide we are allowed to release into the atmosphere, ever.
"We have figured out that this budget is at the low end of what studies indicated before, and if we don't start reducing our emissions immediately, we will blow it in a few decades."
More news
Greenhouse gas emissions Climate change (Environment) Fossil fuels Energy Climate change (Science)


text:
The NFL announced that due to injury lawsuits and President Obama's latest initiative, it will shut down in 2020.
President Obama has formed a task force whose goal is to end the National Football League by 2020. "The President feels that the NFL has become too violent and feels that it is unsafe for players," said a source in the White House. "The President feels that the game now appeals to Americans baser instincts and wants to encourage sports that are competitive, but non-violent."
It's all part of of President Obama's War on Violence. The President hopes to end violence in America by the time he leaves office in 2016.
Though the President has often tossed a football around for fun, he doesn't care for the game. He prefers basketball and would like to see basketball become American's top sport.
"Football players keep getting faster, stronger, bigger and the President feels that it's only a matter of time before a player dies on the field," said a source close to the NFL. "The President feels that American will get over their obsession with football and embrace other sports… like Women's Soccer."
NFL Commissioner, Roger Goodell, said that he will do everything in his power to stop the United States government from abolishing the NFL, but he feels that it may be a losing battle. "The government has just ordered us to ban tackling. They want to turn the NFL into flag-football."
Football fans are up in arms… but they will have to lobby the President and Congress to stop the inevitable.


text:
In 1996, author Steve Englehart wrote a 96-page pitch for DC Comics' alternate reality Elseworlds imprint. Titled "The Tragedy of Batman, Prince of Denmark," this comic took the superhero and placed him smack dab in the midst of William Shakespeare's famous tragedy.
Unfortunately, DC Comics decided not to publish Steve's treatment. But fortunately for us, Englehart agreed to share an excerpt of this Bard-meets-Bat mash-up with io9. Here's the introduction to the Dark Knight's lost Danish adventure.
(I should start off by explaining my experience with Hamlet. I've seen quite a number of versions of the play, and am well aware of the continuing controversies over how to play the prince. I have certainly never seen a version where I went along with everything in the interpretation. So about a year ago I pulled out the family Shakespeare and read through the thing myself, with my own authorial eye toward reconciling the mood swings. To my own satisfaction, I did. This story, of course, is a pastiche, but it follows the arc I found.)
The Tragedy of BATMAN, Prince of Denmark
"To be the Bat, or not to be…"
Bernardo and Horatio are on the night watch when they spy a spirit walking the battlements - a spirit who looks much like the recently deceased and well-beloved King of Denmark, now succeeded by his brother, who has also married the late king's wife. The sentinels go to Hamlet, son of the dead man, a friend of their own age, and a dark-haired Bruce Wayne type in a land of blonds. It gets Hamlet thinking, which is his main interest in life.
Hamlet sits with his uncle, the new king, and his mother. King Claudius always wears dark leather, even in relaxation, while Queen Gertrude wears creamy lace; a greater contrast could not be imagined. The King tries to get Hamlet out of his foul mood, but Hamlet is a typical college student, all dark cynicism to start with, against all authority to start with. He's dissatisfied with the world in general, and has the rich kid's luxury to be so. "Oh, that this too, too solid flesh would melt…!" And now his father may be a ghost, whose flesh has melted. The darkness and strangeness of his vision keeps drawing him away from the tawdry lights of court, into his mind…
Laertes, a more forthright youth, leaves the court with his father, Polonius's, blessing. Polonius also advises his daughter Ophelia to pull back from Hamlet, because, as a prince, he's out of her league. But she shows no signs of obeying. She's not a rebel like Hamlet but she aspires to be Hamlet's girl.
The next night Hamlet, Horatio, and Bernardo stand watch at midnight, and see the spirit return. Hamlet chases after it and has a private conversation with it, as his friends somehow lose track of them. The Ghost says he was murdered by his brother, the new king, and his wife, Hamlet's mother. He calls upon Hamlet to avenge him. Hamlet swears dramatically to avenge his father's death, and lightning flashes above them. However, Hamlet's flaw is that he lives in a world of the mind. Actual action means commitment, a choice, and he prefers the endless ambivalence of thought.
