Category: 3. Business

Oil-focused ETFs came under pressure this week after OPEC+ announced plans to boost production starting in September, raising fresh concerns over an oversupplied market.

USO ETF is in the red today. Check its prices live, here.

The cartel will unwind the last leg of its voluntary production cuts, adding roughly 547,000 barrels per day back into global supply, reported Bloomberg. The move weighed on crude prices and hit popular oil ETFs tied to near-term futures contracts.

Also Read: India Stands Firm on Russian Oil Imports Despite Trump’s Sanction Threats

ETFs like the United States Oil Fund (NYSE:USO) and United States Brent Oil Fund (NYSE:BNO) fell over 5% in the past week when speculations began. Both funds track front-month oil futures and are vulnerable in a contango environment, when futures contracts are priced higher further out, eroding returns on rollovers.

Leveraged products such as the ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil (NYSE:UCO) also saw outsized losses, down about 10% in the past week, reflecting amplified exposure to daily moves in crude prices.

Also Read: Halliburton Has Rug Pulled From Under It, Analyst Blames Tariffs And OPEC

Not all oil-linked ETFs suffered. Funds using optimized roll strategies or offering equity exposure to energy companies held up better.

Equity-based funds like the Energy Select Sector SPDR Fund (NYSE:XLE) and VanEck Oil Services ETF (NYSE:OIH) were more insulated, losing around 1.7% during the same period, with underlying holdings such as ExxonMobil Corp (NYSE:XOM) and Halliburton Co (NYSE:HAL) expected to benefit from increased drilling activity.

The OPEC+ move comes amid rising geopolitical tensions, with reports suggesting the U.S. may consider secondary sanctions on China for importing Russian crude, like it just did for India. Investors seeking to reduce exposure to such risks may look to globally diversified resource ETFs.

The SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF (NYSE:GNR) and FlexShares Global Upstream Natural Resources ETF (NYSE:GUNR) offer broader exposure to energy and commodities worldwide.

As oil markets digest the upcoming supply increase, ETF investors may consider shifting strategies. Futures-heavy funds could continue to face headwinds, while equity-based or globally diversified funds may offer more stability in the months ahead.

Read Next:

Photo: Shutterstock

UNLOCKED: 5 NEW TRADES EVERY WEEK. Click now to get top trade ideas daily, plus unlimited access to cutting-edge tools and strategies to gain an edge in the markets.

Threat actors have targeted insurance companies in a recent string of cyber-attacks, exposing patients’ personal information, including Social Security numbers, claims information, and health reports.

For example, Allianz Life Insurance Company of North America (“Allianz Life”) reported a mid-July breach to the Maine Attorney General’s Office that compromised Allianz Life’s data. According to public reports and the regulatory filing, the threat actor gained unauthorized access to Allianz Life’s systems through an external system, suggesting vulnerabilities in a third-party vendor. Since these reports, impacted individuals have filed a class action complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, contending that Allianz Life failed to protect personal information due to negligence.

This incident comes shortly after Aflac Inc. (“Aflac”), another insurance company, disclosed a cybersecurity incident on July 7. The number of people impacted has not yet been reported. Erie Insurance (“Erie”) also announced a cyber-attack earlier this summer, causing widespread disruptions that interrupted business operations, which included closing customer portals used to pay bills, for nearly a month.

Threat Actor Attribution: Scattered Spider

It is unclear who is behind the Allianz Life, Aflac, or Erie attacks. However, cybersecurity intelligence organizations such as Crowdstrike and Mandiant, as well as various news sources, have warned that the threat actor group “Scattered Spider” is focusing efforts on large U.S. enterprises in the insurance industry. Scattered Spider employs sophisticated social engineering and identity theft tactics to bypass multi-factor authentication and internal security protocols. It has been linked to previous large-scale breaches, and its tactics are part of a broader trend of cybercriminal organizations exploiting supply chain vulnerabilities and third-party relationships.

Regulatory and Legal Implications

Given the nature and scope of the data compromised, targeted insurers may face significant regulatory scrutiny from multiple authorities, including:

• State Attorneys General,
• The Federal Trade Commission (FTC), and
• The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), if protected health information (PHI) is involved.

Additionally, companies may face:

• Class-action litigation from impacted individuals,
• Securities-related claims if disclosures related to the breach are deemed inadequate or misleading, or
• Contractual liability with third parties whose data or systems were affected.

