Baskin Robbins and Mitt Romney Connection??

It's been a while since I posted, just lazy I suppose. I wanted to share an article about Baskin Robbins plant closure. Is it true Baskin Robbins and Mitt Romney want us all fat? LOL..... read on


Baskin-Robbins and the Walmartization of Ice Cream
July 20th, 2012 Armine Yalnizyan

It’s been an unusually hot summer, and soaring temperatures have boosted sales of that quintessential summer food, ice cream. But Baskin-Robbins has decided to shut its production facility in Peterborough, Ont., and lay off 80 workers because of…wait for it… increased demand!

From the department of “wait, what?”, here’s the scoop behind this brain-freeze-inducing decision.

Baskin-Robbins, home of 31 flavours (one for each day of the month), brought in $1.8-billion in sales from its 6,777 outlets around the world last year. Same-store sales rose by an impressive 9.4 per cent in the first quarter 2012, and that’s before the heat wave.

Though business is up, the company says expanding production is not part of the game plan. Peterborough is the last place in North America where Baskin-Robbins makes what it sells, and those 80 CAW-organized workers supply a third of the 4,200 outlets outside of the U.S., including 113 Canadian stores.

That production is now moving to third-party suppliers. Canadians’ demand will be supplied by Scotsburn Dairy in Truro, N.S. — for now. Like Peterborough, it’s also a union shop (CAW). But most of what Peterborough produced will now be made in El-Paso, Texas, a right-to-work state with no minimum wage. Only 5.3 per cent of workers are union members in that state.

Does that make Baskin-Robbins the Caterpillar of Peterborough? Not so fast.

The world’s biggest chain of ice-cream stores already operates in 110 nations, and believes future expansion of global domination can best be achieves by focusing on retailing and franchising. They are getting out of manufacturing.

Getting out of manufacturing is one way to drive down costs, by shifting labour-cost decisions to third-party suppliers.

Baskin-Robbins’ plan goes further: drive down costs by extending its presence in emerging markets, where disposable income is increasing; but, importantly, that’s where new suppliers are emerging too.

Call it the Walmartization of ice cream. When you’re big enough globally, you don’t have to make things to change the way things are made. The size of the contracts you’re waving around changes the game. The retailer, not the producer, becomes king of the deal. And the lowest price becomes the law.

Suppliers swallow ridiculously low per unit prices because the bottom line of that contract is huge. Then they find a way to shave their own costs. So Baskin-Robbins lowers its costs by shifting the incentive to find savings onto parties outside the company. Shift costs, increase profits. That’s the formula these days.

And here’s another part of the formula: Baskin-Robbin’s parent company is Dunkin’ Brands, which is owned by Bain Capital – Mitt Romney’s company before he became Presidential hopeful for the Republicans. These firms, and Romney, have been lobbying against supply management, angling for lower dairy prices to help us all get fatter on pizza and ice cream, one crazy-cheap mouthful at a time.

Lower dairy prices are indeed on the menu of free trade deals like the one now being negotiated with Europe and upcoming talks with the Pacific nations, which will most likely see an end to supply management of the dairy industry in Canada. But there’s still cheaper milk products to be found in other nations. And that’s the point of this drive for global dominance in ice cream. Market-spanning giants like Baskin-Robbins, relentlessly driving down input costs, give a whole new meaning to free trade. But remember the other trade: the flip side of low prices is low wages. Someone’s paying the price somewhere.

This blog originally appeared on the Globe and Mail’s online business feature, Economy Lab.

Prairie Financial Sun Rising

It's good to be in the Prairie's right now as Saskatoon, Calgary, Edmonton and Regina are poised to lead in growth and prosperity over the next couple of years, according to The Conference Board of Canada posted in The Canadian Press yesterday.

As a recruiter in the hospitality industry, I have seen an influx of applications from the mid and eastcoast for positions in the West in the last couple of years. This is really a significant change considering that heading to Ontario has long been the rallying call to highschool grads in many provinces, including Nova Scotia where my roots lead back. It's been a bit of an identity shock to Ontarians adjusting to a tough labour market and looking West. The Outlook suggest Toronto's growth and prosperity will be tied in 5th place with Regina! But, are job seekers ready to look to Saskatchewan as the booming province? It's another adjustment.