Shaking off his two friends as they finally find him, Hamlet stalks the dark halls of the castle, making fantastic, blood-thirsty plans for revenge (in his mind). But when he finds himself near his mother's apartments, he is balked by his love for her. "It cannot be truth, that she is involved," he tells himself, "so I must wait and watch, to learn the truth." And then he hears the harsh sounds of animal lust beyond her closed door. This is all too real for an abstractionist to take in. He stumbles onward, and runs into Yorick, the Jester (visually, a mediæval Joker, with the distinctive Joker face; but as a character, something very different). The Jester, more clever and quick than Hamlet, worms the story out of him, and then advises him that if he wants to watch without being seen to be watching, he should emulate a jester - be a fool, and so be ignored. This is something Hamlet can do: avoid real action by letting his fertile mind run riot, while telling himself that he is acting. The Jester thus becomes his spiritual advisor, easing on the way he really wants to go.
Polonius sends his servant Reynaldo to Paris to find out what Hamlet when he visited there. He wants tales of debauchery he can lay before his daughter to head off her love affair. But then Ophelia comes and says Hamlet's acting very strangely, which may make things simpler. Polonius encourages her doubts and unease.
Word of Hamlet's new weirdness gets to the King. That worthy calls in Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, Hamlet's boyhood companions, and has them check on Hamlet's state of mind. This is what Hamlet has been waiting for: action involving the mind. So he plays the madman very convincingly. But in the larger context of Denmark, this is not good news for the King, because Fortinbras, the King of Norway, is making noises about attacking Denmark, and the King might need the Prince. There are many swirling clouds in the palace's atmosphere.
Polonius tells the King and Queen that Hamlet has gone mad out of frustrated love for Ophelia.
Hamlet comes in being a smart-ass, which he can do under the guise of madness. He manages to take a few sharp swipes at the King and Queen without, he thinks, incurring any risk. But as his mother, the Queen can see through Hamlet pretty well - better than her new husband, who was merely an uncle. She loves her son, but she fears him now, too. What is it that has driven him mad? He loved his father, and he doesn't understand the ways of the older generation. She talks with him privately, to gauge if he's a threat, and though he parries her, he realizes he's not as slick as he thought. And he knows directly confronting the King and Queen is a dangerous thing. He leaves, wondering furiously if his big plan is doomed to failure like so many of his plans.
Alone in a deserted turret of the castle, Hamlet calls himself a coward and berates himself. The Jester comes and talks with him, advising him to take his adoption of a false persona a step farther. If he, Hamlet, can't make himself act, why not "become" a man dedicated to action? "They'll still know who I am," complains Hamlet. Then why not wear a mask? Something designed to show those who encounter you that you're no one to be trifled with? Something to strike fear in their hearts! At that moment, a bat flies through the turret window. And so is born…the idea for the Bat-man.
But Hamlet still doesn't do anything. "To be the Bat, or not to be…"
The King has had his men keep an eye on Hamlet, and they report that the Jester has been seen whispering in his ear. The Jester is seized and taken to the torture chamber in the castle's depths. The King grills him mercilessly, but through all the excruciating and increasing agony, Yorick refuses to divulge what he and the prince discussed - and so the Jester is murdered. Because he was a friend of Hamlet's, his body is dropped into quicklime to quickly burn away the flesh, before being disposed of by night in an unmarked grave.
Hamlet soon learns of the Jester's fate; it's a small world inside the castle. And finally - finally - he decides to become the Batman. He goes to the battlements and kneels where he met the ghost. "I swear by the spirit of my father to avenge his death by spending the rest of my life warring upon his murderers!"
It is a liberating thing for him, as the Jester prophesied. He enjoys creating the mask and the cape. He enjoys running free over the moonlit rooftops of the castle grounds, convinced his ghostly father is watching him. He revels in the superstitious fear he inspires in the night watch who see him. And then he finds Bernardo foully murdered, like his father.
In his new persona as an action hero, Hamlet is sure it has to do with Bernardo having witnessed and alerted him to the ghost. Thus, Horatio is also in danger, and the Bat-man runs directly to Horatio's apartments. He surprises two assassins there to kill his friend, and throws himself into combat, without thinking, without wanting to think but just act. He battles the assassins tooth and nail until they fall to their death through the windows. But, afraid that his friend will recognize him despite the mask, the Bat-man will not linger. He warns Horatio to stay on his guard, and he is gone. He makes his way back to his deserted tower and hides his Bat-costume behind a loose stone in the battlements there.
But he hates to do that, because the Bat-man, Prince of Denmark, is finally fully alive.
Comic industry legend Steve Englehart has written everything from Captain America to the Justice League to the Avengers to one of the first unofficial Marvel/DC crossovers. You can pick up a full copy of The Tragedy of Batman, Prince of Denmark should you run into him at conventions. His most recent novel, The Plain Man, was published in 2011 by Tor Books.
