What is going on with Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization?

On June 15, 2020, a petition for certiorari was filed in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. Two weeks later, the Court decided June Medical. Over the past 9 months (three trimesters if you will), the circuits have split about whether June Medical overruled portions of Whole Woman’s Health. The Court first distributed Dobbs for the 9/29/20 conference. It was then rescheduled for 10/9/20. And rescheduled again for 10/16/20. And rescheduled again for 10/30/20–three days after Justice Barrett was confirmed. Since ACB joined the Court, the petition has been considered at thirteen more conferences.

It’s possible the Court will ultimately grant certiorari at the end of the term. Or maybe there is another vehicle in the waiting that can be granted; Dobbs can be held. At this juncture, there do not appear to be four votes to grant. One or more justices may be writing a dissent from denial of cert. What is going on here?

First, I am confident there are three votes to grant: Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch. They were gung ho in June Medical. But three does not make four.

Second, the Chief Justice seems to be retreating from his position in June Medical. He reaffirmed his conclusion that Whole Woman’s Health was wrongly decided, but Louisiana’s law was too similar to Texas’s law. Roberts was willing to make that point when he was the 5th vote. But now, he would be the (ostensible) 6th vote.

Third, Justice Kavanaugh also seemed to agree with Thomas/Alito/Gorsuch in June Medical. What is the holdup?

Fourth, we have Justice Barrett. In her brief tenure, she has trended towards the Roberts/Kavanaugh centrist wing of the Court. She didn’t vote to take up the Pennsylvania election case. She sided with Justice Kavanaugh in South Bay II. We only have a few glimpses, but the portrait of Justice Barrett is beginning to take shape.

If Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch dissent from the denial of cert in Dobbs, we know that Roberts, Kavanaugh, and Barrett each declined to grant review.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3cgqfi5
via IFTTT

Cigna Responds To Claims That It Excludes White Men In The Hiring Process

Cigna Responds To Claims That It Excludes White Men In The Hiring Process

Authored by Tyler O’Neil via PJMedia.com,

According to an explosive report from The Washington Examiner, one of the nation’s largest health insurance providers actively discriminates against white males in hiring and pushes Marxist critical race theory on its staff. Cigna reportedly urges staff to check various kinds of “privilege,” to avoid using terms like “Wives/husband,” and to read books that claim America is systemically racist. In a statement to PJ Media, Cigna condemned racism and discrimination and insisted its positions were open to qualified applicants, regardless of race. The company did explicitly deny using racial quotas or address claims about its training materials.

“Given the hiring practices they have in place where white, male candidates are blocked, regardless of qualifications, I have to say, ‘Yes, there’s obvious discrimination at this company,’” an anonymous employee told the Washington Examiner.

In chat logs reviewed by the Examiner, a hiring manager rejected a candidate with strong credentials who had performed well in an interview — because the hiring manager mistakenly thought the candidate was white. An employee corrected the manager, noting that the candidate was indeed a minority, and then the manager said she was excited to hire him, despite learning almost nothing else about his background.

An employee also suggested a candidate with years of industry experience, but the hiring manager said the candidate, a white man, could not be interviewed because he did not meet the diversity criteria.

Some employees told the Examiner that these racial quotas often translate to an inability to fill jobs in departments focused on tech or data. “I can’t fill these jobs,” an employee said.

“Cigna stands for equity and equality,” a company spokesperson told PJ Media.

“We do not tolerate racism and discrimination in the workplace. We confront these issues through listening and open discussion and with intensity, empathy and accountability.”

“It is important to note that our recruiting practices are focused on qualifications, abilities, aptitude and attitude for open roles, regardless of race, age, gender, sexual orientation, or any other demographics,” the spokesperson added. “While we have not been able to validate the internal exchange highlighted in the recent story, we encourage all colleagues who have any concerns or questions to contact our 24/7, confidential Ethics Office.”

This statement appears to deny the claims regarding racial diversity quotas in hiring, but when PJ Media asked the spokesperson to clarify the statement with an explicit denial, the spokesperson did not respond.

The spokesperson also did not address or explain the extensive critical race theory trainings recounted in the Examiner‘s story.

Cigna, valued in the tens of billions, boasts over 73,000 employees in offices across the world. Company staff gave the Examiner screenshots of employee trainings that forbade certain phrases as insufficiently “inclusive.”

A spreadsheet urged staff to avoid certain words of phrases and to use others, instead. For instance, “Wives/husbands/boyfriends/Girlfriends” is out — “Spouse/Partner” is in. “Parenting” should replace “Mothering/Fathering.” “Humankind” should replace “Mankind.” Even “Hip Hip Hooray!” is off limits.