In this volatile economy, adjusting to change is a must. So, many will be getting out their dusty globes to discover where Saskatoon and Regina are located and struggling over the spelling of Sa-skatch-e-wan.

The Conference Board says western cities are benefitting from resource riches and attracting migrants, boding well for housing and consumer spending.

Edmonton created almost 40,000 new jobs last year alone, the think-tank says.

"In spite of global economic turmoil, high prices for agricultural products, minerals and oil are likely to continue," said Mario Lefebvre, director of municipal studies for the Conference Board.

"Canada's Prairie cities will reap the benefits of this global demand for commodities."

Central Canadian cities won't do nearly as well with manufacturing continuing to struggle amid the global slowdown, and government cutbacks weighing on growth domestically.

The top 10 cities in terms of expected growth for 2012 are:
Saskatoon, 4.0 per cent
Calgary, 3.6 per cent
Edmonton, 3.4 per cent
Regina, 2.9 per cent
Oshawa, Ont., 2.7 per cent
Toronto, Trois-Rivieres, Vancouver, 2.6 per cent
Kitchener-Cambridge-Waterloo, Windsor, 2.5 per cent

More Pay = More Satisfaction?

We all want a job that pays well, right? How many of us think things like "if I could only make "X" amount more, I would be happy"? Tempting to think such things isn't it? These questions, of course, address the old debate of whether pay leads to satisfaction. We've all heard anecdotes about people who make lots of money and are miserable yet many of us can't help but think that more money would give us more job satisfactaion as well as improve our lives overall.

In the Journal of Vocational Behavior, Author T.A. Judge, et al, recently put this issue to the test to find out if employees find higher paying jobs more satisfying. While their results suggest that within organizations, higher pay is associated with higher job satisfaction, the relationship was not very strong. Not surprisingly, the results also suggest that pay level is more strongly related to employees' satisfaction with pay specifically than with the job overall. Moreover, the fairly weak relationships between pay level and satisfaction were consistent across several countries (U.S., Great Britain, India, Australia, Taiwan).

This study suggests that while increased pay is somewhat associated with increased satisfaction, it's not a strong enough correlation to say anything definitively. If employees truly want satisfying work, then searching for the best paying job is probably not the way to go.

The authors note that attractive characteristics of the leaders and the actual job are likely better predictors of job satisfaction than pay level. People tend to leave positions more because of issues with their direct boss rather than any other issue.

While these results also suggest that increasing pay alone is probably not the best way to improve employees' attitudes, they advise that pay does have motivational power. Being a pay leader in the industry is unlikely to boost organization-wide satisfaction, because employees tend to compare themselves to others, but it will attract highly qualified candidates who value their own skills and experience and look for a company that fairly compensates and values employees financially as well as otherwise.



Publication: Journal of Vocational Behavior (OCT 2010)

Article: The relationship between pay and job satisfaction: A meta-analysis of the literature

Authors: T.A. Judge, R.F. Piccolo, N.P. Podsakoff, J.C. Shaw, and B.L. Rich

Been "86'ed Before?

Have you heard the phrase "86'ed" used in the restaurant, bar or hotel industry? If you've worked any time in North America, then you're likely to answer, "Yes". But, do you know why we use this to refer to an employee that's been terminated or a meal that's been cancelled? A chef has done some research in to the history of it's usage and found that it refers back many years ago to a bar in New York on, well, you guessed it, "86th Street".

Chumley's Bar had its back entrance on 86th street, and they would expel unruly drunks out there, hence the term "I 86ed that guy".

Chumley's Bar, located at 86 Bedford Street in New York, and according to Chef Helm in Seattle, it's the origin this famous and oft used phrase in the industry. "The building dates from the 1830s, and was originally a blacksmith's. Leland Chumley turned it into a speakeasy during Prohibition. To keep it discreet, there were no signs on the outside, only the address, 86, on the door. It was also a gathering place for leftists, literati, and labor organizers. Legend has it that when the police raided the place, the bartenders would get a call warning them it was coming. They would tell the patrons "86!" which would mean to exit through the front door, as the cops were coming in the back entrance".