Key Takeaways for Clients

• Third-Party Cybersecurity Risk: These recent attacks highlight the growing risks posed by third-party vendors. Organizations should evaluate their vendor management programs, particularly focusing on data sharing, access controls, and security certifications.
• Incident Response Planning: Incident response planning should be proactive. The speed and effectiveness of incident response, including timely notification, containment, and forensic analysis, plays a critical role in mitigating risk.
• Regulatory Compliance: Companies should ensure compliance with evolving state and federal breach notification and data privacy laws, including timely reporting and documentation practices.
• Threat Actor Tactics Are Evolving: Scattered Spider and similar groups are employing increasingly sophisticated techniques to circumvent traditional controls, requiring organizations to stay vigilant.

Even though they themselves are victims of a crime, companies subject to a cybersecurity incident may face significant legal and regulatory exposure. Government investigators will expect a thorough and timely response, as will internal leadership, Board Members, customers, and stakeholders.

For these reasons, targeted insurers, as well as those across industries, should consider proactive steps to address these concerns, such as:

• Conducting cybersecurity risk assessments focused on third-party vendors,
• Reviewing and updating breach notification, response, and communication protocols,
• Evaluating cyber insurance policies for adequacy and coverage, and
• Monitoring regulatory developments and litigation related to a breach for precedent-setting implications.

Crowell & Moring LLP has unparalleled experience working with companies, particularly in the insurance, health care, and technology sectors, to address these risks and continues to monitor developments.

For additional information, please contact our team.

A Zoox robotaxi testing in San Francisco

Zoox

Zoox, the autonomous vehicle company owned by Amazon, has received approval from U.S. regulators to operate its purpose-built electric robotaxis that lack steering wheels, mirrors and conventional vehicle controls on public roads, a necessary step as it prepares to take on Alphabet’s Waymo.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said it granted Zoox the first-ever exemption from U.S. rules requiring the use of certain features as part of its expanded Automated Vehicle Exemption Program, which applies to all the company’s vehicles now on the road. As part of the waiver, Zoox must “remove or cover” statements claiming its robotaxi meets Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, NHTSA said. The agency also said it’s closing an investigation of Zoox’s self-certification of its robotaxis.

---

For the latest in cleantech and sustainability news, sign up here for our Current Climate newsletter.

---

The decision is “a win-win for safety and innovation,” Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said in a statement. “America – not China – can and will drive the future of self-driving cars forward.”

The waiver clears the way for Zoox, founded 11 years ago, to launch its robotaxi service later this year, first in Las Vegas, with San Francisco, other Bay Area cities, Austin, Miami, Los Angeles and Atlanta to follow. Like Waymo–and unlike Tesla–the Foster City, California-based company has secured permission to operate paid rides in self-driving vehicles in the Golden State. Also like Waymo, Zoox is using far more robust sensors for its autonomous system, including laser lidar, radar, thermal cameras and microphones (to hear emergency vehicles), in addition to digital cameras.

With its decision, “NHTSA has proposed a way to enable Zoox to move forward with confidence,” the company said in an email. “Through this new exemption process, we are excited to embark on this new path, put these discussions behind us, and move forward, so Zoox can continue to lead the way in autonomous innovation.”

A Zoox robotaxi testing in Las Vegas.

Zoox

Rather than loading up existing vehicles with sensors and computers like Waymo has, Zoox’s plan from the outset has revolved around creating a robotaxi service with an electric model built from the ground up. Along with the absence of conventional physical controls, it features sliding doors reminiscent of transit trains and is a bidirectional vehicle, with identical front and rear ends. The toaster-shaped robotaxi has a top speed of 75 miles per hour, though it won’t typically exceed 45 mph on urban and suburban runs. It’s also intended to operate for up to 16 hours per charge per day, rack up 100,000 miles a year and remain in service for at least five years.

“We’re offering a unique experience for riders that we think they’ll prefer,” cofounder and CTO Jesse Levinson told Forbes during a tour of Zoox’s robotaxi factory in Hayward, California, in June. “The ride quality, the carriage-style seating, the roomy interior–we think all of this is going to be what sets us apart.”

More From Forbes

ForbesForget Tesla. Amazon’s Zoox Is On Track To Be Waymo’s Biggest Robotaxi RivalBy Alan OhnsmanForbesElon Musk’s Tesla Robotaxi Rollout Looks Like A Disaster Waiting To HappenBy Alan OhnsmanForbesInside The Waymo Factory Building A Robotaxi FutureBy Alan Ohnsman

Sidley is advising BDT & MSD Partners in connection with their AU$1.6 billion investment in DBG Health, a leading Australian beauty and pharmaceutical company. This strategic investment values DBG Health at approximately AU$7 billion and includes up to AU$1 billion of additional funding for future acquisitions, making this one of the largest private founder-led transactions in Australian corporate history.

