The TUC is urging employers to relax office dress codes and cool down their overheating offices, to make work more "bearable for staff" in the high temperatures. The current weather spell is the hottest since July 2006, with Tuesday the hottest of the year so far at 31.8C (89.2F).

The union believes that the best way for staff to keep cool inside during sweltering heat is for them to be able to wear less formal, more casual clothing, and come into work in short sleeves and shorts.

The TUC added that it would like to see the law changed so there is an absolute indoor maximum of 30˚C, with employers forced to introduce cooling measures when the outside temperature hits 24˚C.

Before everybody rushes out to buy shorts, the end is in sight as Britain's hottest week in years could end in a wash-out with some parts of the country at risk of flooding, forecasters warned.

I can see nothing wrong with the idea of short sleeved shirts, but should we really be turning up in the office dressed for a day at the beach?

On a similar note, spare a thought for people like the police who spend long hours outside in high temperatures. What message would it spell to the public if they started pounding the beat in shorts?

What are your views? Should we relax dress codes during hot spells or do you think it takes away the professional image?

The 24th June saw the release of the Merrill Lynch Global Wealth Management and Capgemini 13th Annual World Wealth Report. As expected this showed a marked decrease in the wealth of the world’s richest individuals.

At the end of 2008 the global HNWI (High Net Worth Individuals) population dropped 15% from 10 million in 2007 to 8.6 million in 2008 and their wealth dropped 19.5% to $32.8 trillion. Ultra-HNWIs came off even worse, seeing a decrease in their wealth of a whopping 23.9%. As Capgemini says, “The declines were unprecedented, and wiped out two robust years of growth in 2006 and 2007.”

Specific regions continue to host large percentages of the total global HNWI population, namely North America, Asia, and Europe. The top 3 countries for HNWI population - U.S., Japan, and Germany - together accounted for 54 percent of the world's HNWI population in 2008, up slightly from 53.3 percent in 2007. China's HNWI population surpassed that of the U.K. to become the fourth largest in the world.

In Europe, France saw a 12.6% decrease in HNWIs whilst the figure was only 2.7% in Germany. In the Asia Pacific area, Japan had a decrease of 9.9% whilst the number of HNWIs in Hong Kong fell by a whopping 61.3% to a mere 37,000.

Just like the rest of us, HNWIs did take measures to protect their wealth and allocated more of their income to fixed-income investments, cash and liquid assets. They also increased their real-estate holdings by 4%.

“This year's World Wealth Report shows a distinct shift from our reports in recent years,” said Bertrand Lavayssière, Managing Director Global Financial Services, Capgemini. “After a year of significant volatility, we’re seeing a shift in HNWI activity and priorities. There are currently opportunities for wealth management firms and advisors to understand and effectively address increased client concerns by helping to navigate through the uncertain economic times and build relationships that will continue well into the future.”

So, what are the prospects for the future wealth of these individuals? Capgemini Merrill Lynch predicts that overall HNWI financial wealth will grow to $48.5 trillion (that’s a 50% increase on this year’s figures) by 2013, advancing by an annual rate of 8.1 percent. North America and the Asia-Pacific regions are predicted to lead in wealth growth, with Asia-Pacific surpassing North America by 2013. These regions will be spurred by increasing U.S. consumer spending and the extension of the autonomy of the Chinese economy, already sparking a new increase in consumer demand.

Do the predictions surprise you? Do you think that the Asia-Pacific region is set to surpass North America by 2013? And what does the future have in store for Europe’s HNWIs?

Company secretaries should enjoy greater independence, according to a leading company chairman.

Peter Brown, chairman of Synergy Holdings Ltd, argued in last week’s Financial Times that the company secretary ‘must answer to the independent chairman or senior independent director and not to the chief executive’.

‘This means that their pay and benefits are settled by the independent directors as they are the only secretariat available to non-executives within the company,’ he added. ‘Advice is often influenced by, and helpful to, those with bonus and salary review rights that must be taken by and remain with the non-executives.’