Interesting and superfluous information for a nice interlude to our workdays! Now, back to the joys of service we love so much in the hospitality industry.

Brand You!

Brand You: What Makes You Special?

Companies spend millions of dollars a year trying to develop compelling employment brands by interviewing current employees, surveying external job-seekers, and validating the conclusions they draw from the data.

But even after all that, there's no guarantee that the brand statement will perfectly reflect what an organization offers potential employees.

If branding is that difficult for a company with money and resources, how in the world can you and I figure out what our own brand is, how we can present ourselves for a career move, to land that first management role, to move up the ladder?

Fortunately, it's easier than you might think. Let me use the perspective of a recruiter as an analogy.

This morning I went to my "Rolodex" of business contacts (really a stack of business cards held together with a rubber band!) and randomly chose two. As I pulled them out of the stack, I wrote down the first word that came to mind:

Incredible. This is a woman who supervised another department at a company where I used to work. She was so smart and innovative I volunteered to take on any project of her choosing just for the privilege of working with her. I still marvel at how much I learned from her.

Innovative. This is an IT consultant I worked with for several years who is always able to think of a clever solution to any problem, and consistently delivers it ahead of schedule.

Let's face it: no one probably deserves to be reduced to a single word, and each of these people undoubtedly exhibits behaviours contrary to the labels I've given them. Nonetheless, over time, this is the label they've earned in my mind. What label have you earned in the minds of those you meet, work with, strive to impress?

A popular phrase among the self-help profession is "We teach others how to treat us." Do you find your coworkers/boss claiming credit for your best work, yet find yourself saddled with blame for messes you were not even involved with?

Perhaps the problem is your brand. Just like a company, everyone has a brand, whether they like it or not. It's that one word that comes to mind for people when they think of you. The challenge is to learn what your brand is and then position yourself such that you emphasize your strengths and minimize your weaknesses.

Gather Data and Assess Your Current Situation
People, like companies, have both positive and negative qualities. As a first step in the branding process, most corporate initiatives start with an assessment of some sort. This is accomplished through the use of focus groups, surveys, or individual interviews.

Similarly, when you're attempting to learn about your personal brand, it's also a good idea to find out how your "customers" perceive you. You can certainly ask a trusted colleague to share their thoughts, but I recommend one of the widely available 360° assessment tools. In a pinch you can also use a free Web-based survey tool.

Regardless of how you do it, it's important to learn what you do well, what you don't do well, and what overall impression you leave.

Determine What Makes You Unique
I remember being assigned to a business group as its new recruiter. Every person I talked with had the same thing to say: "I'm sure you're a good recruiter, but, alas, no one will ever be as good as jane was."

Jane was this group's recruiter several years before, and despite having worked with several competent recruiters since, the entire team was unable to get beyond the fact that their beloved Jane was now gone.

It would have been easy to start acting like Jane to try and get that client group to like me, and that's in fact what they really wanted. However, as I probed a bit, I learned that her style was very different from mine.

Also, she always asked the hiring managers what they thought about a particular candidate first, and would respond the same way each time: "Isn't that amazing, that's just what I thought!" No wonder everyone liked her! I realized quickly that such a style just wasn't me.

My style is more analytical: "You have expertise and I have expertise. You define success this way, and I define it that way. You want this outcome, and I want that outcome. Let's design a process up front that will get us both what we want, and allow us to measure how we're doing along the way."

Did they like me as much as Jane? I don't know, but we did hire some very successful people into the company.

Advertise and Embrace Your Idiosyncratic Differences
The best recruiters I know tend to unabashedly let people know what makes them unique in the way they approach their job. Adopting a professional style that's not "on brand" for you can make you look insincere, unconfident, and unprofessional.

To hiring managers looking for an opportunity to challenge the "current recruiting model" for their own political gains, such a flicker of weakness is like blood in the water. I've seen it result in phone calls to supervisors, power plays by HR generalists, and frustration on the part of recruiters who begin to question their own abilities.