The Sidley team is led by David Perkins and Rob Garritano (M&A and Private Equity), and includes Louis Jennings and Adi Milstein (M&A and Private Equity); Noam Waltuch, Rachel Kleinberg, and Andy Lau (Tax); Diane McEnroe, Deeona Gaskin, Susan Stolzer, and Kelly Cho (Food, Drug and Medical Device); Chad Ehrenkranz, George Maliha M.D., and Jenna Hoskison (Healthcare); and Vadim Brusser and Mary Marks (Antitrust and Competition).

Novo Nordisk’s outgoing CEO, Lars Fruergaard Jorgensen, has warned that layoffs at the Danish pharmaceutical giant could be unavoidable as competition heats up against its blockbuster obesity drug Wegovy amid rising pressure from rival Eli Lilly.

Novo Nordisk – which became Europe’s most valuable company, worth $650bn, last year on booming sales of Wegovy – is facing a pivotal moment as the medicine loses market share and sees sales growth slow, especially in the United States.

It has warned of far slower growth this year, in part due to compounders who have been allowed to make copycat drugs based on the same ingredients as Wegovy due to shortages. Novo Nordisk, which according to its website has 77,000 employees, cut its full-year sales and profit forecasts last week, wiping $95bn off its market value since.

The slide is a vast and abrupt turnaround for the firm that has been one of the world’s hottest investment stories, which led to a rapid expansion of manufacturing and sales capacity. Now the company is eyeing potential cost-cutting measures.

Layoffs loom

“We probably won’t be able to avoid layoffs,” Jorgensen told Danish broadcaster DR. “When you have to adjust a company, there are some areas where you have to have fewer people, some [areas] where you have to be smaller.”

He added, though, that any decision on layoffs would be in the hands of the incoming CEO, company veteran Maziar Mike Doustdar, who takes over on Thursday.

On a media call, Jorgensen said the market for copycat versions of Wegovy’s class of drugs – known as GLP-1 receptor agonists – was of “equal size to our business” and compounded versions of Wegovy were sold at a “much lower price point”.

In May, Novo Nordisk said it expected many of the roughly one million US patients using compounded GLP-1 drugs to switch to branded treatments after a US Food and Drug Administration ban on compounded copies of Wegovy took effect on May 22, and it expected compounding to wind down in the third quarter.

However, finance chief Karsten Munk Knudsen said on Wednesday that more than one million US patients were still using compounded GLP-1s and that the company’s lowered outlook has “not assumed a reduction in compounding” this year.

“The obesity market is volatile,” Knudsen told analysts when asked under what circumstances the company could see negative growth in the last six months of the year. The low end of the firm’s new full-year guidance range would be for “unforeseen events”, such as stronger pricing pressure in the US than forecast, he said.

The lower end of the range would imply sales around 150 billion Danish krone ($23bn) in the second half of 2025, compared with 157 billion krone ($24.5bn) in the same period last year.

Knudsen reiterated that the company was pursuing multiple strategies, including lawsuits against compounding pharmacies, to halt unlawful mass compounding.

Jorgensen said the company was encouraged by the latest US prescription data for Wegovy. While the drug was overtaken earlier this year by rival Eli Lilly’s Zepbound in terms of US prescriptions, that lead has narrowed in the past month.

Second-quarter sales of Wegovy rose by 36 percent in the US and more than quadrupled in markets outside the US compared to a year ago, Novo Nordisk said.

While Wegovy’s US pricing held steady in the quarter, the company expected deeper erosion in the key US market in the second half, due to a greater portion of sales expected from the direct-to-consumer or cash-pay channel, as well as higher rebates and discounts to insurers, Knudsen said.

He said Novo Nordisk was expanding its US direct-to-consumer platform, NovoCare, launched in March, and may need to pursue similar “cash sales” directly to patients, outside of insurance channels, in some markets outside the US.

Cost cuts

Novo Nordisk reiterated its full-year earnings expectations on Wednesday after last week’s profit warning.

Jorgensen said the company was acting to “ensure efficiencies in our cost base” as it announced it would terminate eight research and development projects.

“There seems to be a larger R&D clean-out than usual, but we do not know if this reflects a strategic re-assessment or just a coincidence,” Jefferies analysts said in a note.