His comments echo recommendations made in ICSA’s submission to the Financial Reporting Council (FRC)’s review of the Combined Code, and views expressed by ICSA Policy and Strategy Director David Wilson in an article also published by the Financial Times in April.

Is this opinion shared by the majority of Cosecs? In a recent mailout to our CSS clients and candidates we asked ‘Who do you think the company secretary should report to?’ We were delighted with the level of response; it’s obviously a subject that Company Secretaries feel strongly about!

Over half of you believe that the Company Secretary should report to the Chairman but CEOs should not be unduly concerned, as some 25% considered that this should be the reporting line, and many of those who voted for the Chairman also felt that there should also be a dotted line to the CEO. And - where the Chairman is a non-exec - there is support for a stronger link to the CEO.

In both cases, many responses mentioned that the remit of the Company Secretary should be taken into account, with the report being to the Chairman on corporate governance matters, and the CEO on operational matters. To put this into context, a significant number of respondees made it clear that the remit of today’s Company Secretary should cover – indeed, focus on - key corporate governance responsibility, taking the role beyond that of corporate administration.

However, one – perhaps controversial - response commented that “Normally the Head of Legal Finance or Compliance to heads up the Governance department so it makes sense for the Company Secretary to report to one of these Heads; the Company Secretary is meant to provide board support in an independent manner and reporting to the CEO or Chairman will blur this.”

On the other hand, several voiced the opinion the Company Secretary should be a stand-alone board-level position, and many commented that the primary imperative is to ensure that the Company Secretary – as the ‘conscience of the company’ - is properly supported in being an effective and influential independent voice.

On respondent mentioned that the title of Company Secretary is probably somewhat outdated and doesn't truly reflect the level of seniority or responsibility that the Company Secretary takes on in the twenty-first century!

What do you think? As stricter compliance regulations come into force to prevent another financial meltdown, is it time to rethink the way Cosecs are remunerated and who they should answer to? We’d love to hear your views…

Accountancy Age has just published its annual list of the Top 50 accountancy firms and not surprisingly just nine of the Top 50 increased growth on their previous figures. Four in five firms saw growth rate slow, some dramatically on previous years – and nine posted negative growth figures.

The Top 10 list remains virtually unchanged on last year with only positions 9 (Tenon Group) and 10 (PKF UK) changing places. PricewaterhouseCoopers again tops the list with a UK fee income of £2,244m, followed by Deloitte and KPMG. Deloitte experienced a growth rate of 11.5% (£2,010m), down on the previous year’s 15.6%.

Confidence for the year ahead is mixed; 32% of respondents said they expected revenue growth rate to be higher than last year, 35% said lower while 33% thought it would remain about the same.

Although one third of the surveyed firms expect to increase UK partner numbers this year the outlook for firm’s other staff isn’t so favourable. 25% expect to reduce support staff while 17% will cut professional staff numbers. It doesn’t look too promising for graduates either as only 2 firms expect to increase graduate recruitment.

Tax departments have also suffered with only six firms having an increased growth for tax revenues over previous years. However more than 33% of the firms that reported figures (33 out of 50) did see double-digit growth.

From our perspective in tax, the volume of recruitment may be down but that’s not to say the market has ground to a halt. There will always be a certain number of vacancies in tax due to the nature of the business and our view is that once the economy picks up, the tax job market will be one of the first to respond.

As part of BLT’s newly reinvigorated Corporate & Social Responsibility Programme, this morning we visited the Raine’s Foundation School in Bethnal Green, London in order to undertake practice interviews with year 12 pupils (aged 16 – 17 year olds). The aim was to give students a true interview experience based on their pre-prepared ‘mini’ cvs in order to help them apply for higher education or employment.

A truly enjoyable morning talking to the pupils about their studies, aspirations and hobbies was had by all. Catriona, Michelle, Dave, Becky and I would like to thank the pupils and staff at the Raine’s Foundation School for their warm welcome and for their time, as well as to the staff at City Action and the Tower Hamlets Education Business Partnership charity for arranging this rewarding and inspirational experience.