Unrelated top image from 2008's Batman #682 by Grant Morrison, Lee Garbett, and Trevor Scott. Second image from Detective Comics #620 by Norm Breyfogle. Second middle image from Batman #200 by Mike Friedrich. Third middle image via the Justice League: Crisis on Two Earths animated film. Bottom image by Dick Giordano from 1998's Batman: Dark Knight of the Round Table. Hat tip to CBR.


text:
Berryessa Optometry Local Diabetic Eye Exams near you in San Jose, California
At present, one in 10 Americans has diabetes – and the trend is continuing upwards. While routine comprehensive eye exams are important for diagnosing the early signs of diabetes, that doesn't mean eye exams become insignificant after diagnosis!
Many eye diseases can be quickly and easily diagnosed during a Comprehensive eye exam, Pediatric eye exam and Contact lens eye exam. If you were diagnosed with an eye disease, such as Cataracts, Glaucoma, Macular degeneration, Diabetic retinopathy, or Dry eye, you may be overwhelmed by the diagnosis and confused about what happens next. Will you need medications or surgery – now or in the future? Is LASIK eye and vision surgery an option for you ? Our San Jose eye doctor is always ready to answer your questions about eye disease and Contact lenses.
How does diabetes affect the eyes?
Diabetes, especially when uncontrolled, can affect blood vessels and nerves throughout the entire body. Excess blood sugar can damage tiny blood vessels in the retina, which can lead to ocular inflammation, bleeding and devastating vision loss when left untreated.
The most common types of eye diseases associated with diabetes are:
- Diabetic retinopathy – small blood vessels in the retina weaken and sometimes leak blood
- Glaucoma – elevated pressure levels of fluid in the eye
- Cataracts – a clouding of the eye's lens that blurs vision
Who needs diabetic eye exams?
If you have diabetes of any type, yearly diabetic eye exams are critical for preserving your healthy, sharp sight. That's because damage to the eyes can be seen during a dilated eye exam way before vision loss occurs.
Sadly, surveys estimate that about 60% of people with diabetes are not vigilant about booking annual eye exams. As a result, early sight-threatening changes in the inner eye tissues are often missed. Only a diabetic eye exam can reliably detect or rule out the start of many dangerous eye conditions. In addition, when your eye doctor notices changes in your eye health as a result of diabetes, it can indicate that a change in your diabetes management regimen may be needed.
If you've been diagnosed with eye disease, such as diabetic retinopathy or glaucoma, diabetic eye exams will be done to monitor your condition to determine the most effective treatment program.
When is a diabetic eye exam needed immediately?
Besides visiting your eye doctor for annual eye exams, the following symptoms are a warning that you should schedule an urgent diabetic eye exam:
- Seeing red spots
- Seeing small black lines or spots that don't glide away
- Seeing red tinted fog
- Sudden changes in your vision
- Taking longer than usual to adjust to darkness
Berryessa Optometry, your San Jose eye doctor for eye exams and eye care
Alternatively, book an appointment online here CLICK FOR AN APPOINTMENT


text:
Face fuzz from near and far made its way to Astoria to try and win the title of best of the beards.
The Quays, a corner bar that has been located at 45-02 30th Ave. for over 40 years, hosted the western Queens neighborhood's inaugural Battle of the Beards on Tuesday, April 8, during a night filled with local music and drinks.
A total of 23 competitors tricked out their facial hair, from full-grown beards to mustaches.
James Albertelli, 50, came representing the Gotham City Beard Alliance to take part in his first competition.
"I haven't seen my chin in 12 years," said the Flushing native who now lives in Manhattan. "I hate to shave. It's easier to grow it."
Other competitors included Adam Bierton, who has held titles for his stylish mustache, and retired journalist Robert Mullen, also known as "Hollywood Bob."
The concept of the event and contest came together after members of the local Astoria band The Green Gallows worked together with Tim House, who co-owns The Quays with Dee Flattery, to put together a show. The contest was inspired by band member Sean Ryan Donnelly's beard.
"Sean has such a great beard and it's that time of year when people want to shave off their beards," said Adam Steiner, lead vocalist for The Green Gallows. "It's a great farewell to winter."
The other members of the band are Astoria residents Blake Adam "Double Wide" Smith and Cara Cooley.
The night began with performances from Beecher's Fault, Robbie Cook and The Green Gallows.
After the performances, the first group of beards and mustaches was judged by audience applause. After two more rounds of judging, the final three came down to first place winner Dan Roberts, The Green Gallows' Donnelly, who snatched second, and Guido Cappello, who took home third.