Investors have questioned whether the company can stay competitive in the booming weight-loss drug market. Several equity analysts have cut their price targets and recommendations on the stock since last week.

Shares in Novo Nordisk plunged 30 percent last week – their worst weekly performance in over two decades. The stock has continued to tumble since the market opened in New York. As of 12pm local time (16:00 GMT), the pharmaceutical giant was down by more than 3.3 percent.

Peter Temin PhD ’64, the MIT Elisha Gray II Professor of Economics, emeritus, passed away on Aug. 4. He was 87. 

Temin was a preeminent economic historian whose work spanned a remarkable range of topics, from the British Industrial Revolution and Roman economic history to the causes of the Great Depression and, later in his career, the decline of the American middle class. He also made important contributions to modernizing the field of economic history through his systematic use of economic theory and data analysis.

“Peter was a dedicated teacher and a wonderful colleague, who could bring economic history to life like few before or since,” says Jonathan Gruber, Ford Professor and chair of the Department of Economics. “As an undergraduate at MIT, I knew Peter as an engaging teacher and UROP [Undergraduate Research Opportunities Program] supervisor. Later, as a faculty member, I knew him as a steady and supportive colleague. A great person to talk to about everything, from research to politics to life at the Cape. Peter was the full package: a great scholar, a great teacher, and a dedicated public goods provider.”

When Temin began his career, the field of economic history was undergoing a reorientation within the profession. Led by giants like Paul Samuelson and Robert Solow, economics had become a more quantitative, mathematically rigorous discipline, and economic historians responded by embracing the new tools of economic theory and data collection. This “new economic history” (today also known as “cliometrics”) revolutionized the field by introducing statistical analysis and mathematical modeling to the study of the past. Temin was a pioneer of this new approach, using econometrics to reexamine key historical events and demonstrate how data analysis could lead to the overturning of long-held assumptions.

A prolific scholar who authored 17 books and edited six, Temin made important contributions to an incredibly diverse set of topics. “As kindly as he was brilliant, Peter was a unique type of academic,” says Harvard University Professor Claudia Goldin, a fellow economic historian and winner of the 2023 Nobel Prize in economic sciences. “He was a macroeconomist and an economic historian who later worked on today’s social problems. In between, he studied antitrust, health care, and the Roman economy.”

Temin’s earliest work focused on American industrial development during the 19th century and honed the signature approach that quickly made him a leading economic historian — combining rigorous economic theory with a deep understanding of historical context to reexamine the past. Temin was known for his extensive analysis of the Great Depression, which often challenged prevailing wisdom. By arguing that factors beyond monetary policy — including the gold standard and a decline in consumer spending — were critical drivers of the crisis, Temin helped recast how economists think about the catastrophe and the role of monetary policy in economic downturns.

As his career progressed, Temin’s work increasingly expanded to include the economic history of other regions and periods. His later work on the Great Depression placed a greater emphasis on the international context of the crisis, and he made significant contributions to our understanding of the drivers of the British Industrial Revolution and the nature of the Roman economy.

“Peter Temin was a giant in the field of economic history, with work touching every aspect of the field and original ideas backed by careful research,” says Daron Acemoglu, Institute Professor and recipient of the 2024 Nobel Prize in economics. “He challenged the modern view of the Industrial Revolution that emphasized technological changes in a few industries, pointing instead to a broader transformation of the British economy. He took on the famous historian of the ancient world, Moses Finley, arguing that slavery notwithstanding, markets in the Roman economy — especially land markets — worked. Peter’s influence and contributions have been long-lasting and will continue to be so.”

Temin was born in Philadelphia in 1937. His parents were activists who emphasized social responsibility, and his older brother, Howard, became a geneticist and virologist who shared the 1975 Nobel Prize in medicine. Temin received his BA from Swarthmore College in 1959 and went on to earn his PhD in Economics from MIT in 1964. He was a junior fellow of Harvard University’s Society of Fellows from 1962 to 1965.

Temin started his career as an assistant professor of industrial history at the MIT Sloan School of Management before being hired by the Department of Economics in 1967. He served as department chair from 1990t o 1993 and held the Elisha Gray II professorship from 1993 to 2009. Temin won a Guggenheim Fellowship in 2001, and served as president of the Economic History Association (1995-96) and the Eastern Economic Association (2001-02).

