Search

Hot Bread Kitchen, founded in New York City in 2008 by baker Jessamyn Waldman Rodriguez, has been working for over a decade to provide training and placement for women in the restaurant industry. It's ramping up its services just as a very different foodservice sector is emerging from the COVID-19 crisis.

The restaurant industry faces reality

As we begin to emerge from the pandemic, the restaurant industry looks much different than before we locked down. Long heading toward a reckoning, the people driving one of the hardest-hit industries will have to determine what its future looks like.

Pre-pandemic, foodservice workers already faced a slew of challenges, including long hours, low pay, mistreatment and a culture that ground workers down — especially those who felt they had nowhere else to go. But it is a huge employer. According to the National Restaurant Association, the restaurant industry brought in sales of $799 billion in 2021, which, although down from pre-pandemic levels, is still significant. The trade group also reports 14.5 million people are employed in the industry, 1 million down from pre-pandemic levels.

There are myriad reasons why so many people have left employment in the restaurant industry, such as the permanent closure of restaurants (90,000, according to the National Restaurant Association). But it remains an attractive option, despite the challenges, due to the low barrier to entry. On its face, it offers a career ladder. Some workers enter the industry because of their passion for food. But in reality, it is known as a meat-grinder for those at the bottom of the industry’s hierarchy.

Women, in particular, have traditionally been relegated to more of the low-paying jobs and have suffered sexual harassment and lack of advancement opportunities in the industry. According to an analysis by the Brookings Institute, nearly half of all working women worked in low-wage jobs with median earnings of $10.93 per hour before the pandemic. The portion of women working lower-wage jobs was higher among women of color. And the National Restaurant Association reported that while women hold the majority of restaurant jobs, they hold significantly fewer management positions.

Hot Bread Kitchen seeks a transformational shift in the food service sector

Rodriguez had seen firsthand the inequities facing women in the baking industry. She wanted to center women in the industry: To start, basic job skills training eventually included a business incubator focusing on small businesses in the food sector led by women of color and a full culinary program.

The program has been so successful that Hot Bread Kitchen moved into a former Food Network space in Chelsea Market in New York City’s Meatpacking District last month. Google, one of the organization’s major partners, provided the space.

Seeing the impact of the pandemic on its “breadwinners,” as program participants are called, Hot Bread Kitchen changed tack. “We really focus on economic mobility for more and more women to use the food industry holistically,” Leslie Abbey, the CEO of Hot Bread Kitchen, told TriplePundit. With that in mind, in addition to increasing the number in their cohorts, the organization will open outposts throughout New York’s five boroughs to meet women where they live.

Looking at the restaurant industry beyond the pandemic

They rethought their training during the pandemic. “We had to take a hiatus from in-person culinary training,” Kristine Borok, chief operating officer at Hot Bread Kitchen, told TriplePundit. “We started thinking about other training programs and what we could do virtually. We piloted a deeper digital skills program and thought about what are the basic elements and skills that a woman needs to sustain economic mobility.”

To that end, Hot Bread Kitchen added facility management training and bridge training, which includes all the attendant skills one needs to success in the industry: English as a second language classes (in partnership with La Guardia Community College), digital skills training, and financial literacy training.

The Hot Bread Kitchen team also mapped out a strategic plan for supporting small businesses, especially micro-businesses run out of women’s homes during the pandemic, with plans for e-commerce training. The organization continued to expand its roster of partners. Google, one of its biggest employer partners, helped leverage other partners to join the effort.

For their part, Abbey and Borok both emphasized that they are careful about selecting employer partners to ensure their breadwinners receive quality jobs with a career path. They are also cognizant of the fact that women, especially women of color and immigrants, have a history of mistreatment by the industry. “We can’t keep putting women into jobs knowing there’s another side to this industry,” Borok told us. “It’s a system-wide approach. Employers are now willing to have a conversation they couldn’t have five years ago. It’s about a high-quality job, a schedule you can count on, future for growth, relationship with your manager, and a non-toxic environment.”

Success stories

Hot Bread Kitchen has launched women into high-quality food industry jobs not only by giving them training, but also by raising their confidence. The team running Hot Bread Kitchen deliberately chose to call its graduates “breadwinners” to reflect not only the women’s positions in the workforce, but also in the community. “To support women in this field is a three-sided triangle: social support, economic mobility, and housing," Abbey said. "You can’t have one without the other. Working in a multifaceted way around economic mobility, by starting businesses, gaining skills, making jobs better for the women who are taking them.”

