FROLITICKS

Satirical commentary on Canadian and American current political issues

Nov 21

Angry Young Males Revolt In America

by bcurry

Back in 2013, I read a very interesting book by Michael S. Kimmel entitled: “Angry White Men: American Masculinity at the End of an Era.”  In it, he described an increase in anger in the seismic economic, social and political shifts that have so transformed the American landscape among young white men.  Downward mobility, increased racial and gender equality, and a tenacious clinging to an anachronistic ideology of masculinity left many white men feeling betrayed and bewildered.  “Angry white male” is a term for white men holding conservative or right-wing views. Today, the term is often used when talking about the politics of the U.S. The term mostly refers to a group which emerged in the early 1990s. They reacted to what they thought were injustices created by “affirmative action.”  An angry white male is opposed to anti-discrimination policies (such as affirmative action) that benefit racial minorities and women.  Supporters of Donald Trump are sometimes said to largely include angry white men.  Today, one might add young Black and Hispanic men to their numbers, especially now that affirmative action is no longer in play.

Back in the 1960s, when activists pushed for laws to equalize opportunities for women, girls had been much less likely than boys to graduate from college.  However, a recent study indicated that by 2015, the situation had flipped.  Boys were much less likely than girls to make it through college and reap the premium jobs that came with degrees.  Young men were not just getting lower-paying jobs than young women, they were also more likely to leave the job market altogether.  This left many of them living with their parents and gave them lots of free time to spend on video games and in chat rooms.  One research team looked at national time-use surveys and found that young men between the ages of twenty-one and thirty spent 12 percent less time on paid work in 2015 than they had ten years earlier — a much sharper drop than was seen in any other demographic group. The newly freed-up time was spent largely in front of a computer.  The amount of time that men under thirty dedicated to video games and “recreational computer time” rose to 520 hours a year in 2015, 99 hours more than what it had been ten years earlier; a significantly greater amount of time and a sharper increase than was seen among older men and women of all ages.1

Even when it comes to investing and playing the markets on-line, young men dominate the scene, preferring to gamble in day trading in order to possibly become wealthier as well as clearly attaining a high out of risk-taking.  Normally, these men are between 20 and 30 years old and live at home with a lot of time on their hands.2  This phenomenon was particularly exasperated by the pandemic, which also continued to have negative impacts on men with respect to  the post-pandemic labour market and low wages.

The results of the American elections illustrated a clear statistical divide between more educated males and lesser educated males, with the majority of the prior supporting Kamala Harris and the latter Donald Trump.  In particular, young men in the so-call working and middle classes are unhappy with the way the economy has gone for them.  They are also still angered over what they perceive to be as unfair and unequal treatment when it comes to women, whether real or not.  This placed Harris at a clear disadvantage during the election when Democrats obviously failed to address the issue.  The Republicans used conservative social media effectively to appeal to the grievances of young working, unemployed and underemployed men.  Policies pushed by the Democrats, including reproductive rights and gender-based ones, did not appeal to most young men.

Canada is not immune to the lure of conservative policies which tend to attract young Canadian males to their political thinking, all of which will have a direct impact in the federal election expected to happen next year.  Unless there is a drastic change in the economy and labour market, one can expect a similar backlash against the current Liberal government whose social policies will no doubt be a major target by conservative groups.

1. Richard V. Reeves and Ember Smith: “Boys Left Behind: Education Gender Gaps Across the US” (The Brooking Institution, October 12, 2022)  https://www.brookings.edu/articles/boys-left-behind-education-gender-gaps-across-the-us/.

2. ”The Trolls of Wall Street (How the Outcasts and Insurgents are Hacking the Markets)”: Nathaniel Popper (HarperCollins Publishers, New York, N.Y., 2024) p. 53

Affirmative Action Conservative Political Groups Donald Trump Labor Force Presidential Election 2024 Republican Party Social Media US

Leave a comment »
Nov 27

Are Emerging Office Designs Really Enough To Encourage Return to Workplaces?

by bcurry

Recently, the New York Times published articles about what the writers referred to as the new “Envy Offices”.  The U.S. Green Building Council in recent years espoused the benefits of green buildings, including environment, economic and health and community benefits.  In other studies, various office designers declared that open-plan spaces are actually lousy for workers.  Nevertheless, in the last couple of decades, employers across industries embraced creative open floor plan offices as a way to convey their culture and attract fresh talent.  However, among employees, especially introverts, open office concepts became an increasing source of frustration as the lack of privacy, noise and other distractions made it harder for workers to concentrate.