At MIT, Temin’s scholarly achievements were matched by a deep commitment to engaging students as a teacher and advisor. “As a researcher, Peter was able to zero in on the key questions around a topic and find answers where others had been flailing,” says Christina Romer, chair of the Council of Economic Advisers under President Obama and a former student and advisee. “As a teacher, he managed to draw sleepy students into a rousing discussion that made us think we had figured out the material on our own, when, in fact, he had been masterfully guiding us. And as a mentor, he was unfailingly supportive and generous with both his time and his vast knowledge of economic history. I feel blessed to have been one of his students.”

When he became the economics department head in 1990, Temin prioritized hiring newly-minted PhDs and other junior faculty. This foresight continues to pay dividends — his junior hires included Daron Acemoglu and Abhijit Banerjee, and he launched the recruiting of Bengt Holmström for a senior faculty position. All three went on to win Nobel Prizes and have been pillars of economics research and education at MIT.

Temin remained an active researcher and author after his retirement in 2009. Much of his later work turned toward the contemporary American economy and its deep-seated divisions. In his influential 2017 book, “The Vanishing Middle Class: Prejudice and Power in a Dual Economy,” he argued that the United States had become a “dual economy,” with a prosperous finance, technology, and electronics sector on one hand and, on the other, a low-wage sector characterized by stagnant opportunity.

“There are echoes of Temin’s later writings in current department initiatives, such as the Stone Center on Inequality and Shaping the Future of Work” notes Gruber. “Temin was in many ways ahead of the curve in treating inequality as an issue of central importance for our discipline.”

In “The Vanishing Middle Class,” Temin also explored the role that historical events, particularly the legacy of slavery and its aftermath, played in creating and perpetuating economic divides. He further explored these themes in his last book, “Never Together: The Economic History of a Segregated America,” published in 2022. While Temin was perhaps best known for his work applying modern economic tools to the past, this later work showed that he was no less adept at the inverse: using historical analysis to shed light on modern economic problems.

Temin was active with MIT Hillel throughout his career, and outside the Institute, he enjoyed staying active. He could often be seen walking or biking to MIT, and taking a walk around Jamaica Pond was a favorite activity in his last few months of life. Peter and his late wife Charlotte were also avid travelers and art collectors. He was a wonderful husband, father, and grandfather, who was deeply devoted to his family.

Temin is lovingly remembered by his daughter Elizabeth “Liz” Temin and three grandsons, Colin and Zachary Gibbons and Elijah Mendez. He was preceded in death by his wife, Charlotte Temin, a psychologist and educator, and his daughter, Melanie Temin Mendez.

The state of the research

Diff Risk Score (DRS) is a AI-powered technology built at Meta that predicts the likelihood of a code change causing a production incident, also known as a SEV. Built on a fine-tuned Llama LLM, DRS evaluates code changes and metadata to produce a risk score and highlight potentially risky code snippets. Today, DRS powers many risk-aware features that optimize product quality, developer productivity, and computational capacity efficiency. Notably, DRS has helped us eliminate major code freezes, letting developers ship code when they historically could not with minimal impact to customer experience and the business.

Why it matters

Software development is fraught with risk, especially for intricate, rapidly evolving, and scaled products and technologies. Because Meta operates at a global scale, we need the best tools possible to mitigate risk and to protect both user experience and advertiser outcomes..

AI is transforming how we build products, so we committed ourselves to applying AI to improve every aspect of the software development process. Production risk was one of the areas we tackled first. We theorized that, if equipped with a model that could predict if a code change might cause a SEV, we could build features and workflows to improve almost every aspect of writing and pushing code.

Since DRS use cases are too numerous to cover in depth here, we’ll focus on one: code unfreeze. For Meta, production incidents can drive significant negative user experience and advertiser impact. For this reason, some teams have historically “frozen” major parts of the codebase for sensitive periods like Cyber 5 holiday shopping week, preventing engineers from shipping code to reduce incident risk. For certain teams, it has cut down their holiday shopping code freeze, leading to significant improvements in productivity.

While this had clear reliability benefits, the tradeoff was a substantial reduction in productivity. DRS enabled a more nuanced approach, letting developers land lower-risk changes during these periods while minimizing production incidents, thus protecting the user experience, the business, and productivity. In fact, DRS has driven meaningful productivity gains across many sensitive periods. During one such period, a major partner event in 2024, we landed 10,000+ code changes (that previously could not have landed during a freeze) with minimal production impact, enabling continued innovation and customer success. What’s more, by managing productivity and risk in this way, we benefit twice: through more code landed and through less engineering time spent detecting, understanding, and mitigating production incidents.