Harkening back to the origins of the organization, Borok noted that when Rodriguez founded it, she wanted to center women and baking. “Bread and food created a brand of warmth,” she said. As the latest Hot Bread Kitchen cohort graduates this spring, they represent women armed with skills, confidence, and ideas to help transform the restaurant sector into somewhere they can not only survive, but also thrive.

Image credit: Hot Bread Kitchen

There is a severe housing crisis throughout the United States. According to Freddie Mac, the housing market is short nearly 4 million homes, and builders cannot keep up with demand. The pandemic made the housing crisis worse because many people craved larger homes due to the need to work remotely. Also, labor and lumber shortages are exacerbating the housing shortage by making it harder and more expensive to construct new homes.

Now, housing prices are skyrocketing due to a lack of supply and low interest rates, which especially squeeze low and moderate-income households. A minimum wage employee can’t afford the rent on a one-bedroom apartment in 93 percent of U.S. counties. Meanwhile, there is a retail apocalypse going on, and tens of thousands of stores are closing.

The rise and fall of shopping centers

Shopping centers started rising in popularity in the 1950s, and this trend continued through the 1990s. Malls across the U.S. quickly became centers for family enjoyment that combined shopping, dining and entertainment under one roof. However, trends in consumer behavior have been causing numerous shopping centers to close. Many of these properties were in use for just a few decades before being deserted.

Although this trend existed pre-pandemic, the move towards e-commerce and away from brick and mortar stores is intensifying. According to 2020 findings from Coresight Research, 25 percent of malls in the United States will close in the next five years. Shopping malls can be especially large spaces, typically spanning hundreds of thousands or even millions of square feet. Now, across outlying suburbs and urban centers alike, many strip malls and sprawling shopping centers are vacant.

Redeveloping retail spaces to tackle the housing crisis

Unfortunately, shopping centers, particularly indoor malls, are proving to be difficult to repurpose, yet there is a dire need for more housing. One particularly appealing idea is to take strip malls and shopping centers and build mixed-use spaces that combine retailers and housing with access to public transportation and green spaces.

There have been some examples of this concept in action. At the Alderwood Mall in Lynnwood, Washington, residential units were created from what had been a large swath of the mall. The Alderwood Avalon Place now has 328 apartments and features shops, restaurants, and a light rail stop nearby that will open in 2024.

In Annapolis, Maryland, a 1960s era mall called Parole Plaza was abandoned. Developers are now completing a mixed-use project called Annapolis Town Center with hundreds of housing units, restaurants, stores, green spaces, and an ice skating rink. This transit-oriented project is located near a commuter rail line.

Social and environmental redevelopment considerations

Across the United States, nearly 60 former malls have been redeveloped into housing, offices, and other purposes and another 75 are in the planning phase. To provide the maximum benefit from these projects, it's critical to consider a variety of social and environmental factors.

For example, is there suitable access to public transportation and green spaces? How can these developments be pedestrian-friendly and support livable communities? How can local governments alter zoning requirements to encourage projects that mitigate the housing crisis and boost access to affordable housing?

Unfortunately, strip malls and shopping centers aren’t often ideally suited for residential purposes because they are located on major roads and lack green spaces. However, there are also numerous advantages to redeveloping these vacant properties.

Typically, new housing projects can be controversial politically, especially when they involve displacing existing residents or gentrifying neighborhoods. This certainly isn’t the case for empty shopping centers, which can quickly become a blight on the community. Also, developing these properties helps mitigate urban sprawl by making use of existing development.

Yet, many retailers continue to shut their doors at rapid rates, causing urban planners, designers, and local officials to grapple with what to do with these deserted properties. But now, new, vibrant options are emerging that can also address the housing crisis.

Image credit: Kevin Jarrett via Upslash

Texas Governor Greg Abbott touched off yet another firestorm of criticism from human rights advocates last month, when he issued a directive that slaps the label of child abuse on gender-affirming medical care for minors. In response, more than 60 leading businesses publicly joined the protest against the new directive targeting transgender rights. That is an important step in the right direction, but it will accomplish nothing unless businesses flex their financial power, too.

Anti-LGBTQ bills fail to reach the Governor’s desk…

Texas is just one among many states in which elected officials have rushed to pass new laws aimed at denying transgender rights. However, the media spotlight has been glued to Texas in recent weeks because the Abbot directive appears to be a clear case of extra-legal, authoritarian-style overreach.

As tracked by the organization Equality Texas, more than 30 anti-LGBTQ bills were filed in the state’s most recent legislative session, including 13 “direct attacks” on transgender youth. None of them made it to the Governor’s desk. The new directive indicates that Abbot felt compelled to deliver at least one achievement to his voters in an election year, one way or another.

