Monday, March 31, 2008
Scary tracking
I've noticed that the ads that appear in my Gmail account are tightly aligned with the content of the e-mail messages. I corresponded with one friend to find out how she liked South-by-Southwest and all of the ads are music related; I wrote to my attorney about a routine matter and all of the ads that appear are legal in nature. Very scary, Google. Very, very scary.
Saturday, March 22, 2008
Reading on the Road
One of the things I enjoy about traveling is getting the chance to read local newspapers and see what constitutes news in different places. For the past two days I've been reading the Santa Rosa Press Democrat.
The big kerfuffle in these parts is the decision against Starbucks in a California court in a case questioning whether shift supervisors can share in pooled tips. The court said they can't and has ordered the ubiquitous coffee chain to pay $106 million in damages to baristas. Starbucks is appealing. The story made page one two days in a row -- today's installment reports that other blended drink companies (Jamba Juice was included along with coffee shops) share the same practice.
The management employees seem to feel that if they are serving customers they are entitled to share in the tips. This all highlights the blurry line between front line staff and management that is common at most retail businesses. Companies want the line clear so that they don't have to pay overtime to one extra person but they also seem to also want the supervisors to benefit from extra cash that doesn't cost them a dime. My opinion is that managers and supervisors should keep their hands out of the tip jar. They get paid more and should view the tips as a motivational tool for the staff.
Other, more upbeat news here in Sonoma County is bud break in the vineyards. The chardonnay buds have burst right on time -- at the spring equinox -- with pinot noir fast on their heels. Zinfandel, Cabernet, and the other varietals will follow in turn. There has been a perfect run of weather for the bud break and those of us who love wine are hoping that favorable weather continues throughout the season. Variations in weather patterns have an enormous impact on the final product.
The big kerfuffle in these parts is the decision against Starbucks in a California court in a case questioning whether shift supervisors can share in pooled tips. The court said they can't and has ordered the ubiquitous coffee chain to pay $106 million in damages to baristas. Starbucks is appealing. The story made page one two days in a row -- today's installment reports that other blended drink companies (Jamba Juice was included along with coffee shops) share the same practice.
The management employees seem to feel that if they are serving customers they are entitled to share in the tips. This all highlights the blurry line between front line staff and management that is common at most retail businesses. Companies want the line clear so that they don't have to pay overtime to one extra person but they also seem to also want the supervisors to benefit from extra cash that doesn't cost them a dime. My opinion is that managers and supervisors should keep their hands out of the tip jar. They get paid more and should view the tips as a motivational tool for the staff.
Other, more upbeat news here in Sonoma County is bud break in the vineyards. The chardonnay buds have burst right on time -- at the spring equinox -- with pinot noir fast on their heels. Zinfandel, Cabernet, and the other varietals will follow in turn. There has been a perfect run of weather for the bud break and those of us who love wine are hoping that favorable weather continues throughout the season. Variations in weather patterns have an enormous impact on the final product.
Friday, March 21, 2008
Local Flavor
I'm in Healdsburg, CA for a couple of days of R&R and I must note how refreshing it is to have so much local retail. Around the plaza at the center of town are a couple of dozen of shops and restaurants but not a single Gap, Restoration Hardware, Abercrombie, or Starbucks. This mix of local businesses gives a distinct energy to the downtown area.
Granted, Healdsburg is a particularly precious town where everything is upscale. It's easier to find a $100 pair of sunglasses than a $ .39 bolt and the locals at the lower end of the economic ladder aren't going to be doing much shopping around the plaza, but these shops are the work of a couple of dozen local owners -- people who are making a living and bringing their unique perspective to the local economy. To me it is much more authentic and interesting than a "quaint" collection of national retailers that would be, in essence, a mall without a roof.
Places like Harvard Square have become much more homogenized as locally owned retail shops have been replaced with chain outlets. It becomes much less appealing to spend time in those cookie-cutter places.
I'm not sure what it takes to keep the locals in charge -- visionary landlords, committed merchants, a concentration of purchasing power, or perhaps all of the above. All I know is that despite its preciousness, Healdsburg is an appealing place to be.
