I always thought that birthdays were important until, say, age 21. After that, achieving a decade might be worth a party. I am just a little embarrassed when non-family members know it is my birthday, except for the free car wash at Scrub-a-Dub.
Recently it became unavoidable for me to acknowledge that it was my 68th birthday. I find this pretty remarkable. I never thought I would get this old. More startling is the actuaries projection that a white male in the US who lives to be 68 has an average of 14.9 years of life left.
The realization that I might exist another 15 or so years is troubling. Do I have enough money? What will I do? Where will I live? Will I remain upright? Will I develop a hump?
Friends dutifully wish me a happy birthday; I smile and say thank you, but really I would just as soon have it pass un-noticed by the rest of you, unless of course you were thinking of sending me some single malt scotch.
6/25/2010
There Will be Blood
According to news reports, about two million French workers walked off their jobs yesterday to protest the government plan to increase retirement ages for pension eligibility. The plan that is being proposed is to raise the minimum retirement age from 60 to 62, to take effect in 2018.
The issue for the government is of course money. Back in the good old (French socialist Party) days, there were 7 people working for every pension recipient. By 2018 there will be only 1.1 people working for every collector of pension money. The government rightly recognizes that this is an unsustainable equation.
But the unions are determined to block any reforms. So they are whipping up the masses to make a big show of solidarity against the government by inconveniencing everyone. Another reason to think twice before spending one's travel dollars in a place where trains and planes may or may not be running at any given time.
Workers in Greece recently rebelled with violence at the austerity measures being instituted by the government in the face of financial meltdown. One of the changes involved raising the retirement age to 63.
Recently, we have even seen worker strikes in China. Perhaps the Chinese are allowing textile workers to strike in a shrewd strategy of moving their low-paying jobs out of China to even lower cost countries such as India. The Chinese may see the demand for higher wages as a way to drive away the low-end business and to shift their workforce to work in more lucrative higher tech products, so they can compete for the higher-end markets.
The labor unrest in France and other parts of Europe are probably precursors to future troubles here in the USA. The steady rise in the standard of living for workers in Western economies has set a fairly high bar for wage and benefit expectations. The labor costs were sustainable in a boom period, but as we have seen, the principal response of business to hard times is to slash costs. This is manifested in shifts to lower-cost suppliers (ie, places where workers are paid less lavishly) and reductions in the size of the workforce.
In the USA we have a large overpaid work force. The successes of organized labor in getting generous benefits for the rank and file have raised both expectations and costs to an unsustainable level. Many of the jobs that were lost during the most recent recession will not come back. How long can we afford to pay unemployment benefits to specialized workers whose jobs have permanently gone to China or India ? Can the entitlement promises by progressives be funded by simply taxing the hell out of the rich?
History and a study of human nature shows that you can't take something away without a tough fight. Unfortunately, I fear that there will be blood.
The issue for the government is of course money. Back in the good old (French socialist Party) days, there were 7 people working for every pension recipient. By 2018 there will be only 1.1 people working for every collector of pension money. The government rightly recognizes that this is an unsustainable equation.
But the unions are determined to block any reforms. So they are whipping up the masses to make a big show of solidarity against the government by inconveniencing everyone. Another reason to think twice before spending one's travel dollars in a place where trains and planes may or may not be running at any given time.
Workers in Greece recently rebelled with violence at the austerity measures being instituted by the government in the face of financial meltdown. One of the changes involved raising the retirement age to 63.
Recently, we have even seen worker strikes in China. Perhaps the Chinese are allowing textile workers to strike in a shrewd strategy of moving their low-paying jobs out of China to even lower cost countries such as India. The Chinese may see the demand for higher wages as a way to drive away the low-end business and to shift their workforce to work in more lucrative higher tech products, so they can compete for the higher-end markets.
The labor unrest in France and other parts of Europe are probably precursors to future troubles here in the USA. The steady rise in the standard of living for workers in Western economies has set a fairly high bar for wage and benefit expectations. The labor costs were sustainable in a boom period, but as we have seen, the principal response of business to hard times is to slash costs. This is manifested in shifts to lower-cost suppliers (ie, places where workers are paid less lavishly) and reductions in the size of the workforce.
In the USA we have a large overpaid work force. The successes of organized labor in getting generous benefits for the rank and file have raised both expectations and costs to an unsustainable level. Many of the jobs that were lost during the most recent recession will not come back. How long can we afford to pay unemployment benefits to specialized workers whose jobs have permanently gone to China or India ? Can the entitlement promises by progressives be funded by simply taxing the hell out of the rich?
History and a study of human nature shows that you can't take something away without a tough fight. Unfortunately, I fear that there will be blood.