There are many different recruiter styles, and they all can be effective. For example, we all know the recruiters who are loud, brash, and direct a never-ending stream of resumes at their customers. Some of the resumes are worthless, but they just laugh that off and send over even more. Their customers adore them, and over time they start to focus that barrage of resumes and zero in on the correct skill set.

We also know the more cerebral type of recruiter, the one who thoughtfully goes back to their workspace for several days, triumphantly emerging with a single, perfect resume in hand. Can you articulate your own recruiting style?

Communicate and Reinforce Your Brand
Once you understand how your customers perceive you, and develop a style that plays to your strengths, let people know what to expect when they work with you:

•"You'll be hearing from me by phone several times a day. I like to keep you informed as we work together."
•"Let's set up a face-to-face conversation each week to review the resumes I've sent you, and agree on next steps."
•"I'm only going to send you the resumes that meet your exact specifications; otherwise, we'll just waste time. I need you to be very specific about what a candidate must have and must not have."

Take time to point out the things that make your style unique as you develop working relationships in the industry. You'll be able to feel more confident and instill this in your teams. A win-win situation!

Employee Retention in Hospitality Industry

When managing in restaurants, hotels, reorts, casinos.... our number one goal is simple: attract customers and repeat customers because that drives our bottom line.

What makes it not so simple is creating the framework for this customer focus. One thing we know is that we depend heavily on the retention of management staff. Who wants to incur the loss of their management team's experience, education and indepth knowledge of the company brand?

According to Lori McInerney, hospitality employment expert with Careerbuilder.com, "hospitality organizations will need to upgrade retention strategies ...to keep their top performers, and their guests, from checking out early."

Hospitality is an industry that is prone to high employee turnover rates. Two in 10 hospitality workers have worked for 10 or more employers. In a nutshell, employees leave when the cost of staying exceeds the reward of leaving. This cost can be a broad range of compensation factors but the main pillars for candidates are challenge, responsibility and actual financial gain.

A retention program that targets financial gain, responsibility and challenge will up your employee retention rate. McInerney recommends the following hospitality employee retention tips:

* Define a clear path for upper mobility with training and development opportunities. Employees are more likely to invest in their jobs if they feel the company has invested in them.

* Communicate often. An informed employee is a connected employee who will feel a personal stake in the success of a company.

* Implement the "Three R's Rule": Recognize, Reward, Repeat. Pat your employees on the back for every job well done to continually reinforce your appreciation of their performance.

* Ask them about their day. Measure employee satisfaction with the same conviction applied to measuring guest satisfaction as the first will determine the latter.

Counter-Offers

Let's examine the idea of counter-offers.

If you're a shinning example of the perfect employee, at some point, you're going to quietly explore your options in the hospitality market. Perhaps you'll contact a recruiter so as to ensure your interest is kept confidential - always a good choice! But what if this exploring leads to a first interview, then a working interview, and then a third? And in due time, you receive an extremely attractive job offer. Do you accept straight away and cheerily return to your current employer with a letter of resignation?

You might be surprised when your boss reads this resignation and implores you to postpone a final decision for a day or two. In a mere few hours, this executive returns and presents you with an even more attractive counter-offer. "We simply can't afford to lose you," your boss explains.

Who knew? And more importantly - what do you do now?

Before you start wishing you had such "problems", let me mention that because of marketplace demands, it's primarily highly qualified managers and executives that are more likely to face this particular conundrum.

There are many legitimate reasons to leave a position for greener pastures...perhaps the company has executed it's expansion plans a couple years ago and is now in maintenance mode, with no fresh challenges on the horizon. Or perhaps a training budget has been slashed to bits - thwartying your intention of upgrading your skills. Or perhaps you just learned the $15,000 yearly bonus you were counting on isn't likely to materialize. Bummer.

So, hence the passive career search for new positions....the terrifc offer....and impending resignation where your boss says, "Tell me what's wrong here, and I'll fix it. But you have to promise to stay. And by the way, here's more money."

Perhaps you should accept the offer, but that won't rectify all problems. Think about your reasons for wanting to leave in the first place. Let's review the situation and consider the following worst-case scenarios that might play out if you decide to stay with your employer.

You're action can change the culture of your organization.