For those of us who worked in offices where the use of cubicles was common place, the biggest issue tended to be related to poor “air quality” due to inadequate ventilation systems and the resulting volatile organic compounds captured in enclosed buildings.  Such buildings constructed during the seventies and eighties were fully enclosed and pressurized due to the focus on “energy conservation” and associated costs at the time.  As a result, it became clear that such buildings have a higher percentage of workers reporting symptoms such as irritated eyes, nose and throat, fatigue, headache and respiratory symptoms.  In 2007, a U.S. survey found that one quarter of office workers perceived indoor air-quality problems in their offices, and about 20 percent reported their work performance was hampered by air quality.  Experts suspected those figures were conservative, and I fully agree.  Employing modular office furniture, space usage was given a priority whereby a maximum number of workers were squeezed into cubicles, again further reducing air quality.  The use of cubicles also reminded people of their place in the power structure, with higher-ups typically allocated more space and enclosed offices.  People would even tussle over having a cubicle near a window, especially given bad, glare producing and predominately fluorescent lighting found in many buildings.  However, with cubicle walls one at least had the perception that one had some privacy.

Subsequent to the pandemic, all that has changed.  With more employees working remotely from home and the arrival of “hybrid working arrangements” requiring workers to be in the office a specified number of days each week, employers are having to reconsider office designs.  Open office concepts may actually offer a better alternative under current circumstances given a more itinerate workforce and the need to reduce required costly work space and associated expenditures to the employer.  Mobile technologies have greatly facilitated the use of new office designs, which did not readily exist two or three decades ago and initially were very costly.

Historically, the evolution in office designs has been governed by many different considerations over the years, most related to the perceived needs of organizational hierarchies and their priorities.  This often meant that worker needs and the impact on their health and safety were often overlooked.  Studies have shown that poor office building design and poor air quality leads to poorer productivity.  For this reason, it will be interesting to see what office designers have in store for workers in the coming years.

Hopefully, employers and office building designers can learn from their past mistakes and experiences.  Today’s younger workers may not be so forgiving.  With skilled labour shortages across North America, recruitment and retention issues are even more significant.  The first thing that a potential employee will see is the building and its interior workplace design.  With more prevalent remote working arrangements available, making the office more inviting, healthy and aesthetic has become even more important.  This will help determine how one views work and one’s relationship to it.  Think about it, when it comes to today’s workplace, where and how would you want to work?

Canada Labor Force New Technologies Remote Work Remote Work US

Leave a comment »
May 6

Child Labour Is No Longer An Issue Found Only In Third World Countries

by bcurry

In 2017, the U.S. Department of Labor released an update of its annual child labor report – representing the most comprehensive research product at that time on the state of child labour in over 130 countries worldwide.  The release included International Labor Organization (ILO) figures estimating there were still over 152 million child labourers and 25 million forced labourers worldwide.  In 2016, 23 countries, including Canada, made a significant advancement in their efforts to address child labour, more than ever before.  The former U.S. Secretary of Labor Alexander Acosta asserted that: “We must make these injustices a relic of the past.”  However, the Labor Department which is supposed to find and punish child labour violations, noted that inspectors in a dozen states said their understaffed offices could barely respond to complaints, much less open original investigations.  The same department noted dozen of cases of young migrant workers who were killed since 2017, the last year the Labor Department reported any such data.

One now has the state government of Iowa introducing a bill aimed at rolling back labour protections for children, allowing them to work longer hours and take jobs that had been previously prohibited. The measure would permit children as young as 14 to work in roofing, construction and demolition, provided they are part of educational or apprenticeship programs and a parent has granted permission for the work.  A law passed in Arkansas in March eliminated work permits and age verification requirements for workers younger than 16, and similar legislation is advancing in Missouri.  Other similar child labour proposals have been introduced in Minnesota, Ohio and Georgia.  Wisconsin legislators on Monday introduced a bill to allow children as young as 14 to serve alcohol in restaurants.