6/17/2010
BP: Cares about small people
Well, today a lot of people seem to have their panties in a bunch because of a stray comment by BP chairman Carl-Henric Svanberg, who is Swedish. He told reporters. "I hear comments sometimes that large oil companies are greedy companies or don't care. But that is not the case with BP. We care about the small people."
Clearly, the guy was not intending to insult or demean the good citizens of Louisiana, nor was he showing a preference for midgets and dwarfs. He was trying to show some humanity in the face of anger and disappointment. The translation did not go so well, but a fair-minded person might have expected the faux pas to pass with barely a twitter. Maybe a mention on the Leno show.
But it evoked memories of the lordly attitude of Leona Helmsley who famously said, "We don't pay taxes. Only the little people pay taxes...," She was sent to prison for tax evasion shortly thereafter.
But I think this "small people" remark is a case of "lost in translation" more than an imperial attitude. Now the media is spilling more oil on the fire by focusing on the outrage of a few nitwits and attention whores. Now the guy has to apologize again. Besides setting aside $20 billion to cover the costs of the damages to people and property in the area.
The hyenas are rushing to the kill, but we should keep in mind that if BP is driven into bankruptcy all the people with claims will just have to get in line and divide-up a much smaller pie. It will be heaven for lawyers regardless of their stature.
I am sick of this story, aren't there some wars going on somewhere?
Clearly, the guy was not intending to insult or demean the good citizens of Louisiana, nor was he showing a preference for midgets and dwarfs. He was trying to show some humanity in the face of anger and disappointment. The translation did not go so well, but a fair-minded person might have expected the faux pas to pass with barely a twitter. Maybe a mention on the Leno show.
But it evoked memories of the lordly attitude of Leona Helmsley who famously said, "We don't pay taxes. Only the little people pay taxes...," She was sent to prison for tax evasion shortly thereafter.
But I think this "small people" remark is a case of "lost in translation" more than an imperial attitude. Now the media is spilling more oil on the fire by focusing on the outrage of a few nitwits and attention whores. Now the guy has to apologize again. Besides setting aside $20 billion to cover the costs of the damages to people and property in the area.
The hyenas are rushing to the kill, but we should keep in mind that if BP is driven into bankruptcy all the people with claims will just have to get in line and divide-up a much smaller pie. It will be heaven for lawyers regardless of their stature.
I am sick of this story, aren't there some wars going on somewhere?
6/08/2010
Work Lessons - Overcoming Fear
The underlying theme of this journal has been about work. I used to dignify my opinions as a "Search for the meaning of work in our lives." During my actual working days, the topics were almost always generated by examples of universal work experiences and attitudes which I encountered in-person or through reading.
Since my "escape" from the working world, and the hellholes that some people call The Office, I have occasionally strayed into social and political commentary - much to the chagrin of some fans who have politely assured me that the Internet is chock full of opinions - by writers/thinkers who are better suited to the role of pundit than I. Well, that may be so.
A couple of years ago, I stopped looking for full-time work because I simply do not have time to devote 40 or more hours to a workaday job, nor the patience to suffer the indignities of commuting, status reports, staff meetings and periodic performance reviews by nitpicking micromanagers. But I have not given up thinking about the importance of work.
Many of the young people I know are obsessed with insecurity about their jobs. This is nothing new. During my career, I knew many workers who were working under the stressful assumption that someone would fire them if they did not get this status report done by two PM on Friday, or if they made a mistake they would be terminated.
In all that time I cannot recall even one person being terminated for making a mistake, or even for being incompetent. Most people who got fired (including me) were sacked because the boss didn't like them. Fortunately for me, I had the experience of being fired early in my career - by a Napoleonic tyrant who literally screamed at his subordinates - complete with red face and veins popping out of his forehead - when something did not go his way.
One day after I had had enough of his ultra Nazis managerial techniques I privately informed him that I was planning to seek a transfer to another department. The next day he called me in and fired me. He told me that my loyalty was a question mark and besides he needed someone who was better at statistics.
Fired. My worst fears were realized, and strangely enough, it didn't feel so bad. The previous day I was in a hopeless situation, feeling trapped with virtually no way out. Now, suddenly, I was free. I suddenly realized that I had been in a box of my own making. Now it seemed that there was a whole world of better possibilities in front of me - a chance to get out from under a nutcase and to move-on.
When I look back I realize that I owe a debt of gratitude to that insane boss who fired me, because he actually freed me from the paralyzing fear of being fired, (i.e., failure) by forcing me to deal with it.