Granted, Healdsburg is a particularly precious town where everything is upscale. It's easier to find a $100 pair of sunglasses than a $ .39 bolt and the locals at the lower end of the economic ladder aren't going to be doing much shopping around the plaza, but these shops are the work of a couple of dozen local owners -- people who are making a living and bringing their unique perspective to the local economy. To me it is much more authentic and interesting than a "quaint" collection of national retailers that would be, in essence, a mall without a roof.
Places like Harvard Square have become much more homogenized as locally owned retail shops have been replaced with chain outlets. It becomes much less appealing to spend time in those cookie-cutter places.
I'm not sure what it takes to keep the locals in charge -- visionary landlords, committed merchants, a concentration of purchasing power, or perhaps all of the above. All I know is that despite its preciousness, Healdsburg is an appealing place to be.
Monday, March 17, 2008
Guns on Campus
There is a growing debate about whether guns, including concealed weapons, should be allowed on campuses. The enthusiasm for arming students and faculty comes on the heels of recent shootings on campus.
I have only one question: Are they out of their minds?
Arming the average student, staff member, or faculty member may make sense if you have watched enough movies to think that the good guys never miss a shot and that morally superior always win. They picture a high noon showdown with Clint Eastwood gunning down the villians. Folks, it just doesn't happen that way.
First, even those who are range trained and certified to shoot aren't necessarily ready to react appropriately in the midst of a chaotic crowd. Once multiple people draw and start firing, how likely is each person to know who the real "bad guy" is? And, when the police arrive, how will they know who to take out? It's a recipe for mayhem and more needless deaths.
Second, we must factor in the other shootings that could occur. None of us were on best behavior throughout our college years -- we got rowdy, drank too much, perhaps experimented with a controlled substance or two, stayed up all night studying until our eyes were blurry, had our hearts broken once or twice -- in short, we did lots of things that put us in situations where everyone should be happy that we didn't have ready access to firearms. College is a time to get a little wild and that's better done without live ammunition.
We ought to be looking at the root causes of violence in our society rather than planning on arming every Tom, Dick, Harry, Jane, Kate, and Sally.
I have only one question: Are they out of their minds?
Arming the average student, staff member, or faculty member may make sense if you have watched enough movies to think that the good guys never miss a shot and that morally superior always win. They picture a high noon showdown with Clint Eastwood gunning down the villians. Folks, it just doesn't happen that way.
First, even those who are range trained and certified to shoot aren't necessarily ready to react appropriately in the midst of a chaotic crowd. Once multiple people draw and start firing, how likely is each person to know who the real "bad guy" is? And, when the police arrive, how will they know who to take out? It's a recipe for mayhem and more needless deaths.
Second, we must factor in the other shootings that could occur. None of us were on best behavior throughout our college years -- we got rowdy, drank too much, perhaps experimented with a controlled substance or two, stayed up all night studying until our eyes were blurry, had our hearts broken once or twice -- in short, we did lots of things that put us in situations where everyone should be happy that we didn't have ready access to firearms. College is a time to get a little wild and that's better done without live ammunition.
We ought to be looking at the root causes of violence in our society rather than planning on arming every Tom, Dick, Harry, Jane, Kate, and Sally.
Saturday, March 15, 2008
Micro v. Macro
One of Boston's radio stations, WBOS, recently went to a DJ-free format. It is the second station in the market to do so (Mike 93.7 is the other). Both seem dedicated to "never two good songs in a row" but that's OK for me as I'm an NPR junkie.
The format move made me think, however, about job loss and the trend across industries to shed employees wherever possible. From a microeconomic perspective, each business wants to keep its costs as low as possible and employ no more workers than it needs to create the most profit. However, each business also needs enough employed customers to buy its products and services.
The problem, as I see it, is that we have largely abandoned macroeconomic policy as it relates to employment. Under both Republican and Democratic administrations of recent years, the only two policy tools that seemed to be available have been deregulation and tax cuts. The rationale seems to be to let "1,000 micro decisions bloom" in hopes that the wisdom of crowds will be an effective substitute for actual macroeconomic policy.
Now, neither deregulation nor tax cuts are necessarily bad but you can't play 18 holes well with only a 3 wood and a 5 iron. The recent subprime mortgage mess can be seen largely as an unintended consequence of deregulated financial markets. With no one at a macro level ensuring that the credit risks being taken were good, individual players were simply satisfied that they were good enough for them to take their little piece and pass them on the next player in the chain.