"To win is great but to win in New York is even better. Here is home. It brings a lot of emotion. It makes me feel so good," said Roberts, who is from Mattituck, New York, and is one of the founding members of the Long Island Beard & Mustache Society. "It's not about having a beard. It's all about having a good time."
Roberts, who has been growing his winning beard for almost three years and has taken part in various national competitions, took home an aged bottle of Jameson whiskey and a pair of Mets tickets.
The owners of the Astoria bar plan to continue with the competition for the following year and perhaps also add a separate mustache contest to the list of events.
"People came from miles around, and a lot of new blood came to the bar," House said. "I want the talent to gravitate here."
The Quays has been the backdrop for a scene in 1993's "A Bronx Tale" and, most recently, the pilot episode of CBS's "Elementary."


text:
Boston Children's Hospital's science and clinical innovation blog
CIMIT Summer Education Series 2010
Leave a comment
Comments on this entry are closed.
For real-time updates, enter your email address:
Vector is published by Boston Children's Hospital. © Boston Children's Hospital. All rights reserved.
All information provided on diagnosis and therapy reflects the care environment of Boston Children's Hospital and related physician practices. It is not a substitute for the professional judgment of a qualified heath care provider based upon actual examination of a patient's condition and history. Therefore, it should not be construed as medical advice for any particular patient's condition, and may need to be altered in different care environments. Please contact us if we can be helpful in answering any questions or to arrange for a visit or consult.
WordPress Admin


text:
South Bend, IN – The 20th-ranked Notre Dame Fighting Irish take aim at halting their current skid, when they play host to the Rutgers Scarlet Knights in Big East action at Purcell Pavilion on Saturday.
Mike Brey's Irish won 14 of their first 15 games this season and certainly looked the part of a conference contender. However, Notre Dame has hit a wall of late, with back-to-back conference losses to Connecticut (65-58) and most recently, St. John's (67-63). The setbacks spoiled a strong start to Big East play for the Irish who are now just 2-2 in-conference.
Mike Rice's Scarlet Knights are a solid 11-4 on the year and is 3-2 in conference play thus far. Rutgers has won three of its last four games and enters this contest off a hard-fought 70-67 win over USF this week.
This is the 32nd all-time meeting in this series, with Notre Dame holding an 18-13 advantage. The Irish have won seven of the last nine meetings and are 11-1 at home in the series all-time, including wins in each of the last eight matchups there.
Rutgers overcame a 3-point deficit at intermission, shooting .515 from the floor in the second half to earn the win at home against the Bulls. Wally Judge led the team in victory with 14 points. Myles Mack and Eli Carter added 13 points apiece. The team's 3-2 start to Big East play is its best since the 1999-2000 campaign.
The Scarlet Knights aren't putting up eye-popping scoring totals, averaging a modest 70.2 ppg, however, they have been efficient, shooting .465 from the field overall. Carter is the team's top scoring option at 15.9 ppg, but could be putting up better numbers if not for a rather weak .395 shooting. Mack is the only other double-digit average on the team with 13.0 ppg, on .530 shooting. Dane Miller (8.4 ppg, 5.8 rpg) and Judge (7.9 ppg, 6.2 rpg) provide some frontcourt balance.
The Irish aren't the biggest team around, employing a four-guard set in the starting five, but the team's one presence up front has dominated in the form of 6-foot-9 senior Jack Cooley. The veteran forward is converting over 60 percent of his shots on the year (.608) and is averaging a double-double with team-highs of 14.8 points and 10.7 rebounds per game. Guards Jerian Grant (12.6 ppg) and Eric Atkins (12.2 ppg) are the perfect complements with their perimeter scoring and also team-up to form quite the one-two punch in terms of assists. The two have combined for 204 assists on the year.
Notre Dame lost its third straight to St. John's and fifth straight to the Red Storm at Madison Square Garden last time out. Atkins did his best to stop the skein, netting a game-high 21 points in the loss. Grant poured in 14 points, but Cooley was neutralized, finishing with 10 points and just five rebounds. Notre Dame shot a solid .462 from the floor in the game, but was just 1-of-9 from 3-point range.


text:
The theme for the issue I received to review was Dacha Life, exploring the tradition of upper- and middle-class Russians to have second homes, dachas, in the countryside. Irina Borisova's short story "A Summer's Tale" describes two older women still living the dacha lifestyle while their children have grown up and away.
A special note must be given to the featured photographer, Alexander Anshukov, whose black and white photos (especially the orange cat framed in an old rustic window above) show an old, rural Russia not often depicted. This journal is published four times a year and the readings are the perfect size to enjoy. While the subscription is not inexpensive, the fact that it has no annoying advertisements makes it worthwhile.