Code unfreeze works well, but it’s just the start of what the technology can do. Understanding risk, even imperfectly and at a statistical level, has driven improvements for Meta in more ways than we anticipated – there are 19 use cases for risk tooling and growing!

Where we’re headed next

The success of DRS has spurred the creation of new risk-aware features across Meta that span the entire development lifecycle, from planning to post-release monitoring. The demand to build such features also led us to build the Risk Awareness Platform to provide risk analysis APIs and tool integrations.

We envision four major directions for risk awareness in the coming months and years.

First, while we’ve seen an explosion of DRS-powered features on the Risk Awareness Platform, from optimizing build and test selection to improving reliability, selecting code reviewers, and analyzing release risks, we believe this is only the beginning. A critical problem in software engineering is maximizing innovation rate subject to a reliability threshold, so the applications of risk understanding are virtually inexhaustible. We believe code risk can play a significant role in improving this tradeoff, so we will build more risk-aware features while improving their quality. As the risk model, feature data, and user experiences improve, we’ll see greater real-world benefits for people who use Meta’s products and businesses who advertise with Meta.

Second, we will expand beyond code change risk to configuration change risk. While code changes cause the plurality of SEVs at Meta, configuration changes are another large category. For this reason, we’ve expanded the RAP to include models that predict the risk of various config changes. These efforts are state of the art, focused on an open research area, and earlier on the research-to-production continuum, but we believe they will soon power feature families of their own, much like DRS does today.

Third, we want to automate the risk mitigation step. Instead of flagging risky diffs and recommending appropriate reviewers or rollback mechanisms, we want to use AI agents to proactively generate risk-mitigating changes. This can be done for code in motion (i.e. diffs or pull requests) and for code at rest to lower baseline codebase risk. Additionally, once we are armed with a greater understanding of configuration risks, these agents will be able to operate flexibly across both code and config changes.

Fourth, we will increasingly use natural language outputs to show humans what these risk-aware technologies are doing and why. By helping engineers understand the rationale behind the risk score, we’ll empower them to either mitigate risks or give the model feedback to improve accuracy. This creates a learning loop for improving both our risk models and the end user experience. LLM explainability remains an open area of research, but our teams are actively working to offer answers to common questions.

We are excited for the future of risk-aware software development, and we look forward to learning from—and with—our colleagues in industry as we make progress in this valuable domain.

Read the papers

“Moving Faster and Reducing Risk: Using LLMs in Release Deployment“

“Leveraging Risk Models to Improve Productivity for Effective Code Un-Freeze at Scale”

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank all the team members and the leadership that contributed to making the DRS effort successful at Meta. Rui Abreu, David Amsallem, Parveen Bansal, Kaavya Chinniah, Brian Ellis, James Everingham, Peng Fan, Ford Garberson, Jun Ge, Kelly Hirano, Kosay Jabre, David Khavari, Sahil Kumar, Ajay Lingapuram, Yalin Liu, Audris Mockus, Megh Mehta, Vijayaraghavan Murali, Venus Montes, Aishwarya Girish Paraspatki, Akshay Patel, Brandon Reznicek, Peter C Rigby, Maher Saba, Babak Shakibi, Roy Shen, Gursharan Singh, Matt Steiner, Weiyan Sun, Ryan Tracy, Siri Uppalapati, and Nachiappan Nagappan.

The National Coal Mining Museum is set to pause its underground tours due to a staff pay dispute.

More than 40 members of the UNISON union at the museum in Wakefield are to go on strike for four weeks after the attraction said it couldn’t afford an increase above its offer of 5%.

Staff are set to walk out from 20 August to 14 September, with further action threatened if an agreement was not met.

A spokesperson for the museum called the decision “extremely disappointing”, with UNISON writing to the site’s trustees to request a meeting.

UNISON argued the pay offer should be 5% or £1 an hour more, whichever is higher, and claims a previous agreement was pulled by the attraction.

However, the museum said a £1 an hour increase would be the equivalent of 8% for many workers and would “threaten the long-term sustainability of the museum”.

Workers were balloted for strike action, with 74% backing the move.

Rianne Hooley, UNISON regional organiser, said: “Nobody wants to take strike action, but nobody wants to be messed about either.

“There’s still time for the museum to stop any disruption.”

A spokesperson for the museum said: “This will impact the experiences of so many children, families, and schools to whom the museum means so much.  

“Our museum is a vital place for people of all ages to understand more about the important history of coal mining and many have visits booked for months in advance.”

The museum confirmed it would remain open despite the strike, however tours of the 230-year-old mine could not be offered during the industrial action.