ABA Section of Business Law
Snap Judgments
By Heather Brewer
Too much work? Then you're happy
On-the-job boredom is apparently so common among U.S. workers that it's
become, well, boring.
In fact, more than half of employees in the United States say their minds and talents are underemployed, according to the Washington Post .
"We know that 55 percent of all U.S. employees are not engaged at work," says Gallup's Curt W. Coffman. "They are basically in a holding pattern."
Another study, however, shows that — with Homer Simpson as the possible exception — Americans are actually happier the busier they are at work.
Sirota Consulting found that employees who said they had "too much work" had a job satisfaction rating of about 57, while those with "too little work" rated job satisfaction at 49.
"Those who are saying their workload is heavier rather than lighter are more positive," says Sirota's Jeffrey M. Saltzman. "When you say you have too much to do, other things are happening in your head: 'I'm valued by the organization. They're giving me responsibility.'"
Apparently Saltzman is a very busy man at his firm.
In fact, more than half of employees in the United States say their minds and talents are underemployed, according to the Washington Post .
"We know that 55 percent of all U.S. employees are not engaged at work," says Gallup's Curt W. Coffman. "They are basically in a holding pattern."
Another study, however, shows that — with Homer Simpson as the possible exception — Americans are actually happier the busier they are at work.
Sirota Consulting found that employees who said they had "too much work" had a job satisfaction rating of about 57, while those with "too little work" rated job satisfaction at 49.
"Those who are saying their workload is heavier rather than lighter are more positive," says Sirota's Jeffrey M. Saltzman. "When you say you have too much to do, other things are happening in your head: 'I'm valued by the organization. They're giving me responsibility.'"
Apparently Saltzman is a very busy man at his firm.
You've come a long way, — uh, person
Utility regulators have come a long way, baby. Or have they?
The Chicago Tribune ran a story touting the fact that today roughly 25 percent of the 228 utility-regulation commission seats nationwide are filled by women. According to the article, that's a marked increase from the virtually all-male commissions of the 1960s.
However women comprise approximately 50 percent of the population — and consume, presumably, 50 percent of the utility services, such as electricity and telecommunications, that these commissions regulate.
Further, while Michigan State University's Institute of Public Utilities is now run by a woman, she too appears to equate progress with parity.
"I don't see too many all-male commissions any more," says institute director Jan Beecher.
Certainly these new numbers show that women have come a long way in serving on these commissions, but clearly there's a ways yet to go. Especially if anyone's still really calling them baby.
The Chicago Tribune ran a story touting the fact that today roughly 25 percent of the 228 utility-regulation commission seats nationwide are filled by women. According to the article, that's a marked increase from the virtually all-male commissions of the 1960s.
However women comprise approximately 50 percent of the population — and consume, presumably, 50 percent of the utility services, such as electricity and telecommunications, that these commissions regulate.
Further, while Michigan State University's Institute of Public Utilities is now run by a woman, she too appears to equate progress with parity.
"I don't see too many all-male commissions any more," says institute director Jan Beecher.
Certainly these new numbers show that women have come a long way in serving on these commissions, but clearly there's a ways yet to go. Especially if anyone's still really calling them baby.
Throwing dollars at India
India's financial market has grown into a two-ton elephant in the middle of
investment firms, but rather than ignoring the behemoth, foreign investors
are throwing dollars at the market's mammoth possibilities.
According to Fortune magazine, foreign investment in India hovered around $13.5 billion from March 2004 to March 2005. Further, the country's Mumbai stock exchange shot up 72 percent in the last year.
Experts say that the recent outsourcing boom lured not just overseas companies, but also overseas investors to build businesses and portfolios in India. The country's democratic government and young population — nearly half are under 25 — also have investors looking to Southeast Asia, Fortune reports.
Regardless of the reasons for the surge, indicators — such as a GDP that's growing 6 to 7 percent annually — point to the promise of more dollars flowing into India.
"As an investment, it has turned a corner," says Bhim Asdhir, who works on India investments for Ontario's Excel Funds.
According to Fortune magazine, foreign investment in India hovered around $13.5 billion from March 2004 to March 2005. Further, the country's Mumbai stock exchange shot up 72 percent in the last year.
Experts say that the recent outsourcing boom lured not just overseas companies, but also overseas investors to build businesses and portfolios in India. The country's democratic government and young population — nearly half are under 25 — also have investors looking to Southeast Asia, Fortune reports.
Regardless of the reasons for the surge, indicators — such as a GDP that's growing 6 to 7 percent annually — point to the promise of more dollars flowing into India.
"As an investment, it has turned a corner," says Bhim Asdhir, who works on India investments for Ontario's Excel Funds.
Wal-Mart beats BP
Wal-Mart, the retail chain Americans love to hate, is clearly doing
something right as the U.S.-based mega-corporation topped Fortune
magazine's Global 500 list — ranking first in revenue and in number
of employees.
With cash registers ca-chinging to the tune of $287,989,000 in 2004 — a 9.5 percent increase over 2003 — Wal-Mart topped the income list, but bested its nearest competitor, BP, by only $2 million.
In fact, even though the retail giant headed up the list, it's the solo retail chain in a top-10 dominated by oil and automobile companies. Interestingly, these fossil-fuel financial powerhouses are also finding fiscal success amid growing public protests of their business practices.
On the employment side, Wal-Mart again topped the list, employing 1.7 million people in 2004. Next in line was China National Petroleum, with 1.1 million employees.