…so the Governor seeks an alternate route…

Specifically, Senate Bill 1646 in the Texas legislature would have added gender affirming medical treatment for minors to the list of legally defined forms of child abuse, triggering an investigation by the state and potentially leading to severe consequences for care givers and medical providers.

After SB 1646 failed to pass, Abbott reportedly asked Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton to render a formal opinion on the matter. Paxton filed his determination as No. KP-0401, in the form of a letter to State Representative Matt Krause (R-District 93) as Chair of the House Committee on General Investigating.

In the letter, Paxton creates a false equivalency between gender affirming care and sterilization policies that have been “historically weaponized against minorities,” including “African Americans, female minors, the disabled, and others,” using the words “irreversible sterilization” and “sterilization” multiple times throughout.

Editor's note: Be sure to subscribe to our Brands Taking Stands newsletter, which comes out every Wednesday.

Given the false starting point of forced sterilization, it is no surprise that Paxton arrived at a conclusion that effectively criminalizes gender affirming medical care for minors.

“Each of the ‘sex change’ procedures and treatments enumerated above, when performed on children, can legally constitute child abuse under several provisions of chapter 261 of the Texas Family Code,” Paxton wrote.

“When considering questions of child abuse, a court would likely consider the fundamental right to procreation, issues of physical and emotional harm associated with these procedures and treatments, consent laws in Texas and throughout the country, and existing child abuse standards,” he emphasized (emphasis added).

…and makes up a “bill” of his own.

With KP 0104 in hand, Abbott then issued his directive in the form of a letter to Jaime Masters, Commissioner of the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services.

In the letter, Abbott informs Masters that the Attorney General has confirmed “that a number of so-called ‘sex change’ procedures constitute child abuse under existing Texas law.”

The letter is a textbook example of a circular argument surrounding transgender rights, building from one false foundation to the next before ordering the Commissioner to “protect Texas children from abuse” and “follow the law as explained in OAG Opinion No. KP-0401.”

U.S. business leaders respond

Business leaders have been slow to organize a response to the anti-LGBTQ laws in the Texas legislature and elsewhere, until the organization Human Rights Campaign assembled a platform of public protest. On March 2, HRC released an open letter protesting anti-LGBTQ legislation in statehouses across the country, signed by thousands of parents and other individuals.

In a press release explaining the letter, HRC also underscored the science-based position of health care experts.

“The experts have spoken — and they make clear that affirming and supporting LGBTQ+ youth is essential for optimal health and wellbeing. Period.” HRC wrote.

That letter set the stage for business leaders to weigh in against the Abbot directive. On March 11, HRC released a letter of protest signed by more than 60 leading businesses.

Published as a full-page ad in the Dallas Morning News, the letter lists Apple, Capital One, Google, IBM, Johnson & Johnson, Meta, Microsoft, Salesforce and Unilever, among scores of other supporters.

Rather than simply criticizing the Abbott directive as a general matter of human and civil rights for transgender families, the letter positions transgender rights as a fundamental matter of corporate culture.

“The recent attempt to criminalize a parent for helping their transgender child access medically necessary, age appropriate healthcare in the state of Texas goes against the values of our companies,” they state.

“We are committed to building inclusive environments where our employees can thrive inside and outside of the workplace,” the letter adds. “For years we have stood to ensure LGBTQ+ people — our employees, customers, and their families — are safe and welcomed in the communities where we do business.”

“This policy creates fear for employees and their families, especially those with transgender children, who might now be faced with choosing to provide the best possible medical care for their children but risk having those children removed by child protective services for doing so,” the letter’s signatories continued.

Words are good on transgender rights, action is better

The letter also draws attention to other attacks on transgender rights across the nation and calls upon elected officials to “abandon efforts to write discrimination into law and policy.”

“It’s not just wrong, it has an impact on our employees, our customers, their families, and our work,” the letter emphasizes.

The strength of the letter seems to have caught the media spotlight, and it lends force to an effort by HRC to organize business in support of federal legislation in support of LGBTQ rights.

Meanwhile, though, business leaders have to reckon with the fact that their nonpartisan get-out-the-vote initiatives did nothing to prevent former President Trump and his extremist allies from steering the Republican party into an almost-successful, violent insurrection followed by a torrent of state legislation aimed at suppressing Democratic-leaning voters, concurrent with the focus on eliminating transgender rights.

Fortunately for transgender children in Texas, last Friday a state judge issued a temporary stay of Abbott’s order. Attorney General Paxton promptly vowed to appeal the stay.