One cannot believe that Americans could justify sending 14 year olds into what are definitely considered hazardous or inappropriate workplaces, employment situations considered as too hazardous for young people in many states and countries.  For example, in Ontario, Canada, children under 14 cannot work in an industrial establishment of any kind.  Children under 15 cannot work in a factory.  Children under 16 cannot work in a logging operation, in a mine, or in construction.  We’re not talking here about delivering newspapers or helping out in a restaurant or on a farm, as long as the use machinery and tools are not included.  This does not mean that child labour doesn’t exist in Canada as recent labour standards violations and employment-related deaths and injuries have demonstrated.  Indeed, workers between the ages of 15 and 24 are more likely than any other group to suffer serious injuries, according to statistics gathered by the Workers’ Compensation Boards of Canada (WCBC).  Investigations and inquests consistently find a major cause to be the lack of proper health and safety training, especially related to younger workers.  Between 2011 and 2015, the WCBC reported that 33 young workers aged 15 to 24 died in work-related incidents.  Every year, young workers between 14 and 17 are killed or injured on the job, often in workplaces deemed to be hazardous, including roofing, construction, transportation, industrial sites, farming and forestry.

Arguing that giving 14 year olds work experience is all fine and dandy, but not when it comes to potentially risking their lives.  I have dozens of examples over the years where preventable workplace tragedies happened involving young workers, especially in hazardous workplaces.  14 year olds should be in school until such time they are mature enough to take on certain employment opportunities.  There is no place in a modern and ethical society which places children in unsafe conditions, most often for the purpose of profiteering by certain businesses.  Why should we take advantage of the desperation of some families who are living below the poverty line and receiving inadequate social assistance, especially migrant families?  If we continue to promote child labour, then we are no better than those third world countries where unfortunately it exists in large numbers.  There is no excuse to expand the use of child labour either in Canada or the U.S.!

Canada Labor Force Labour Force US

Leave a comment »
Apr 19

What Does the Acronym “DINC” Stand For, And Why Has It Resurfaced Today?

by bcurry

During the early eighties, young people who were economically struggling were putting off marriages, children and buying homes.  They represented what became known as the DINC generation, that is to say “dual income no children”.  More recently, the acronym was expanded to DINCWAG, or “dual income no children with a dog”.  The acronym has again surfaced today.

Today’s younger generation, be they millennials or Generation Z, are facing tough economic times as a result of COVID and the current inflationary situation, where high interest rates and soaring housing prices have excluded many from the market.  In addition, rents in major urban centers are at an all time high and new residential construction was greatly impacted by COVID and problems with supply management.  Even in the high-tech industries, more and more layoffs are occurring.

Since the boomer period following the Second World War, birth rates in North American have been slowly declining.  Few people are having three or more children anymore and, with more women participating in the labour market and having professional careers, women are delaying having children into their thirties and even forties.  However, despite new fertility techniques, women are often restricted to having only one child as they become biologically older.  As well, a growing number of people are deciding not to have children, citing concerns such as climate change and inequality.  One suspects from recent studies that this situation will most likely become the norm in our society.

Even Elon Musk has entered into the debate by proclaiming that ‘civilization is going to crumble’ if people don’t have more children.  Musk further added that too many “good, smart people” think there are too many people in the world and that the population is growing out of control.  What does Musk mean by ‘civilization’?  Within his assertions lies an underlying perspective that what the industrialized countries need are more people born to so-called “smart people”.  This gets a little to too close to Adolf Hitler’s obsession with ‘racial purity’ and use of the word ‘Aryan’ to describe his idea of a ‘pure German race’ whereby the ‘Aryan race’ had a duty to control the world.  There are far right extremist white groups in North America who believe that current immigration levels from so-called ‘third world’ countries are diluting the population.  They are thereby loosing their traditional white privilege status, and feel threatened.  Such groups push for white women to have more children, thereby maintaining political and economic control within the society.  Don’t even talk about interracial marriage with these folks!

Let’s get real!  The so-called DINC phenomenon has more to do with the economic realities of our times.  It’s tough to have children in an age when the costs associated with raising children in our society are much greater than in the past.  Child care is not cheap and often women or men do not have access to adequate and affordable parental leave after the birth of a child.  The higher costs of higher education alone can be a major consideration, given that most parents want their children to graduate with a degree and go on to more lucrative employment.