Special thanks to Paul for the Review Copy.


text:
I came across this account of a Gulfstream G-IV crash back in 2014 and found it to be very interesting. I hope you enjoy it and find it as interesting as I did.
Michael Carter - Editor and Chief / Aero Pacific Flightlines
Like many pilots, I read accident reports all the time. This may seem morbid to people outside "the biz", but those of us on the inside know that learning what went wrong is an important step in avoiding the fate suffered by those aviators. And after fifteen years in the flying business, the NTSB's recently-released report on the 2014 Gulfstream IV crash in Bedford, Massachusetts is one of the most disturbing I've ever laid eyes on.
If you're not familiar with the accident, it's quite simple to explain: the highly experienced crew of a Gulfstream IV-SP attempted to takeoff with the gust lock (often referred to as a "control lock") engaged. The aircraft exited the end of the runway and broke apart when it encountered a steep culvert. The ensuing fire killed all aboard.
Sounds pretty open-and shut, doesn't it? There have been dozens of accidents caused by the flight crew's failure to remove the gust/control lock prior to flight. Professional test pilots have done it on multiple occasions, ranging from the prototype B-17 bomber in 1935 to the DHC-4 Caribou in 1992.
But in this case, the NTSB report details a long series of actions and habitual behaviors which are so far beyond the pale that they defy the standard description of "pilot error".
Just the Facts
Let me summarize the ten most pertinent errors and omissions of this incident for you:
- There are five checklists which must be run prior to flying. The pilots ran none of them. CVR data and pilot interviews revealed that checklists simply were not used. This was not an anomaly, it was standard operating procedure for them.
- Obviously the gust lock was not removed prior to flying. This is a very big, very visible, bright red handle which sticks up vertically right between the throttles and the flap handle. As the Simon & Chabris selective attention test demonstrates, it's not necessarily hard to miss the gust lock handle protruding six inches above the rest of the center pedestal. But it's also the precise reason we have checklists and procedures in the first place.
- Flight control checks were not performed on this flight, nor were they ever performed. Hundreds of flights worth of data from the FDR and pilot interviews confirm it.
- The crew received a Rudder Limit message indicating that the rudder's load limiter had activated. This is abnormal. The crew saw the alert. We know this because it was verbalized. Action taken? None.
- The Pilot Flying (PF) was unable to push the power levers far enough forward to achieve takeoff thrust. Worse, he actually verbalized that he wasn't able to get full power, yet continued the takeoff anyway.
- The Pilot Not Flying (PNF) was supposed to monitor the engines and verbally call out when takeoff power was set. He failed to perform this task.
- Aerodynamics naturally move the elevator up (and therefore the control column aft) as the airplane accelerates. Gulfstream pilots are trained to look for this. It didn't happen, and it wasn't caught by either pilot.
- The Pilot Flying realized the gust lock was engaged, and said so verbally several times. At this point, the aircraft was traveling 128 knots had used 3,100 feet of runway; about 5,000 feet remained. In other words, they had plenty of time to abort the takeoff. They chose to continue anyway.
- One of the pilots pulled the flight power shutoff handle to remove hydraulic pressure from the flight controls in an attempt to release the gust lock while accelerating down the runway. The FPSOV was not designed for this purpose, and you won't find any G-IV manual advocating this procedure. Because it doesn't work.
- By the time they realized it wouldn't work and began the abort attempt, it was too late. The aircraft was traveling at 162 knots (186 mph!) and only about 2,700 feet of pavement remained. The hydraulically-actuated ground spoilers — which greatly aid in stopping the aircraft by placing most of its weight back on the wheels to increase rolling resistance and braking efficiency — were no longer available because the crew had removed hydraulic power to the flight controls.
Gulfstream has been sued by the victim's families. Attorneys claim that the gust lock was defective, and that this is the primary reason for the crash. False. The gust lock is designed to prevent damage to the flight controls from wind gusts. It does that job admirably. It also prevents application of full takeoff power, but the fact that the pilot was able to physically push the power levers so far forward simply illustrates that anything can be broken if you put enough muscle into it.
The throttle portion of the gust lock may have failed to meet a technical certification requirement, but it was not the cause of the accident. The responsibility for ensuring the gust lock is disengaged prior to takeoff lies with the pilots, not the manufacturer of the airplane.
Gulfstream pilot and Code7700 author James Albright calls the crash involuntary manslaughter. I agree. This wasn't a normal accident chain. The pilots knew what was wrong while there was still plenty of time to stop it. They had all the facts you and I have today. They chose to continue anyway.