Whether the appeal is successful or not, Abbott’s naked attempt to use children as cannon fodder in his campaign for reelection has brought the conjunction of voter suppression and human rights oppression into clear relief.

Signing a letter of protest is a good first step for socially responsible corporations, but it is just the beginning of a long, hard fight to undo a generations-long spiral.

Business leaders can – and must – drop the pretense that encouraging people to vote is the beginning and end of their responsibility. They can make a real difference by focusing their corporate financial muscle in the service of candidates who fight for civil rights and human rights, as the twin forces that distinguish a functioning democracy from an authoritarian state.

Image credit: Mercedes Mehling via Unsplash

Considering sustainability when making our investment options has clearly become a must-have.

As devastating droughts and wildfires become an annual occurrence across the western U.S., it is impossible to ignore the consequences of climate change. In addition to upending food security, natural systems, infrastructure and human health — with 20 extreme weather events causing over $1 billion damage each in the U.S. during 2021 — the total economic cost was around $145 billion last year alone.

The same risks that pose a threat to communities, families and businesses also have an impact on our employees’ retirement security, as economic losses from extreme weather events continue to occur. This is why Sierra Nevada Brewing Co. and other companies support efforts to protect the pension and retirement funds of hardworking Americans from climate risk.

The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) is currently reviewing comments submitted for a proposed rule, Prudence and Loyalty in Selecting Plan Investments and Exercising Shareholder Rights, which opens the door for retirement fund sponsors to include more sustainable options in their retirement saving plans. It reverses the prior administration’s restrictions on 401(k) and retirement plans that prevented investors from considering environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors as part of their investment decision-making and proxy voting. These restrictions effectively meant American workers and retirees were denied access to ESG investment opportunities that offer competitive returns and reduce risks to their investments.

Employees are drawn to companies like Sierra Nevada because they live the same values: embracing a philosophy that balances environmental, social, and economic needs.

Employees want and deserve access to retirement investment options that include considerations for climate change risk, social impact and economic resiliency. The DOL’s rule conforms with longstanding policy and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, which was passed to protect employees’ investment interests. Retirement and pension plans covered under this act hold more than $10 trillion in assets, covering about 141 million workers and their beneficiaries.

Most Americans invest in the stock market through their retirement funds. However, few 401(k) plans include ESG options despite studies that show these funds consistently outperform relative to the market. In addition to commanding higher-than-average returns and lower risk, demand is growing for these types of funds, particularly from younger workers who prioritize sustainability when investing.

As we transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy and other low-carbon technologies, we have the opportunity to build a more resilient economy that will maintain competitiveness. While the DOL rule will allow Sierra Nevada to integrate our employee retirement options with our company values, its importance stretches far beyond our walls — marking a key step toward building long-term resiliency into our economy.

We encourage all employees to continue asking their employers and plan providers about the availability of retirement funds that include ESG considerations, generate competitive returns, and align with a sustainable and thriving economy.

Interested in having your voice heard on 3p? Contact us at editorial@3BLMedia.com and pitch your story idea to us.

Image credit: City of Chico via Facebook

Clearly, there’s growing interest in plant-based alternatives for traditional foods and beverages. With an elevated understanding of both health and a balanced diet, more coffee drinkers across the U.S. are opting for plant-based dairy alternatives, including those made by Silk. The Danone North America-owned brand recently expanded its lineup of plant-based coffee creamers with two new flavors, one of which is made from oats and the other from almonds.

The announcement comes at a time when other companies, including Nestlé and Chobani, are crowding this niche segment of the food industry with new investments in plant-based beverages while they continue to roll out more products.

Consumers’ growing affinity for plant-based beverages reflects what’s occurring in the wider plant-based food industry. “As more consumers gravitate toward flexitarian diets — in other words, eating less meat and enjoying more meals without it — brands are coming to market with a rapidly expanding array of plant-based foods that tout a taste and texture that's just like the real thing,” TriplePundit’s senior editor, Mary Mazzoni, wrote earlier this year.

That certainly applies to plant-based beverages — and these new products aren’t your parents’ and grandparents’ half-and-half. And, they’re definitely not the powdered or liquid non-dairy creamer you remember from picnics or the office.

The growing interest in plant-based beverages and creamers

The plant-based beverage sector is projected to grow this decade as critics of the global dairy industry repeatedly point out its contribution to climate change. According to Silk, it takes 64 percent less water to make a half gallon of a Silk plant-based beverage than it does to produce a half gallon of dairy milk. Silk’s lifecycle assessment also concluded the same amount of plant-based milk results in 67 percent less greenhouse gas emissions than conventionally produced milk.