With the current labour shortages in several sectors, the U.S. and Canada cannot afford to not use immigration as the primary means to fill jobs with skilled labour.  These jobs include everything from agricultural workers, construction workers, truckers to workers in the services sector.  Let’s face it, the DINC phenomenon is real and one sees it in communities on a daily basis.  The phenomenon has been gradually growing and was expedited by the COVID pandemic, which in itself has had an enormous impact on the world of work in North America.  New technologies, including artificial intelligence (AI), are having a major impact and are creating a good degree of uncertainty among the younger generation.  Uncertainty is the key word.  Dealing with it will continue to be a difficult challenge for young couples today and into the near future.  Perhaps Elon Musk might want to come down from his pedestal and recognize the realities of the age in which we live.

Canada Extremist Groups Immigration Immigration Policies Labor Force Labour Force The American Dream Women's Issues

Leave a comment »
Mar 13

Work-Life Balance and Shift to More Stay-at-Home Fathers

by bcurry

One thing that the pandemic has done is to give more fathers, notably those working remotely, a chance to spend more time with their family members, especially their children.  A study by Statistics Canada in 2010 indicated that about 12 percent of stay-at-home parents were the fathers, triple the number recorded in 1986.  I would expect that many of us probably know at least one or more parenting couples where the man has stayed at home for a number of valid and rational reasons.  Often, it is the fact that the woman is in a better paying job with good health and dental benefits, as well as opportunities for advancement.  Due to changes in the labour market, data has shown that women increasingly have become the top earner in the family.  In many cases, there are considerations over the high cost of childcare, particularly where it is not subsidized by the state and where affordable and licensed childcare is lacking.  From a monetary point of view, it just doesn’t make any financial sense for both parents to work.

A survey by Harvard’s Making Caring Common project in June 2020 found that more than two-thirds of fathers said they felt closer to their children since the pandemic started.  As well, according to a Morning Consult survey for The New York Times in 2022, 47 percent of employed fathers said flexibility and control over their hours was a top priority.  This is 10 percentage points more than those who said they felt that way before the pandemic.  Recruiters are also now seeing more and more men with families who are asking about the company’s position on flexible hours and parental leave provisions.

Surprisingly, many employers still require long, inflexible hours and penalize workers for prioritizing family life.  However, what the pandemic and its impact on working conditions did is to expedite what was already a known trend in the labour market.  Working remotely has given more fathers the opportunity to share greater responsibility in household duties and childcare.  Where both parents worked, working women in the past had to do most of the household work. Now, all that has changed with the advent of new technologies and working conditions.  In many occupations in certain industries, telework and hybrid work have increasingly become the norm. 

There is little doubt that efforts to reduce the costs of childcare and ensure the quality of public and private childcare providers will result in influencing the current trends, particularly in Canada.  Recently, provincial governments signed on to a major federal initiative to increase the amount of affordable childcare spaces across the country over the next five to ten years.

Regardless, more and more fathers will be looking to their employers to accommodate having more time to spend with their families.  The issue of work-life balance is at the top of their agenda, forcing employers to adjust accordingly if they wish to retain experienced and motivated employees, both men and women.

Canada Labor Force Labour Force US Women's Issues Women's Issues

Leave a comment »
Mar 3

Employ of Children in High Risk Jobs Still Exists in North America

by bcurry

In my experience in the occupational health and safety (OHS) field at the federal level in Canada over two decades, I came across numerous examples of young people, often 13 to 17 years old, who were killed or injured on the job.  In both Canada and the U.S., labour standards legislation prescribes that young people of certain ages cannot work in employment where risks to health and safety are high — such as mining, construction, agriculture, oil and gas, roofing, meat processing, commercial baking, forestry, etc., etc.  Normally, to work in higher risk jobs, persons must be 18 or older and require more OHS training and supervision than older workers.  This is the law.  However, U.S. federal law still allows those 12 and older to work on farms for unlimited hours, as long as there is no conflict with school.  For general nonfarm work, federal law sets 14 as the minimum age and restricts work for children under 16 to eight hours a day.