It's the most inexplicable thing I've yet seen a professional pilot do, and I've seen a lot of crazy things. If locked flight controls don't prompt a takeoff abort, nothing will.
Albright's analysis is outstanding: direct and factual. I predict there will be no shortage of articles and opinions on this accident. It will be pointed to and discussed for years as a bright, shining example of how not to operate an aircraft.
In response to the crash, former NTSB member John Goglia has called for video cameras in the cockpit, with footage to be regularly reviewed to ensure pilots are completing checklists.
Despite the good intentions, this proposal would not achieve the desired end. Pilots are already work in the presence of cockpit voice recorders, flight data recorders, ATC communication recording, radar data recording, and more.
If a pilot needs to be videotaped too, I'd respectfully suggest that this person should be relieved of duty. No, the problem here is not going to be solved by hauling Big Brother further into the cockpit.
A better model would be that of the FOQA program, where information from flight data recorders is downloaded and analyzed periodically in a no-hazard environment.
The pilots, the company, and the FAA each get something valuable. It's less stick, more carrot. I would also add that this sort of program is in keeping with the Fed's recent emphasis on compliance over enforcement action.
The Normalization of Deviance
What I, and probably you, are most interested in is determining how well-respected, experienced, and accomplished pilots who've been through the best training the industry has to offer reached the point where their performance is so bad that a CFI wouldn't accept it from a primary student on their very first flight.
After reading through the litany of errors and malfeasance present in this accident report, it's tempting to brush the whole thing off and say "this could never happen to me". I sincerely believe doing so would be a grave mistake. It absolutely can happen to any of us, just as it has to plenty of well-trained, experienced, intelligent pilots. Test pilots. People who are much better than you or I will ever be.
But how? Clearly the Bedford pilots were capable of following proper procedures, and did so at carefully selected times: at recurrent training events, during IS-BAO audits, on checkrides, and various other occasions.
Goglia, Albright, the NTSB, and others are focusing on "complacency" as a root cause, but I believe there might be a more detailed explanation. The true accident chain on this crash formed over a long, long period of time — decades, most likely — through a process known as the normalization of deviance.
Social normalization of deviance means that people within the organization become so much accustomed to a deviant behavior that they don't consider it as deviant, despite the fact that they far exceed their own rules for the elementary safety. People grow more accustomed to the deviant behavior the more it occurs. To people outside of the organization, the activities seem deviant; however, people within the organization do not recognize the deviance because it is seen as a normal occurrence. In hindsight, people within the organization realize that their seemingly normal behavior was deviant.This concept was developed by sociologist and Columbia University professor Diane Vaughan after the Challenger explosion. NASA fell victim to it in 1986, and then got hit again when the Columbia disaster occurred in 2003. If they couldn't escape its clutches, you might wonder what hope we have.
Well, for one thing, spaceflight in general and the shuttle program in particular are specialized, experimental types of flying. They demand acceptance of a far higher risk profile than corporate, charter, and private aviation.
I believe the first step in avoiding "normalization of deviance" is awareness, just as admitting you have a problem is the first step in recovery from substance addiction. After all, if you can't detect the presence of a problem, how can you possibly fix it?
There are several factors which tend to sprout normalization of deviance:
- First and foremost is the attitude that rules are stupid and/or inefficient. Pilots, who tend to be independent Type A personalities anyway, often develop shortcuts or workarounds when the checklist, regulation, training, or professional standard seems inefficient. Example: the boss in on board and we can't sit here for several minutes running checklists; I did a cockpit flow, so let's just get going!
- Sometimes pilots learn a deviation without realizing it. Formalized training only covers part of what an aviator needs to know to fly in the real world. The rest comes from senior pilots, training captains, and tribal knowledge. What's taught is not always correct.
- Often, the internal justification for cognizant rule breaking includes the "good" of the company or customer, often where the rule or standard is perceived as counterproductive. In the case of corporate or charter flying, it's the argument that the passenger shouldn't have to (or doesn't want to) wait. I've seen examples of pilots starting engines while the passengers are still boarding, or while the copilot is still loading luggage. Are we at war? Under threat of physical attack? Is there some reason a 2 minute delay is going to cause the world to stop turning?
- The last step in the process is silence. Co-workers are afraid to speak up, and understandably so. The cockpit is already a small place. It gets a lot smaller when disagreements start to brew between crew members. In the case of contract pilots, it may result in the loss of a regular customer. Unfortunately, the likelihood that rule violations will become normalized increases if those who see them refuse to intervene.
It also requires buy-in from pilots on the procedures and training they receive. When those things are viewed as "checking a box" rather than bona fide safety elements, it becomes natural to downplay their importance.