Further, several of Silk’s plant-based products contain more calcium than dairy milk. The caramel-flavored creamer also includes Vitamin A for immune system support, and Silk says all of its products are free of cholesterol, saturated fat and carrageenan. While the science around carrageenan is disputed, some scientists have pointed out that the ingredient, derived from a red seaweed called Irish Moss, can cause inflammation and be toxic to the digestive system (other scientists have said such conclusions are misleading).

Another common misconception about plant-based options is that they won’t be flavorful, or they will taste “too healthy.” Silk says it’s put that argument to rest.

The Silk road away from half-and-half

“More consumers are looking to the ‘better-for-you’ category for both great taste and convenience in food and beverage options,” Amanda Simerman, Silk’s senior director of plant-based and organic creamers, said in a public statement. “New Silk Enhanced Almond Creamers are a delicious and easy way to add enhanced benefits to your morning brew.”

Another criticism about plant-based foods is that they lack protein. Silk refutes that question with how its almond-based creamers are formulated: four grams of protein per serving.

It’s obvious “plant-based” doesn’t mean something you grill or pan-fry.

As 3p’s Leon Kaye noted last month, “Bottom line, the list of next-gen foods is growing, and also evolving far beyond the fake burgers provided by the likes of Impossible Foods and Beyond Meat.”

Meanwhile, Silk says it’s focused beyond nutrition, with support for initiatives that involve water stewardship, sustainable packaging and protecting pollinators.

Consumers can visit Silk product locator here to find stores near you.

Leon Kaye contributed to this article.

Image credit: Silk via Cision

March 15 was Equal Pay Day: the day in which U.S. women finally reach, on average, the same amount of annual wages as men had gained during the previous year. This year’s Equal Pay Day is also a reminder of how women, especially women of color, have faced numerous setbacks during the global pandemic.

In a new report, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has put a price tag on the gap in collective earnings women have in the U.S. job market. And the costs that many women of color have paid across the country in lost wages, due to missed opportunities, have been huge.

According to the DOL’s analysis, two overarching factors have led to millions of women losing their jobs during the pandemic.

A little context is needed first. In previous recessions, men generally lost more jobs in women. For example, during the 2008-2009 financial crisis, more men than women lost jobs as men often worked in industries in which men were disproportionately employed, namely construction and manufacturing. During that “Great Recession,” American men also lost more jobs than women in the service sector, even though women were (and now are) employed in that space at a higher rate than men.

Editor's note: Be sure to subscribe to our Brands Taking Stands newsletter, which comes out every Wednesday.

The pandemic turned everything upside down. Data from the DOL concluded that almost 12 million women lost their jobs during the pandemic’s economic upheaval, in contrast to just over 10 million men. That trend occurred for two huge reasons.

First, women have always shouldered the burden of work that is unpaid, has its own economic impact yet its value is often overlooked: family caregiving. That ties into the second factor, which is the overrepresentation of women in the industries that happened to be hit the hardest by the pandemic. In DOL terminology, this reality is called “occupational segregation.”

Occupational segregation has always been the norm in U.S. society, though the disparity in what was assumed to be “men’s” versus “women’s” work narrowed somewhat during the 1970s and 1980s. The pandemic, however, widened that gap again, for a gallimaufry of reasons, among them: ongoing workplace discrimination along with hostile workplace cultures and harassment (on-site or virtual); the lack of access to capital for women entrepreneurs; gaps in education opportunities that divert women to different career opportunities; and social norms that still push men and women into roles that are assumed to be a “fit” for them based on their gender, race or ethnicity.

The DOL's numbers from 2021 illuminate this reality. Take the 20 occupations in the U.S. with the highest median incomes. Of those careers, only one of them, nurse practitioners, is a field dominated by women. The rest are what the DOL considers “mixed-gender” (women holding 25 to 75 percent of such jobs) or “non-traditional” (less than 25 percent) for women.

Conversely, of the 20 lowest-paid occupations in the country, the DOL considers eight of them to be “women-dominated.” In both graphs, the color pink highlights what the DOL considers to be "women-dominated" jobs.

Expect the gaps in pay between men and women to widen once more current numbers are crunched. Based on 2019 data, the prospects aren’t trending better, especially for women of color: The DOL concluded that Black women lost $39.3 billion in wages while Hispanic women lost $46.7 billion due to ongoing differences in occupations and industries when compared to white men.