Regardless, there continue to be cases where child labour is still seen in certain industries, particularly where the exposure to hazards and safety risks are clearly part of the work.  For example, in 2011 American public health experts and federal labor officials sought to bar teenagers under 16 from the tobacco fields, citing the grueling hours and the harmful exposure to nicotine and other chemicals.  However, their efforts have been continuously blocked.  Opponents of such use of child labour noted that Brazil, India and some other tobacco-producing nations already prohibit anyone under 18 from working on tobacco farms.  American agricultural organizations argued that the proposed federal rule would hurt family farms and make it harder for young people to learn farming skills. The Obama administration withdrew the the proposal in April 2012 after encountering intense opposition from farm groups and Republican lawmakers.  At the time, some big tobacco corporations however said they strongly opposed the illegal use of child labour.  Philip Morris International bans its growers from using workers under 18, a measure that goes well beyond American law. Some labour contractors, however, evidently have flouted this requirement without the growers’ knowledge.

This past week, the New York Times published an article which investigated the number of migrant children ending up in dangerous jobs that violate child labour laws — including in plants that make products for well-known brands like Cheetos and Fruit of the Loom and belong to companies supplying Hearthside Food Solutions, Walmart, Target, PepsiCo, Ben & Jerry’s, Whole Foods, Ford and General Motors.  Many of these children, 13 to 17, are falling through wide cracks in the regulatory system.  The Times noted that the growth of migrant child labour in the U.S. over the past several years is a result of a chain of wilful ignorance.  Companies ignore the young faces in their back rooms and on their factory floors.  Schools often decline to report apparent labour violations, believing it will hurt children more than help.  And the Department of Health and Human Services, responsible for ensuring sponsors will support these children and protect them from trafficking or exploitation, behaves as if the migrant children who melt unseen into the country are doing just fine.  Too many people are turning a blind eye!

Some of these children will actually die on the job.  For example, the Times reported that recent deaths included a 14-year-old food delivery worker who was hit by a car while on his bike at a Brooklyn intersection; a 16-year-old who was crushed under a 35-ton tractor-scraper outside Atlanta; and a 15-year-old who fell 50 feet from a roof in Alabama where he was laying down shingles.  Over the years, I found numerous examples of young people (13 to 17) in Canada being killed while in higher-risk employment.  Many more have been injured on the job, often seriously.

Of equal concern is that the evident use of migrant children by scurrilous businesses has led to increased child trafficking in the U.S.  Traffickers bring in migrant children illegally, give them fake I.D.s and find them businesses willing to turn a blind eye and employ them.  This is all being done despite the knowledge and oversight of several federal, state and local authorities.  Finally, after several media investigative sources raised this issue, the Biden administration just announced a wide crackdown on the labour exploitation of migrant children, including more aggressive investigations of companies benefiting from their work and the larger companies that have child labour in their supply chains.  In addition, Congress needs to increase penalties for child labour violations, which may now be occurring in the thousands.  Federal investigators have long complained that the maximum fine for violations — about $15,000 per occurrence — is hardly enough to deter child labour.  It’s about time that something concrete may be done!

Canada Labor Force Labour Force US

Leave a comment »
Jan 18

How Immigration Must Play More Significant Role When It Comes To Future Labour Force

by bcurry

Recently, reports are coming out of China that since the Communist Party took power, China’s population has started to level off.  Soon, India will surpass China in terms of population and population growth.  Much of the Chinese population decline was of course due to deliberate policies by governments, including the previous one-child policy, aimed at lowering its overall population growth.  However, such policies, while effective, have led to major concerns over future labour shortages due to low birth rates and an aging population.  It is reported that by 2035, 400 million people in China are expected to be over 60, accounting for nearly a third of its population.  Whether or not the government can provide widespread access to elder care, medical services and a stable stream of income later in life will also affect a long-held assumption that the Communist Party can provide a better life for its people.  In the case of China, few believe that its restrictive immigration policies will help out in the short-term.

What do these predictions have to do with the North American scene?  The fact of the matter is that both Canada and the U.S. are also facing issues surrounding aging populations, lower fertility rates and their subsequent impact on the labour market and social safety nets.  Simply put, in order to maintain a population via the annual birth rate, one needs to have at least two children born to each couple.  This is referred to as the replacement rate.  In 2020, Canada’s total fertility rate hit a record low.  In addition, in Canada more than nine million baby boomers are set to retire over the next decade, creating a potential labour shortage that, if unchecked, could raise health-care costs, upend pension payments and halt the country’s economic growth.  The current population of Canada is estimated at less than 40 million.  As the population ages, the median age had climbed steadily from 26.2 in 1971 to 41.1 in 2021, a trend observed in many advanced economies including the U.S.

