Author: Staff (Page 12 of 28)

Manufacturing and union jobs

Here’s an interesting article that frames the growth in manufacturing activity in the context of union jobs.

Last July was a good month for factory workers in Anderson, Ind., where a Honda parts supplier announced plans to build a new plant and create up to 325 jobs. But it was a grim month in the Cleveland suburbs, where an industrial plastics firm told the state of Ohio it was closing a plant and laying off 150 people.

Nearly all of the Ohio workers belonged to a labor union. Workers at the Indiana plant don’t. Their fates fit a post-recession pattern: American factories are hiring again, but they’re not hiring union members.

U.S. manufacturers have added a half-million new workers since the end of 2009, making the sector one of the few bright spots in an otherwise weak recovery. And yet there were 4 percent fewer union factory workers in 2012 than there were in 2010, according to federal survey data. On balance, all of the job gains in manufacturing have been non-union.

The trend underscores a central conundrum in the “manufacturing renaissance” that President Obama loves to tout as an economic accomplishment: The new manufacturing jobs are different from the ones that delivered millions of American workers a ticket to the middle class over the past half-century.

There’s definitely a trend to avoid union shops on the part of manufacturers. Frankly, many unions overstepped their mission with ridiculous work rules, and many resources were used to protect the few workers who abused the system.

Now, in tougher economic times and high unemployment, the leverage is just gone for many unions.

Why Protecting Your Online Reputation is Important


Free image courtesy of FreeDigitalPhotos.net

The Internet has changed the way that we communicate with each other and how we perceive each other as well. To some people, the Internet exists as its own world that does not affect the events that take place in the outside world. But the information on the Internet can have a significant effect on your personal reputation and how you are treated by strangers, as well as the people you have known for years. It is extremely important to protect your online reputation and ensure that what is being said about you is true.

Internet Information Doesn’t Fade

Prior to the Internet, people who made mistakes would pay for those mistakes and then wait for those mistakes to be forgotten. But on the Internet, information stays indexed forever and can be found by anyone willing to do an Internet search. If someone tells a lie on the Internet about you now, then that lie will be around 10 years from now unless you take action to get rid of that lie.

Anonymous Sources

When someone spreads a rumor outside of the Internet, it can often be easier to attach their name to the rumor by tracing it back to its source. The Internet allows people to post information and remain completely anonymous. Complete websites can be created to spread lies about you, and the person could remain anonymous. Experts like Reputation CEO Michael Fertik can help to find those anonymous sources and put an end to the rumors.

Why Should You Care?

Lies created and spread to ruin your personal reputation can cause problems in your personal life as well as your professional life. If someone in your family sees a lie about you on the Internet, it can be difficult to dispel that rumor. When employers go through a background check on an employment candidate, they will do a general Internet search to see what kinds of information is attached to your name. The lies they find can seem like truth to them because they were found on the Internet.

The Internet is cataloging the activities of mankind each and every day. The problem is that the Internet does not have a way of telling what is the truth and what is a lie. In order to protect yourself from people who try to spread lies and false rumors about you, it is important to hire an Internet reputation specialist and put the lies and rumors to rest.

Debating tax policy

Should the top 2 percent be taxed more? That’s the big debate in Washington these days, and you might be surprised as to what some big business people are saying about it.

On Tuesday, FedEx Chairman and CEO Fred Smith, an adviser to Sen. John McCain’s presidential campaign, said that the notion that tax hikes on the richest Americans would kill jobs was simply “mythology.”

And on Monday, a gathering of the nation’s top defense executives took a surprising turn when they endorsed tax rate increases on the wealthy and cuts of up to $150 billion to the Pentagon’s budget. Top executives from Northrop Grumman, Pratt & Whitney, TASC and RTI International Metals appeared at the National Press Club at an event organized by the Aerospace Industries Association, the top defense contractor lobbyist.

David Langstaff, CEO of TASC, said that the executives were speaking out because so far leaders of the defense industry were “talking a good game, but are still unwilling to park short-term self-interest.” After the event, he told a defense reporter for Politico that tax rates need to go up.

“In the near term, [income tax rates] need to go up some,” Langstaff said. “This is a fairness issue — there needs to be recognition that we’re not collecting enough revenue. In the last decade we’ve fought two wars without raising taxes. So I think it does need to go up.”

David Hess, head of Pratt & Whitney, said his parent company, United Technologies Corp, believed personal income tax rates should be on the table; Dawne Hickton, CEO of RTI, said he would back a rate hike if it led to a deal.

The CEOs join other high-profile executives who are willing to chip in more. Following a meeting with President Barack Obama last week at the White House, executives emerged to endorse higher rates. “There needs to be some revenue element to this, and [Obama] started with rates,” said Joe Echeverria, CEO of Deloitte LLP. “And he started with rates on what we would define [as] the upper two percent … that we have to pay our fair share. And I think everybody was in agreement with that notion.”

With the end of the election, more people are willing to call out the absurdity of Republican dogma. Basically, it’s silly to argue that behavior will be affected at all by top rates going from 35% to 39.6%.

Growth of frack water treatment

With the fracking boom, we’re seeing an explosion of related industries as well. One issue relating to hydraulic fracking has to do with the massive amounts of water used in the process. The water gets contaminated, and then it has to be dealt with. This is even bigger than the problem of potential ground water contamination.

Start-ups, venture capitalists and large companies, including Veolia and Siemens, see riches in water cleanup and are developing and testing various technologies. They are also working in other areas besides shale gas, including Canada’s oil sands and the use of water to pressure oil out of wells.

One of these companies is Ecosphere Technologies of Stuart, Florida, which uses ozone as a disinfectant to clean water in a process called advanced oxidation. The treatment, which does not use chemicals, can both eliminate the chemicals typically used for bacteria control and scale inhibition during fracking and recycle 100 percent of the water, according to Charles Vinick, the company’s chief executive.

Ecosphere says it has cleaned more than two billion gallons of water and eliminated the need for more than 1.7 million gallons of chemicals at approximately 600 oil and natural gas wells in U.S. shale fields since 2008.

The developments are very encouraging, both from an economic point of view and an environmental point of view, and this should help the overall fracking business which has been an economic boom for the US.

« Older posts Newer posts »