Yes, this survey is a government report, but many of its suggestions should not be seen as merely public policy suggestions; the private sector could do a better job on opening the doors of opportunity for all. At a higher level, the DOL’s report suggests that in order to narrow these gaps in wages, the tasks involved include: an improvement in ethnic, gender and racial equity; fairer access and equity to education and training programs; a boost in access to capital for women of color who have that entrepreneurial streak; and find more ways in which women and people of color can network professionally.

Image credit: Sora Shimazaki via Pexels

Something called the “real” cost of gasoline often comes up when the prices of electric vehicles (EVs) are compared to the costs of conventional cars. The basic argument is that electricity could compete with gas on cost, if there were no subsidies or other forms of government support for the oil industry. However, from an employer perspective, that misses the point. Even if electric cars were more affordable, switching one for the other still leaves a host of problems to solve.

The “real” cost of gasoline is…complicated

Even with oil industry subsidies, the overall cost of owning EVs has already moved into competitive territory with gas. EVs cost more up front due to the expense of the battery pack, but over time the “total cost of ownership” calculation can level out, due to lower fuel and maintenance costs for an all-electric drive.

Given this context, the bottom-line case for electric vehicles becomes even more clear if car buyers have to pay higher prices for gasoline.

Estimates vary, but the figure of $15.00 per gallon for unsubsidized gasoline in the U.S. seems to have caught hold in the current conversation.

That’s actually an old estimate, from a 2011 analysis undertaken by the Center for Investigative Reporting (now Reveal News). Their analysis factored in costs related to the cost of environmental and health impacts as well as direct financial subsidies.

Another analysis from the same year pegged the cost at $12.75 per gallon. A 2018 study also suggests that the cost of military protection for shipping routes and other elements of the global oil supply network should be part of the equation, too. That study arrived at an additional figure of more than 70 cents per gallon for military costs alone.

The social safety net could include gas…

All in all, it seems fair to assume that the cost of a gallon of gas would be far more without various oil industry subsidies.

It is also fair to assume that many drivers can easily put money down for a new EV if they don’t want to pay more for gas. However, many households cannot afford to trade in their old car for another, electric or not. Removing the subsidies will force them to absorb higher fuel costs into budgets that are already stretched thin.

One solution would be to expand the social safety net to include fuel. Tattered as they are, social programs still underwrite basic needs for millions of low-income households including food, housing and utilities. Gas costs could also receive support, too.

A household subsidy program could also account for the use of fuel by self-employed drivers, small business owners, and workers in the gig economy who depend on their own vehicles to make a living.

…but accessible transportation access is the real issue

Either way, the back-and-forth over the real cost of gasoline is a distraction from a far more complicated problem that has impacts on businesses as well as on individuals. Unequal access to transportation is both a social issue and a bottom-line challenge for commerce.

For all the opportunities created by car culture, the focus on individual ownership leaves millions out in the cold, limiting the ability of employers to connect with potential employees, customers and clients.

The simple fact is that millions of low-income workers and consumers in the U.S. do not drive. They walk, drive, bike, use mass transit, rely on community networks for rides, or get ferried to a worksite by their employer. They will not benefit from a gas assistance program, at least not directly.

Income is only one limiting element. Millions of workers and consumers in the U.S. also don’t drive due to eyesight issues and other physical factors. In addition, the U.S. court system routinely pulls millions more out of the driving pool by suspending their licenses, while concerns over legal status can keep keep millions of non-citizens from owning or driving a car.

On the flip side, the need to accommodate individual car ownership can result in burdensome requirements for businesses that must subsidize employee parking, either through in-house parking lots and garages or through a voucher system.

To the extent that businesses need to have their own parking infrastructure, their choice of location can be limited, forcing a tradeoff between other bottom-line considerations and on-site employee parking.

The electric vehicles solution, fleet manager edition

While the impact and benefits of knocking out subsidies for gasoline will be spread unevenly among individual car owners and the general public, the effect on fleet management would be definitive. Higher gas prices will help push the fleet electrification movement into overdrive.

The fleet electrification movement has already begun to accelerate in recent years, even under relatively low gas prices. The latest price spike has further clarified the bottom-line advantage of EVs under a total cost of ownership scenario. In addition, up-front costs are expected to decline as the cost of EV batteries continues to fall.

Today’s fleet managers – and their employers – are also more sensitized to the public relations benefits of transitioning to more environmentally sustainable automotive technology. Community relations and driver health can also improve when noisy, smelly gas and diesel vehicles are replaced with clean and quiet-running EVs.

In addition, an electrified fleet can participate in workplace charging initiatives and demand-response programs that save money while contributing to overall grid reliability. Bi-directional EV batteries can also reduce or eliminate the need for noisy diesel generators in case of a power outage.