This is why both Canada and the U.S. will continue to rely on immigrants to augment future labour forces.  Restricting immigration for political reasons, such as occurred under President Trump’s administration, will backfire when it comes to the rate of population growth.  Until recently, natural change — births minus deaths — had always been the primary driver of growth in Canada and the U.S.  However, even before the pandemic hit, these aging nations were already experiencing a decline in fertility and increase in deaths.  This is partly why Canada welcomed over 405,000 newcomers in 2021 – the most ever welcomed in a single year. The Federal Government is continuing its ambitious immigration policy by setting targets in the new levels plan of 465,000 permanent residents in 2023, 485,000 in 2024 and 500,000 in 2025. 

However, there is one exception in Canada when it comes to increasing immigration.  According to recent data, the province of Quebec is taking a dwindling share of immigrants to Canada.  Under an agreement between the federal government and Quebec, Quebec controls the number of economic immigrants it takes each year.  In 2022, Quebec brought in roughly 15.7 percent of permanent immigrants to Canada, despite the province representing nearly 23 percent of Canada’s population.  Quebec’s current immigration policy is primarily based on its desire to have immigrants who are capable of living and working in French, Quebec’s official language.  The province’s Immigration Minister, Christine Fréchette, has stated that Quebec has to limit immigration to French speakers to protect the French language.  The minister further made it clear that the province won’t be boosting levels anytime soon.  However, strong opposition to this policy has surfaced within certain key sectors within Quebec, notably within business sectors which already are dealing with labour shortages.  For example, the Quebec Manufacturers and Exporters association said the province desperately needs these newcomers because there are labour shortages everywhere.  The association estimates that some $7 billion (Canadian) in manufacturing output that could have taken place last year was sidelined due to current labour shortages.

As in the case of China, the Quebec provincial government has implemented several schemes to encourage Quebecers to have more children, however with little notable success.  In both cases, government handouts like cash for babies and tax cuts, have failed to change the underlying fact that many young people simply do not want children.  Fertility rates continue to fall as incomes rise and education levels increase, and more women are participating in the labour force.  Other factors have contributed to the reluctance to have more children; including the burden that many younger adults face in taking care of aging parents and grandparents, the high costs of raising and educating children, and the increase in the number of working couples in order to make ends meet.  For these reasons, countries have fewer options other than increasing immigration to offset their aging populations and maintain their standards of living.

Canada Immigration Immigration Policies Labor Force Labour Force US

Leave a comment »
Jan 6

Flexible Working Aimed At Improving Work-Life Balance Is Making A Comeback

by bcurry

For the last two decades I have been following workplace trends toward flexible working arrangements offered by employers and the resulting pros and cons.  Now, the issue has once again raised its head as a result of discussions around post-pandemic alternative working conditions, including remote work or various hybrid arrangements.  The Great Recession of 2008 caused a lot of employers to consider alternate and more flexible working arrangements for their employees so as to better retain the most critical members of their workforce.  Struggling to survive the economic downturn, the need for increased productivity became greater than ever, which made it the perfect time for companies to introduce smarter working practices.  In a 2009 survey of 400 employers by the Families and Work Institute in New York found that 81 percent had maintained flexible work arrangements such as telecommuting, compressed workweeks, phased retirement and voluntary reduced hours.  Among companies with 1,000 or more workers, 37 percent used flexible work arrangements to minimize layoffs. 

As one can see, the idea of flexible working arrangements is not a new concept.  If anything, interest in promoting work-life balance has increased as a result of the pandemic’s impact on work and the labour force.  A recent report by the International Labour Organization (ILO) concludes that giving workers flexibility in terms of where and when they work can be win-win for both employees and businesses.  The ILO report further concludes that flexible work schedules can improve workers’ job satisfaction, performance and commitment to an organization — thereby reducing recruitment costs and increasing productivity.