It took that wrongful act of getting sacked that made me see that a hellhole is not a prison. I had always had the power to escape that miserable situation. No one was forcing me and the others to take the abuse of an unreasonable boss. It was our own mindset that kept us shackled. The point here is that fear can be paralyzing and blind us to simple solutions, and escapes.
Later on in my career, I became virtually fearless about getting fired. But, some of my evil bosses would devise a much more fiendish torture for me: Micromanagement - making the working conditions of the job so agonizing that I would fire myself and quit.
This happened more than once. I never worried about getting another job in those days. I always figured that there were millions of places to work and I would always find one that would see me as an asset.
(Nowadays, even with the recession starting to ease, there are still many millions unemployed I would probably put up with more BS than I would at full employment. So much for overcoming fear, eh? The key to being brave is the perception that you have options.)
Since my "escape" from the working world, and the hellholes that some people call The Office, I have occasionally strayed into social and political commentary - much to the chagrin of some fans who have politely assured me that the Internet is chock full of opinions - by writers/thinkers who are better suited to the role of pundit than I. Well, that may be so.
A couple of years ago, I stopped looking for full-time work because I simply do not have time to devote 40 or more hours to a workaday job, nor the patience to suffer the indignities of commuting, status reports, staff meetings and periodic performance reviews by nitpicking micromanagers. But I have not given up thinking about the importance of work.
Many of the young people I know are obsessed with insecurity about their jobs. This is nothing new. During my career, I knew many workers who were working under the stressful assumption that someone would fire them if they did not get this status report done by two PM on Friday, or if they made a mistake they would be terminated.
In all that time I cannot recall even one person being terminated for making a mistake, or even for being incompetent. Most people who got fired (including me) were sacked because the boss didn't like them. Fortunately for me, I had the experience of being fired early in my career - by a Napoleonic tyrant who literally screamed at his subordinates - complete with red face and veins popping out of his forehead - when something did not go his way.
One day after I had had enough of his ultra Nazis managerial techniques I privately informed him that I was planning to seek a transfer to another department. The next day he called me in and fired me. He told me that my loyalty was a question mark and besides he needed someone who was better at statistics.
Fired. My worst fears were realized, and strangely enough, it didn't feel so bad. The previous day I was in a hopeless situation, feeling trapped with virtually no way out. Now, suddenly, I was free. I suddenly realized that I had been in a box of my own making. Now it seemed that there was a whole world of better possibilities in front of me - a chance to get out from under a nutcase and to move-on.
When I look back I realize that I owe a debt of gratitude to that insane boss who fired me, because he actually freed me from the paralyzing fear of being fired, (i.e., failure) by forcing me to deal with it.
It took that wrongful act of getting sacked that made me see that a hellhole is not a prison. I had always had the power to escape that miserable situation. No one was forcing me and the others to take the abuse of an unreasonable boss. It was our own mindset that kept us shackled. The point here is that fear can be paralyzing and blind us to simple solutions, and escapes.
Later on in my career, I became virtually fearless about getting fired. But, some of my evil bosses would devise a much more fiendish torture for me: Micromanagement - making the working conditions of the job so agonizing that I would fire myself and quit.
This happened more than once. I never worried about getting another job in those days. I always figured that there were millions of places to work and I would always find one that would see me as an asset.
(Nowadays, even with the recession starting to ease, there are still many millions unemployed I would probably put up with more BS than I would at full employment. So much for overcoming fear, eh? The key to being brave is the perception that you have options.)
6/01/2010
Some Jobs may not come back
A recent news item says that many of the jobs that were lost during the recession may be gone forever. The report says that corporations have "found ways to be productive with less." Being productive with less might lead us to infer that the survivors of the massive job cuts of recent years have been forced to work harder to take-up the slack.
As one who spent a few decades wandering around some pretty successful corporate hallways, I find this conclusion both naive and dubious. Productivity in the Corporate world has never been a function of employee headcount. People are inferior to machines in this regard. It is reasonable to assume that a piece of machinery can produce a measurable and predictable output of product withing a given span of time. Ten identical machines should yield ten times the output. People are not so easy to measure.
The well-recognized truth about the way humans behave in organizations is expressed by the so-called "Pareto Principle" or more commonly, the 80/20 rule. The economist Pareto's observation was that 80% of the wealth is owned by 20% of the people. This perception of reality has extended itself to other observations - how long it takes to complete tasks, the participation of students in a classroom, etc. Basically 80% of any result can be ascribed to 20% of activity. In the business context, 80% of the work is done by 20% of the staff.
Back in the 80's, at my company, one of my bosses had an interesting variation on this phenomenon. He called it "Ziff's Law"*. He reasoned that - instead of perfection (100%), which takes 100% of the time - we should aim at something less than perfection (eg, 80% of the requirement). The beauty of this approach was that we could do 5 times as many jobs. since each job would only take 1/5 of the time.