A resignation is the business equivalent of holding your boss at gunpoint: "Give me what I want, or I'm history." The counter-offer is the equivalent of your boss handing over cash, a promotion, less travel or more time off, and putting your gun back into its holster.

But the incident isn't over. In fact, it may never be. You have upset an apple cart and provoked a panic-buy. Those apples can never be stacked the same way, and everything, including the company's pecking order, is now different. Passive aggression and veiled hostility might arise later from some unexpected sources.

If co-workers hear of your new title and/or perks, a new dynamic will develop. You won't exactly be the most popular guy or gal on campus. However minor your perks, don't underestimate how little it takes to make co-workers angry; inequality within the ranks is lethal. If you decide to stay where you are because it is familiar, you might be surprised. By accepting the counteroffer's perks, that familiar office dynamic will become foreign.

You'll raise the stakes.

Your acceptance of a counteroffer will change expectation levels - both for your boss and for yourself.

After bestowing rewards, it is human nature for your boss to expect more from you. You'll be held to a higher performance standard, which you might also hold yourself because of guilt from stirring up muddy waters. Your every misstep will be scrutinized, and every minor error in judgment will be magnified. In other words, you'll earn every penny of that increased salary and every minute of that family leave time with your blood, sweat and tears.

You won't be trusted.

You're no longer a team player, but someone who, first and foremost, looks out for No. 1. You've already stated in effect, "I don't really want to be here." Because you've broken the loyalty oath and held your employer hostage, you'll be henceforth viewed as less than committed. Your allegiance also will be compromised in your own mind; something about the job just won't feel "right."

Perceived lack of loyalty in addition to co-worker resentment and an employer's feelings of disempowerment could lead to a short-lived position. I've witnessed many workers who've happily accepted counter-offers in winter only to leave by the next summer. Unfortunately, upon leaving this upheaval, the employee no longer will receive a good solid reference. S/he more than likely will receive a two-word negative response, if any.

Accepting a counter-offer isn't always a bad decision, but as a professional recruiter, I'd be remiss if I didn't urge a very close look at the possible pitfalls. My ultimate goal is seeing candidates happy and successful in permanent placements, whatever and wherever those might be. So I'd also encourage a talk with the boss before you start shopping around, rather than after. Address your misgivings and dissatisfactions early; give him a fair chance to rectify them. It's quite possible that nothing will change - but be assured that you haven't wasted your time.

You've called the boss' attention to the situation in an honest, straightforward way. You've acted with integrity while gaining the assurance of knowing how much you're truly valued - without jeopardizing your career, your economic stability or your positive relationships with peers. And without pulling out the verbal equivalent of an Uzi.

What's more, if you ultimately decide to leave the company for a warmer climate, your boss will be able to accept this and not be suprised.

Leadership Tips brought to you by the letter, "H"

THE FOUR H's OF LEADERSHIP

HOPE
Research by Harvard Business School shows that people want to see progress rather than receive recognition; they want to see they're making a difference and get a sense that things are getting better. The good news is leaders don't have to go too far to find hope in 2010. There is no doubt that the economy and general employment conditions are getting better so there is still plenty of reason for optimism and hope.

HUMANITY
This is best reflected in a company's CSR. It's about connecting with the community -whether through charity, demonstrating conscionable corporate governance, or using influence in a positive way. The corporate world is very powerful and its leaders need to recognise they can create positive outcomes for their employees outside of work. Afer all, companies are comprised of people and we all have a desire to better the lives of those around us.

HUMILITY
Humility means not being a celebrity leader and remembering what it's like to walk alongside your staff. If you sit in boardrooms all day you'll lose touch with your employees - the key is to never stray too far away from the shop floor. Some of the best-performing and more enduring companies have self-effacing leaders who are able to look in the mirror when things go wrong. They can take a good look at themselves, their decisions and their methods, analyse the situation, and look at how they can make a difference.

HUMOUR
Never lose the ability to have a good laugh at yourself. Leaders who relax and enjoy being at work put their staff at ease. Given we spend so much time at work, we should enjoy what we're doing. Laughter is particularly important for leaders because its effects cascade through the organisation. It's well documented that a happy employee is a productive employee.
[Source: Human Capital, issue 8.4]