“Flexibility” is now the new magic word for recruiters, and for good rationale as flexibility (or lack thereof) is consistently one of the biggest reasons employees cite for staying or leaving a job.  While pay continues to be paramount for most people, in the current environment companies need to find new ways to distinguish themselves as an employer of choice.  Unfortunately, there are still some employers who fail to see the benefits of offering flexible work arrangements in an era when new technologies better facilitate such opportunities, including remote or hybrid forms of work.  For example, the Canadian federal government recently mandated a policy requiring workers this coming spring to work at least two to three days a week in person, or between 40 to 60 percent of their regular schedule.  This employer is saying that in-person work better supports collaboration, team spirit, innovation and a culture of belonging.  While the federal Treasury Board is arguing that the employer has the right to determine where employees work, several federal unions are going to the courts to argue against the policy.  This has angered thousands of employees who currently have flexible working arrangements, especially as they are currently in contract negotiations.  However, I believe that the primary drive behind this employer’s decision has more to do with management’s continuing distrust in not having in-person accountability and supervision, believing other arrangements negatively affect productivity.

However, most experts agree that, in what continues to be a tough economic climate, empowering employees with the right tools and working environment will have numerous flow-on benefits; including improved customer service, retaining talent, ultimately giving the business a significant competitive advantage.  Most experts would agree that giving workers flexibility in terms of where and when they work can be win-win for both employees and businesses.  The above noted ILO report echoes the findings of many other recent studies and surveys.  While salary, benefits and work security have historically topped the list of sought-after incentives, multiple post-pandemic polls have found workers, especially women, increasingly prioritizing work-life balance.  The main question now is whether or not employers can really afford to not seriously consider promoting work-life balance through greater flexible working conditions?

Canada Labor Force Labour Force US

Leave a comment »
Nov 14

Recent Layoffs Among White-Collar Workers and CEOs Can’t Stop Saying Sorry

by bcurry

Last August a survey was released by consultant PwC which polled more than 700 U.S. executives and board members across a range of industries.  It found that half of respondents said they’re reducing headcount or plan to, and 52 percent had implemented hiring freezes.  The projected layoffs were seen to especially hit the high tech and financial sectors, primarily among middle- and lower-management.  Since rising interest rates in March resulted in home sales slowing to a crawl, there have also been widespread cuts for realtors, mortgage brokers and appraisers.  Unlike blue-collar workers where there is a current shortage of labour, most analysts would agree that this particular round of layoffs will have its greatest impact among white-collar workers.

As of today, forecasted layoffs in significant numbers are happening across the U.S. and Canada.  Many are occurring among some of our largest employers, including for example: Meta Platform Inc., Netflix Inc., Shopify, Wayfair Inc., Oracle Corp, and Apple Inc.  Walmart Inc., Ford Motor Co., Gap Inc., Zillow Group Inc. and Stanley Black & Decker Inc. also announced they plan to cut jobs at their head offices.  Of course, Elon Musk, following his purchase of the company, leads the way with his recent announcement that half of Twitter’s workforce is being dismissed.  These are all companies that did well during the pandemic, notably because of the growth in on-line sales and business.  However, now that the pandemic is coming to an end and interest rates are rising and stock price valuations are in decline, the boom appears to be over.  Thousands upon thousands are being laid off, largely because of massive hiring during the pandemic itself and management’s misreading of the markets.

The layoffs couldn’t have come at a worst time for white-collar workers given that the labour market today is extremely tight, with about 1.9 available jobs for every unemployed person.  What is interesting, many CEOs are openly expressing regret by stating that the situation is largely their fault.  They obviously recognize that they’ll probably need to hire back some of the talented and skilled people they laid off, and could be positioning themselves to recruit again when the recovery comes.  This is being done out of self-interest and to maintain a good product name.  At the same time, about two-thirds of firms surveyed are boosting pay or expanding mental-health benefits, largely to retain the remaining workers.  The most common move is making remote work permanent for more people.  For this reason, many CEOs are trying to appear to initiate the layoffs in as humane way as possible.

Otherwise, just saying you’re sorry is not enough!  There will obviously be a need to keep doors open once the economy recovers.  One question will be the nature of employment and the workplace down the road.  While replacing blue-collar workers with robotics for example is increasingly a concern, the advent of the greater use of artificial intelligence will be an issue for white-collar workers.  For example, Deutsche Bank’s CEO John Cryan hinted in 2017 that half its workers could be replaced by machines.  According to a survey in the same year by Greenwich Associates, around 75% of financial firms were intending to either explore or implement artificial intelligence technologies.  Among Canada’s five big banks, there are artificial intelligence-powered chatbots that now interact with customers through a bank’s digital channels — online, mobile and social media, and programmable software bots perform administrative tasks such as processing mortgage applications.  These virtual machines are already being tasked with some heavy lifting.