With cash registers ca-chinging to the tune of $287,989,000 in 2004 — a 9.5 percent increase over 2003 — Wal-Mart topped the income list, but bested its nearest competitor, BP, by only $2 million.
In fact, even though the retail giant headed up the list, it's the solo retail chain in a top-10 dominated by oil and automobile companies. Interestingly, these fossil-fuel financial powerhouses are also finding fiscal success amid growing public protests of their business practices.
On the employment side, Wal-Mart again topped the list, employing 1.7 million people in 2004. Next in line was China National Petroleum, with 1.1 million employees.
Investing in China
Many in the investment community have been seeing red in recent years,
decrying increased Chinese investment in the United States even as they
feel closed out of investment opportunities in the world's most-populous
nation.
However, new numbers from Bank of America's Investment Strategies Group show that it's American investors that hold a larger stake in their overseas business ally, not vice versa.
In fact, U.S. companies had more than $15 billion invested last year in Chinese firms, while Chinese investments in U.S. businesses totaled only $314 million in 2003, according to U.S. News & World Report.
"It's no contest," says Bank of America's Joseph Quinlan. "U.S. firms enjoy an outsize investment advantage."
However, new numbers from Bank of America's Investment Strategies Group show that it's American investors that hold a larger stake in their overseas business ally, not vice versa.
In fact, U.S. companies had more than $15 billion invested last year in Chinese firms, while Chinese investments in U.S. businesses totaled only $314 million in 2003, according to U.S. News & World Report.
"It's no contest," says Bank of America's Joseph Quinlan. "U.S. firms enjoy an outsize investment advantage."
As the corrupt world turns
Corruption is in the eye of the businessperson, according to a recent
Transparency International survey that used people's perceptions to assess
the level of corruption in 159 countries. And the eyes have it that
Bangladesh and Chad are the most corrupt countries and Iceland is the
least.
After talking with businesspeople, academics and public officials about the level of corruption in the countries where they operate, Transparency International ranked countries on a corruption scale of 1 to10 — 1 meaning widespread corruption and 10 meaning almost no corruption.
Bangladesh and Chad both scored 1.7 on the scale, according to the Associated Press, while Iceland came in at 9.7.
Chad scored low marks for its lack of legal action to fight graft; Bangladesh ranked at the bottom for missteps such as the alleged loss of $68 million in state money through government corruption.
Iceland headed up the other end of the scale, followed by Finland, New Zealand, Denmark and Singapore. The United States came in at No. 17.
After talking with businesspeople, academics and public officials about the level of corruption in the countries where they operate, Transparency International ranked countries on a corruption scale of 1 to10 — 1 meaning widespread corruption and 10 meaning almost no corruption.
Bangladesh and Chad both scored 1.7 on the scale, according to the Associated Press, while Iceland came in at 9.7.
Chad scored low marks for its lack of legal action to fight graft; Bangladesh ranked at the bottom for missteps such as the alleged loss of $68 million in state money through government corruption.
Iceland headed up the other end of the scale, followed by Finland, New Zealand, Denmark and Singapore. The United States came in at No. 17.
Government out, government in
Airline deregulation may be to blame for more than 100 airlines landing in
bankruptcy in the past 30 years, Slate.com reports, so it's not surprising
that older airlines are looking to the government now to save them from
their soaring competitors.
Older airlines saddled with more higher-paid employees and beholden to retirees find their costs too high to keep prices on a par with the younger fliers — like Southwest - now that the feds are keeping their hands off ticket rates and travel routes, Slate reports.
Even though these so-called legacy airlines can't cut costs on their own, the government — in the form of a judge — can. Unlike airlines, the courts are not hamstrung by contracts and commitments and can impose new wages on unions and shift pension responsibilities to Washington. Interestingly, these court actions effectively bring the feds back into the airline biz to rectify the problems that their exit ostensibly created.
Older airlines saddled with more higher-paid employees and beholden to retirees find their costs too high to keep prices on a par with the younger fliers — like Southwest - now that the feds are keeping their hands off ticket rates and travel routes, Slate reports.
Even though these so-called legacy airlines can't cut costs on their own, the government — in the form of a judge — can. Unlike airlines, the courts are not hamstrung by contracts and commitments and can impose new wages on unions and shift pension responsibilities to Washington. Interestingly, these court actions effectively bring the feds back into the airline biz to rectify the problems that their exit ostensibly created.
Let's hear it for resiliency
Taking a global perspective on globalization gives Vivek Paul, the former
CEO of India's Wipro information technology firm, a different take on
economic issues, according to his recent comments in U.S. News &
World Report
.
According to Paul, the rapid rise in the economies of India and China is not bringing the United States down — primarily because the U.S. economic system is more resilient.
"India and China are rising because people are willing to work for less than in the United States," Paul says. "But that's not sustainable. Wages are already going up. The United States has a system that is sustainable through thick and thin."
Further, Paul says that the shifting of jobs is nothing new; it's simply that the shift overseas is so visible.
"Companies have been moving jobs around for decades," he says. "The difference is that today it's very easy for individuals to see that they have to compete with somebody elsewhere in the world."
According to Paul, the rapid rise in the economies of India and China is not bringing the United States down — primarily because the U.S. economic system is more resilient.
"India and China are rising because people are willing to work for less than in the United States," Paul says. "But that's not sustainable. Wages are already going up. The United States has a system that is sustainable through thick and thin."
Further, Paul says that the shifting of jobs is nothing new; it's simply that the shift overseas is so visible.
"Companies have been moving jobs around for decades," he says. "The difference is that today it's very easy for individuals to see that they have to compete with somebody elsewhere in the world."