Many of you know I am not exactly a fan of the Part 121 airline scene, but it's hard to argue with the success airlines have had in this area.
When I flew for Dynamic Aviation's California Medfly operation here in Southern California, procedures and checklists were followed with that level of precision and dedication. As a result, the CMF program has logged several decades of safe operation despite the high-risk nature of the job.
Whether you're flying friends & family, pallets of cargo, or the general public, we all have the same basic goal, to aviate without ending up in an embarrassing NTSB report whose facts leave no doubt about how badly we screwed up.
The normalization of deviance is like corrosion: an insidious, ever-present, naturally-occurring enemy which will weaken and eventually destroy us. If we let it.
(Ron Rapp - The House of Rapp)


text:
Reading: Successful delegation
Successful Delegation
Using the Power of Other People's Help
Accomplish a lot more by delegating.
Even "Super You" needs help and support. There is no shame in asking for assistance. Push aside the pride and show respect for the talent others can bring to the table.
And, remember that there is no such thing as a single-handed success: when you include and acknowledge all those in your corner, you propel yourself, your teammates and your supporters to greater heights.
- Author Unknown
Do you feel stressed and overloaded? Or that your career seems stalled? If so, then you may need to brush up your delegation skills!
If you work on your own, there's only a limited amount that you can do, however hard you work. You can only work so many hours in a day. There are only so many tasks you can complete in these hours. There are only so many people you can help by doing these tasks. And, because the number of people you can help is limited, your success is limited.
However, if you're good at your job, people will want much more than this from you. This can lead to a real sense of pressure and work overload: you can't do everything that everyone wants, and this can leave you stressed, unhappy, and feeling that you're letting people down.
On the positive side, however, you're being given a tremendous opportunity if you can find a way around this limitation. If you can realize this opportunity, you can be genuinely successful!
One of the most common ways of overcoming this limitation is to learn how to delegate your work to other people. If you do this well, you can quickly build a strong and successful team of people, well able to meet the demands that others place. This is why delegation is such an important skill, and is one that you absolutely have to learn!
Finding This Article Useful?
You can learn another 265 team management skills, like this, by joining the Mind Tools Club.
Why People Don't Delegate
To figure out how to delegate properly, it's important to understand why people avoid it.START_MAIN Quite simply, people don't delegate because it takes a lot of up-front effort.
After all, which is easier: designing and writing content for a brochure that promotes a new service you helped spearhead, or having other members of your team do it? You know the content inside and out. You can spew benefit statements in your sleep. It would be relatively straightforward for you to sit down and write it. It would even be fun! The question is, "Would it be a good use of your time?"
While on the surface it's easier to do it yourself than explain the strategy behind the brochure to someone else, there are two key reasons that mean that it's probably better to delegate the task to someone else:
1First, if you have the ability to spearhead a new campaign, the chances are that your skills are better used further developing the strategy, and perhaps coming up with other new ideas. By doing the work yourself, you're failing to make best use of your time.
2Second, by meaningfully involving other people in the project, you develop those people's skills and abilities. This means that next time a similar project comes along, you can delegate the task with a high degree of confidence that it will be done well, with much less involvement from you.
Delegation allows you to make the best use of your time and skills, and it helps other people in the team grow and develop to reach their full potential in the organization.
When to Delegate
Delegation is a win-win when done appropriately, however, that does not mean that you can delegate just anything. To determine when delegation is most appropriate there are five key questions you need to ask yourself:
Is there someone else who has (or can be given) the necessary information or expertise to complete the task? Essentially is this a task that someone else can do, or is it critical that you do it yourself?
Does the task provide an opportunity to grow and develop another person's skills?
Is this a task that will recur, in a similar form, in the future?
Do you have enough time to delegate the job effectively? Time must be available for adequate training, for questions and answers, for opportunities to check progress, and for rework if that is necessary.
Is this a task that I should delegate? Tasks critical for long-term success (for example, recruiting the right people for your team) genuinely do need your attention.
If you can answer "yes" to at least some of the above questions, then it could well be worth delegating this job.
Other factors that contribute to the delegability of a task include:
1The project's timelines/deadlines.
How much time is there available to do the job?
Is there time to redo the job if it's not done properly the first time?
What are the consequences of not completing the job on time?
2Your expectations or goals for the project or task(s), including:
How important is it that the results are of the highest possible quality?
Is an "adequate" result good enough?
Would a failure be crucial?
How much would failure impact other things?
That being said, having all these conditions present is no guarantee that the delegated task will be completed successfully either. You also need to consider to whom you will delegate the task and how you will do it.