The case for fleet electrification is crystal clear, regardless of oil industry subsidies. As for individual car ownership, electric vehicles have finally gone mainstream. The early work of convincing individual car buyers to go electric has been done. Advocates for electric vehicles who have been leaning on the environmental case for electrification can shift gears and embrace a more fair, equitable and sustainable distribution of transportation resources beyond personal car ownership.

Image credit: Adobe Stock

Twenty years ago, planning for a staff meeting probably didn’t require coordination between time zones. Today, it might still involve a bit of snappy dressing—from the waist up, that is. Or, it may be a commute of only a few steps to the home office rather than a white-knuckle, twenty-mile drive on a crowded freeway. Logistics and manner of dress may have changed, but employers still want a cohesive workforce.

In her new book, Leading Global Diversity, Equity and Inclusion: A Guide for Systemic Change in Multinational Organizations (Berrett-Koehler Publishers), Rohini Anand, PhD., discusses the unique challenges of managing an international work force and provides guidelines for developing a successful “way-of-work-life” that incorporates DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) into the workplace.

Anand’s inspiration for the book came from personal experience. When, as a young woman, she moved to North America from India for school, and eventually career opportunities, Anand found herself a minority for the first time in her life. Not only was she subject to disparate treatment as a woman and an Asian, but she also discovered unconscious cultural assumptions of her own, including relying on a single-culture worldview to inform her interactions with others. “I didn’t recognize the privilege of majority status that I enjoyed until I came to America and was subject to the opposite,” said Anand.

With a long CV of executive job titles, awards, podcasts, blogs and presentations, and having solidified her reputation as an expert on the subject, Dr. Anand developed five principles of change that global businesses can adopt in the area of DEI. Her research for the book included interviewing 65 leaders across various industries, and it’s heavy on specifics.

There are two chapters dedicated to each principle in her book, beginning with formalizing a global change strategy and understanding race and ethnicity. Further in the process, Anand speaks of transformational leadership and dealing with resistance.

That Anand specifically addresses issues such as resistance and the often-slow progress of advancing DEI through each stage, adds validity to her methods. The process isn’t easy, and she doesn’t pretend that it is.

It is this resistance to change and the search for shared attributes that complicates the process. Finding that common denominator makes the difference between the employee who is merely task-oriented, and the one who sees their time as an investment in the organization and themselves.

In light of the challenges of the global work setting, and taking full advantage of Dr. Anand’s expertise, TriplePundit asked Dr. Anand to answer some of the more difficult questions that most organizations will face.

3p: How do you assure equity for your employee in Vietnam and your employee in Alaska considering language differences, different environmental challenges and cultural peculiarities? What does equity look like in that scenario?

Anand: The company values are what guides how a company navigates cultural peculiarities, regardless of the part of the world. These values are about ensuring that the workplace is equitable and inclusive and where all systemic barriers have been removed so anyone, regardless of their identity can succeed.

Global work is most effective when there is a transversal strategy: a global framework of values and accountability but allowing for local execution.

If the global strategy is focused, for example, on the representation of women, the targets need to be cascaded with an understanding of the local contexts, allowing for different ways to achieve this outcome.

For example, in Thailand, men who are recruited are asked if they have wives or daughters who would like to work. Viewed through a one-dimensional western feminist lens, this would be unacceptable and patronizing. But in patriarchal cultures, it is important to get the family’s buy-in. With a one-dimensional approach, the women would not be able to work at all.

3p: In one of your podcasts, you say that “Ultimately transformation happens at the intersection of the personal and systemic.” Is it appropriate to expect personal transformation in the workplace?

Anand: That’s a big “yes.” Yes it is possible. To lead DEI with purpose and passion, leaders have to internalize the benefit of DEI to themselves and their organization. Often this requires a disruptive experience that triggers deep introspection and a shift in their world view.

3p: What is meant by your use of the phrase “moving from corporate statements to disruptive and sustainable actions.” How disruptive?

Anand: Giving money to social justice causes and making statements are a good start, but that's easy. Much harder is making sustainable changes to make the organization diverse, equitable and inclusive. The 5 Principles in the book provide a through-line to make sustainable change.

Organizations can make disruption of the status quo part of normalized conversations, even when it is not breaking news. What this means is that leaders need to eliminate the harmful practices that have benefitted some. To do that they have to recognize how they got to their positions.

To be disruptive, organizations need to take a bold stand on social justice issues. Consumers, employees and communities are expecting this.

3p: “We’re more divided than we ever were” is something you hear frequently from various sources. Is there an undercurrent of resistance to DEI in America today?