What does the subprime mortgage mess have to do with jobs policy? Look at the jobs that have been lost in the financial sector alone and the tens of thousands more that are being swept away in the riptide of that situation.
What, you may also ask, does this have to do with the format choices of radio stations? Simply that I posit that each job lost -- even a few djs -- create costs for society and that some of those costs should go back to the organizations that choose to replace people with technology. I don't advocate being so severe as to restrict innovation or create featherbedding, but I do think that we should have tax and other policies that reward job creation and penalize job elimination (unlike the current situation where there are significant tax benefits for investing in technology rather than people).
Microeconomic logic says to keep as few employees as possible; macroeconomic logic says that the closer we are to full employment we are, the better for all of us. I'm with the macroeconomists on this one.
The format move made me think, however, about job loss and the trend across industries to shed employees wherever possible. From a microeconomic perspective, each business wants to keep its costs as low as possible and employ no more workers than it needs to create the most profit. However, each business also needs enough employed customers to buy its products and services.
The problem, as I see it, is that we have largely abandoned macroeconomic policy as it relates to employment. Under both Republican and Democratic administrations of recent years, the only two policy tools that seemed to be available have been deregulation and tax cuts. The rationale seems to be to let "1,000 micro decisions bloom" in hopes that the wisdom of crowds will be an effective substitute for actual macroeconomic policy.
Now, neither deregulation nor tax cuts are necessarily bad but you can't play 18 holes well with only a 3 wood and a 5 iron. The recent subprime mortgage mess can be seen largely as an unintended consequence of deregulated financial markets. With no one at a macro level ensuring that the credit risks being taken were good, individual players were simply satisfied that they were good enough for them to take their little piece and pass them on the next player in the chain.
What does the subprime mortgage mess have to do with jobs policy? Look at the jobs that have been lost in the financial sector alone and the tens of thousands more that are being swept away in the riptide of that situation.
What, you may also ask, does this have to do with the format choices of radio stations? Simply that I posit that each job lost -- even a few djs -- create costs for society and that some of those costs should go back to the organizations that choose to replace people with technology. I don't advocate being so severe as to restrict innovation or create featherbedding, but I do think that we should have tax and other policies that reward job creation and penalize job elimination (unlike the current situation where there are significant tax benefits for investing in technology rather than people).
Microeconomic logic says to keep as few employees as possible; macroeconomic logic says that the closer we are to full employment we are, the better for all of us. I'm with the macroeconomists on this one.
Everything's Fair Game
I started this blog to write about social enterprise and social entrepreneurship. But I am a fox, not a hedgehog and so am broadening my own charter. I will still report on and advocate for Capitalism 2.o, but that is not the only thing that will make this a Richer Earth.
So here goes -- from politics to business to film to wine -- nothing is off limits.
So here goes -- from politics to business to film to wine -- nothing is off limits.
Monday, March 10, 2008
Taking Advantage of Green?
If you've been watching TV at all recently you've probably seen the Hertz ads promoting their green fleet. Yes, you can request a hybrid when you rent a car and I decided to do just that today when putting the final touches on my preparations to head to northern California next week.
Until I discovered that a Prius (or similar) is more than $900 for the week. That's double the cost for a comparable non-hybrid. It makes me question whether Hertz cares about the envirinomental benefits of hybrids or just senses a chance to charge ultra-premium prices for a high demand vehicle.
This rental will be part business/part pleasure so I have to look at the costs. Even with gas at $4.00+ a gallon, I can't justify the Prius.
Perhaps this is just the free market. And perhaps that's the problem with free markets where cash can always trump conscience.
Until I discovered that a Prius (or similar) is more than $900 for the week. That's double the cost for a comparable non-hybrid. It makes me question whether Hertz cares about the envirinomental benefits of hybrids or just senses a chance to charge ultra-premium prices for a high demand vehicle.
This rental will be part business/part pleasure so I have to look at the costs. Even with gas at $4.00+ a gallon, I can't justify the Prius.
Perhaps this is just the free market. And perhaps that's the problem with free markets where cash can always trump conscience.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