Otherwise, no one’s job is guaranteed to be safe now or in the future, including many of today’s white-collar jobs.  There is little doubt that, as more permanent cost cutting measures occur, companies will be looking to enhance their productivity and lower labour costs through the use of new technologies.  There is no profession or field of employment that is safe anymore.  The fact that CEOs are currently letting go so many white-collar workers, may also offer them an opportune time to look at new replacement strategies.  I wonder if CEOS like Elon Musk will continue to say ‘sorry’?

Labor Force Labour Force Reopening the Economy

Leave a comment »
Oct 27

Women Still Cannot Break Corporate Glass Ceilings

by bcurry

Yes it takes time for more women to reach leadership positions in companies, even though more and more qualified women are entering business management fields.  One human resource expert in 2011 referred to the so-called infamous glass ceiling as being more of a brick ceiling.  Yes, there are more women in senior management than ever before.  However, proportionately, they still are under-represented as to their numbers in businesses in general.  Back in 2020, Bloomberg News reported that women held more than a quarter of the board seats at S&P 500 companies for the first time, a significant gain.  It was also reported at the time that, according to Catalyst which follows labour market trends, there now were 32 women leading S&P 500 companies.  Increasingly although at a snail’s pace, more women are now holding the top finance jobs (e.g. Chief Financial Officers) at large U.S. companies, despite the fact that companies continue to have fewer women in operational roles.

What is disheartening in 2022, Bloomberg News reports that women are leaving the top ranks of companies at higher rates than ever before — as female employees remain less likely to get promoted into leadership roles in the first place.  According to a new McKinsey & Co. and LeanIn.org report, for every woman at the director level who gets promoted, two female directors are choosing to leave their company.  Bloomberg notes that while women have long been at a disadvantage in the workplace, many of problems have been further exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic.  For example, a lack of affordable childcare has contributed to more women leaving the workforce than men in recent years.  A gender pay gap, which had been narrowing, also stalled during the pandemic.  Furthermore, those in the highest ranks of their organizations are re-evaluating — because of a lack of advancement opportunities, flexibility or unequal treatment or a combination of these and other factors.  Many of the factors were once again particularly true for women representing visible minority groups, such as women of colour.  Women of colour continue to represent far fewer women promoted to a manager role from entry-level when compared to women in general.  This is further complicated by the fact that there are still simply fewer women in upper management at most companies to be promoted.

McKinsey and LeanIn reported also that the pandemic affected women in other ways, in particular those related to remote work and work-life balance, especially where children are involved.  They found that only one in ten female employees want to work from the office most of the time.  The summary of their report said “many” women call hybrid work schedules a key reason for joining or sticking with an employer.  LeanIn CEO Rachel Thomas points out that: “Women are not breaking up with work, they are breaking up with companies who are not delivering the work culture and the opportunity and the flexibility that’s so critically important to them”.

Women have made some strides to break the glass ceiling in recent years.  According to a 2014 report by Reuters, for the first time more than half of 4,000 corporations worldwide reported boards with 10 percent or more female members.  However, it is noted that for all the progress that’s been made, male CEOs and board members still vastly outnumber women. 

All in all, it appears that the pandemic has stalled the steady progression which promoted more and more qualified women to senior management and corporate board positions.  Most governments in the U.S. and Canada have made it clear that the current situation is still unacceptable.  At all levels of government, most have promoted women to leadership and judicial positions, cabinet portfolios, and have attempted to encourage more women to run for political office.  On the other hand, as one author noted, the inability to recruit and retain women in the corporate arena could be disastrous for businesses.  This is not hyperbole, especially when women now make up the majority of university grads and most plan to enter the labour force upon graduation.  Yes, frustration has set in and rightly so.  Paying lip service and tokenism are no longer an option!  At this time, what one has is only a crack in the glass ceiling!

Canada Labor Force Labour Force US Women's Issues Women's Issues

Leave a comment »
«Older Entries
Blog at WordPress.com.