Anand: Yes, there is a backlash against diversity. When some in the majority feel threatened and left out of the DEI discourse, they are being vocal. This divisiveness is a reflection of our society and is spilling into organizations.

Organizations need to allow space for dialog from all sides with clear ground rules and they need to ensure that everyone feels [they are a] part of DEI.

However, organizations need to be clear about their values and ensure that there is no disrespect or discrimination of anyone.

In spite of the national climate of divisiveness, initiating or strengthening a sustainable DEI movement within an organization can positively impact people, planet and profit.

For information regarding the purchase of Dr. Anand’s book, or to request a speaking engagement, visit Dr. Anand’s website.

Image credit: Christina Morillo via Pexels

Last year saw a surge in commercial real estate transactions, with a record $809 billion in commercial property sales, according to Real Capital Analytics. For many companies in the sector, including the commercial real estate services and investment firm CBRE Group, Inc., there has been a boom in business. But CBRE also saw a return on its investments in, and focus on, ESG (environmental, social and governance).

From the start of 2021 through to now, CBRE has repeatedly been recognized for the company’s diversity and inclusion efforts. Bloomberg also named CBRE to its Gender-Equality Index for the third consecutive year in February. In 2021, CBRE featured on the Human Rights Campaign’s “Best Place to Work for LBGTQ Equality,” the Disability Equality Index’s list of Best Places to Work for Disability Inclusion and on Ethisphere’s directory of the “World’s Most Ethical Companies” –for the eighth consecutive year.

“As a professional services firm, we are all about our people, whose integrity and commitment to ethical conduct served us well as we rallied to support colleagues and communities in need, while continuing to deliver world-class solutions for our clients,” said Elizabeth Atlee, CBRE’s senior vice president and chief ethics and compliance officer, said in a public statement.

Internally, CBRE was simultaneously building out its Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) team, promoting Tim Dismond from chief diversity officer to chief responsibility officer, uniting all of CBRE’s ESG efforts under his leadership. Ryan Mitchell and LaTonya Wilson were both hired to lead DEI efforts for CBRE; Mitchell for advisory services and real estate investments businesses and Woodson for global workplace solutions business.

The move to incorporate more ESG practices into the business is not unusual for the commercial real estate industry. A GlobeSt.com article published last June found that “over the last decade, commercial real estate players have increasingly considered the environment and sustainability when underwriting investments and operating properties.”

Quite simply, business leaders have recognized that the economist Milton Friedman’s 1970s doctrine, “the social responsibility of business is the increase profits,” is effectively dead. Neal Hartman, senior lecturer in managerial communication at MIT Sloan argued in his January 2021 article published by the school, that Friedman was suggesting “greed was good.” Hartmann points out that modern companies’ “focus on the environment and renewable energy have bolstered the brand images of these companies.”

Today’s consumers and shareholders would argue that “green” is good, and in fact, a focus on ESG can have a positive impact on revenues. Yet, more can be done. For example, CBRE contends listed infrastructure is neglected in ESG and sustainable strategies in the October 2021 investment insights report, Why Listed Infrastructure is Essential for ESG and Sustainability, published in conjunction with New York Life Investments. The report states “infrastructure may drive 50 percent of all decarbonization investment.”

So, as the world’s largest manager of commercial properties, CBRE has said that it is committed to improving the efficiency and sustainability of its own building operations as well as that of its clients. According to its 2020 corporate responsibility report, CBRE seeks a greenhouse gas reduction target of cutting its operational emissions by more than two-thirds by 2035.

Further, CBRE its announced commitment to net-zero carbon emissions by 2040 and as part of that strategy. The company has also signed The Climate Pledge, joining a group of companies committed to achieving the Paris Agreement’s net-zero carbon goal 10 years ahead of schedule. Efforts like these helped CBRE earn a spot on the Dow Jones World Sustainability Index for three consecutive years.

However, with approximately 500 offices worldwide and more than 100,000 employees, it stands to reason that CBRE puts so much emphasis on talent diversity. 2020 saw the launch of a partnership between the real estate shop and social impact platform Project Destined, which now includes the Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) Bridge Program, connecting students with CBRE leaders to expose them to industry career paths.

As CBRE President and CEO Robert Sulentic said in the 2020 Corporate Responsibility Report, “We are particularly focused on onboarding and advancing more people of color and women….”

Beyond internal DEI initiatives, CBRE also pledged $1 billion in purchasing from minority- and women-owned suppliers in 2021, tripling that spend by 2025.

Image credit: Robert Stump via Unsplash