This was business application software development. Order Processing, Invoicing, Receivables, Reporting. Pretty important functions in any company. However, the part of the new system design that always got cut was the "ease of use" interface pieces of the design, which was always the most time-consuming element for computer programmers.
Of course, the users hated the products we designed and delivered to them. The unfriendly interfaces caused them to make errors and stressed them out. The manual fixes from yesterday's errors took all morning to resubmit, Instead of fixing the system, our technical management would go to the users management and convince them that the complainers were incompetent - and that doing the 100% job would be too costly. Somehow functional business managers were convinced (or cowed) into submission.
So, none of the jobs ever got done according to the original users specifications (which took about 20% of the alloted project time to write). Nothing worked the way it was supposed to work, and everything we did was what they called FUBAR.
This is the difference between theory and practice. We were very productive from the measure of lines of code produced, but we did not make the business run better and often we made it worse. The part of the aforementioned article that I agree with, says that many of the retail/service jobs are gone forever because the customers have disappeared. For example: Hardly anybody goes to the store in the mall to purchase DVD's anymore. Mortgage agents have gone away with the dearth of qualified home buyers. And then there is the self-service sector which effectively puts clerks, toll-takers, film developers, video store employees, gas station attendants and bank tellers out of a job - just to name a few.
History indicates that there will be plenty of jobs when things pick-up again. New things are always percolating up the marketing food chain. Until a few years ago, you never heard of Kindle or Blu-Ray or IPhone, Goji berries, Teavana.
The economy continually cycles between full employment and prosperity and recession. Some jobs are lost in the dust. But there will always be always new jobs that did not previously exist.
=============================
* Probably a reference to Harvard linguist G.K. Zipf who authored "Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort."
As one who spent a few decades wandering around some pretty successful corporate hallways, I find this conclusion both naive and dubious. Productivity in the Corporate world has never been a function of employee headcount. People are inferior to machines in this regard. It is reasonable to assume that a piece of machinery can produce a measurable and predictable output of product withing a given span of time. Ten identical machines should yield ten times the output. People are not so easy to measure.
The well-recognized truth about the way humans behave in organizations is expressed by the so-called "Pareto Principle" or more commonly, the 80/20 rule. The economist Pareto's observation was that 80% of the wealth is owned by 20% of the people. This perception of reality has extended itself to other observations - how long it takes to complete tasks, the participation of students in a classroom, etc. Basically 80% of any result can be ascribed to 20% of activity. In the business context, 80% of the work is done by 20% of the staff.
Back in the 80's, at my company, one of my bosses had an interesting variation on this phenomenon. He called it "Ziff's Law"*. He reasoned that - instead of perfection (100%), which takes 100% of the time - we should aim at something less than perfection (eg, 80% of the requirement). The beauty of this approach was that we could do 5 times as many jobs. since each job would only take 1/5 of the time.
This was business application software development. Order Processing, Invoicing, Receivables, Reporting. Pretty important functions in any company. However, the part of the new system design that always got cut was the "ease of use" interface pieces of the design, which was always the most time-consuming element for computer programmers.
Of course, the users hated the products we designed and delivered to them. The unfriendly interfaces caused them to make errors and stressed them out. The manual fixes from yesterday's errors took all morning to resubmit, Instead of fixing the system, our technical management would go to the users management and convince them that the complainers were incompetent - and that doing the 100% job would be too costly. Somehow functional business managers were convinced (or cowed) into submission.
So, none of the jobs ever got done according to the original users specifications (which took about 20% of the alloted project time to write). Nothing worked the way it was supposed to work, and everything we did was what they called FUBAR.
This is the difference between theory and practice. We were very productive from the measure of lines of code produced, but we did not make the business run better and often we made it worse. The part of the aforementioned article that I agree with, says that many of the retail/service jobs are gone forever because the customers have disappeared. For example: Hardly anybody goes to the store in the mall to purchase DVD's anymore. Mortgage agents have gone away with the dearth of qualified home buyers. And then there is the self-service sector which effectively puts clerks, toll-takers, film developers, video store employees, gas station attendants and bank tellers out of a job - just to name a few.
History indicates that there will be plenty of jobs when things pick-up again. New things are always percolating up the marketing food chain. Until a few years ago, you never heard of Kindle or Blu-Ray or IPhone, Goji berries, Teavana.
The economy continually cycles between full employment and prosperity and recession. Some jobs are lost in the dust. But there will always be always new jobs that did not previously exist.
=============================
* Probably a reference to Harvard linguist G.K. Zipf who authored "Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)