The Who and How of Delegating
Having decided to delegate a task there are some other factors to consider as well. As you think these through you can use our free Delegation Log worksheet to keep record of the tasks you choose to delegate and who you want to delegate them to.
To Whom Should You Delegate?
The factors to consider here include:
1The experience, knowledge and skills of the individual as they apply to the delegated task.
What knowledge, skills and attitude does the person already have?
Do you have time and resources to provide any training needed?
2The individual's preferred work style.
How independent is the person?
What does he or she want from his or her job?
What are his or her long-term goals and interest, and how do these align with the work proposed?
3The current workload of this person.
Does the person have time to take on more work?
Will you delegating this task require reshuffling of other responsibilities and workloads?
When you first start to delegate to someone, you may notice that he or she takes longer than you do to complete tasks. This is because you are an expert in the field and the person you have delegated to is still learning. Be patient: if you have chosen the right person to delegate to, and you are delegating correctly, you will find that he or she quickly becomes competent and reliable.
/ grey_block
How Should You Delegate?
Use the following principles to delegate successfully:
1Clearly articulate the desired outcome. Begin with the end in mind and specify the desired results.
2Clearly identify constraints and boundaries. Where are the lines of authority, responsibility and accountability? Should the person:
Wait to be told what to do?
Ask what to do?
Recommend what should be done, and then act?
Act, and then report results immediately?
Initiate action, and then report periodically?
3Where possible, include people in the delegation process. Empower them to decide what tasks are to be delegated to them and when.
4Match the amount of responsibility with the amount of authority. Understand that you can delegate some responsibility, however you can't delegate away ultimate accountability. The buck stops with you!
5Delegate to the lowest possible organizational level. The people who are closest to the work are best suited for the task, because they have the most intimate knowledge of the detail of everyday work. This also increases workplace efficiency, and helps to develop people.
6Provide adequate support, and be available to answer questions. Ensure the project's success through ongoing communication and monitoring as well as provision of resources and credit.
7Focus on results. Concern yourself with what is accomplished, rather than detailing how the work should be done: Your way is not necessarily the only or even the best way! Allow the person to control his or her own methods and processes. This facilitates success and trust.
8Avoid "upward delegation." If there is a problem, don't allow the person to shift responsibility for the task back to you: ask for recommended solutions; and don't simply provide an answer.
9Build motivation and commitment. Discuss how success will impact financial rewards, future opportunities, informal recognition, and other desirable consequences. Provide recognition where deserved.
10Establish and maintain control.
Discuss timelines and deadlines.
Agree on a schedule of checkpoints at which you'll review project progress.
Make adjustments as necessary.
Take time to review all submitted work.
In thoroughly considering these key points prior to and during the delegation process you will find that you delegate more successfully.
Keeping Control
Now, once you have worked through the above steps, make sure you brief your team member appropriately. Take time to explain why they were chosen for the job, what's expected from them during the project, the goals you have for the project, all timelines and deadlines and the resources on which they can draw. And agree a schedule for checking-in with progress updates.
Lastly, make sure that the team member knows that you want to know if any problems occur, and that you are available for any questions or guidance needed as the work progresses.
We all know that as managers, we shouldn't micromanage. However, this doesn't mean we must abdicate control altogether: In delegating effectively, we have to find the sometimes-difficult balance between giving enough space for people to use their abilities to best effect, while still monitoring and supporting closely enough to ensure that the job is done correctly and effectively.
The Importance of Full Acceptance
When delegated work is delivered back to you, set aside enough time to review it thoroughly. If possible, only accept good quality, fully-complete work. If you accept work you are not satisfied with, your team member does not learn to do the job properly. Worse than this, you accept a whole new tranche of work that you will probably need to complete yourself. Not only does this overload you, it means that you don't have the time to do your own job properly.
Of course, when good work is returned to you, make sure to both recognize and reward the effort. As a leader, you should get in the practice of complimenting members of your team every time you are impressed by what they have done. This effort on your part will go a long way toward building team member's self-confidence and efficiency, both of which will be improved on the next delegated task; hence, you both win.
Key Points
At first sight, delegation can feel like more hassle than it's worth, however by delegating effectively, you can hugely expand the amount of work that you can deliver.
When you arrange the workload so that you are working on the tasks that have the highest priority for you, and other people are working on meaningful and challenging assignments, you have a recipe for success.
To delegate effectively, choose the right tasks to delegate, identify the right people to delegate to, and delegate in the right way. There's a lot to this, but you'll achieve so much more once you're delegating effectively!