Perhaps most ironically, the spreadsheet singles out “China Virus” as particularly offensive. Next to the term, the spreadsheet says, “NO alternatives—discontinue use.” Technically, such a directive would ban Cigna employees from speaking about COVID-19 at all.

Cigna training screenshot, obtained by The Washington Examiner.

The Cigna training also encouraged staff to use a “‘Societal Norms’ Checklist.” The form encourages staff to “check your privilege.” Various forms of “privilege” include “Able-bodied,” “Age (25-55),” “Christian,” “Cis-Male,” “Heterosexual,” “Upper Class,” and “White.”

While a few of these aspects — able-bodied and upper class — clearly do translate to a form of privilege, the “privilege” of other identities is quite debatable. Jack Phillips, a Christian baker repeatedly targeted for his faith, seems not to enjoy any “privilege” from being Christian. It seems white males who apply for a job at Cigna have the opposite of “privilege.” While younger people are considered lucky for various reasons, 25-year-old applicants more often lack the experience necessary to get the jobs they want.

Cigna training screenshot, obtained by The Washington Examiner.

This training makes a perverse kind of sense in the context of Marxist critical race theory, however. Critical race theory teaches that any racial disparities must ipso facto be proof of some hidden racial bias or discrimination, regardless of civil rights laws explicitly forbidding such discrimination. While this often translates to claims of “white privilege,” Asian Americans have also warned that critical race theory often targets Asian Americans, who tend to be overrepresented in higher education and some professions.

Cigna’s training materials support books that promote critical race theory. The company recommends that employees read Robin DiAngelo’s White Fragility, Ibram X. Kendi’s How To Be An Anti-Racist, and two books from accused leftist terrorist Angela Davis — who was arrested in 1970 on kidnapping and murder charges.

The Cigna “My University” portal offers several lessons on alleged systemic racism in American society. The curriculum cites The New York Times‘ “1619 Project,” including the claim that “America was not yet America [in 1619], but this was the moment it began.”

The 1619 Project twists American history to claim that America is systemically racist, matching critical race theory. Last year, the Times stealth-edited the project’s online portal, removing the claim that the project “aims to reframe the country’s history, understanding 1619 as our true founding, and placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the very center of our national narrative.” Many historians had torn apart the 1619 Project’s claims — even the 1619 date does not represent the first time slaves set foot in what would become the United States, for instance — but the project continues to enjoy prominence.

The 1619 Project also arguably helped inspire the violent riots over the summer of 2020 that killed at least 26 people. When vandals toppled a statue of George Washington in Portland, they spray-painted “1619” on the statue. When Claremont’s Charles Kesler wrote in The New York Post, “Call them the 1619 riots,” 1619 Project Founder Nikole Hannah-Jones responded (in a since-deleted tweet) that “it would be an honor” to claim responsibility for the destructive riots.

Yet Cigna has apparently gone all-in on the Black Lives Matter narrative. In fact, one company memo referred to George Floyd’s death as a “senseless murder” and announced that Black Lives Matter attire will be acceptable in the workplace.

“As part of our culture of inclusion, we believe employees should bring their whole selves to work, and we embrace causes that align with our values,” the announcement read.

“That’s why we’ve recently updated our Dress for Your Day policy to reflect that Black Lives Matter apparel is permitted at work.”

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) condemned Cigna’s corporate culture in comments to the Examiner.

“This woke ideology is infecting every part of our economy and our culture, and it only serves to divide Americans into smaller and smaller groups and then pit those groups against each other,” Rubio declared.

“You have to wonder how a corporate culture so consumed by dividing Americans can effectively serve our nation and its people. It is grotesque and un-American.”

Cigna’s statement to PJ Media suggested that the company does not use racial quotas in hiring, but the spokesperson did not make that denial explicit. Instead, the spokesperson used lefty buzzwords like “equity” and “empathy.” This duplicity suggests a desire to cater to both sides of the issue. Cigna is unlikely to satisfy conservatives, however, given the egregious bias in the company’s training materials.

Tyler Durden
Tue, 03/23/2021 – 18:05

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3rg6ivZ Tyler Durden

Daily Briefing: One Year Anniversary of the Market Bottom What Could Go Wrong?

Daily Briefing: One Year Anniversary of the Market Bottom What Could Go Wrong?

Lily Francus, independent quantitative researcher, joins Real Vision senior editor Ash Bennington to share her outlook on narrative economics, the NOPE Index, and the dangers of beta. On the one-year anniversary of the bottom in the S&P 500, Francus notes that this current market environment is marked by a great deal of short covering and portfolio rebalancing, which drive the “rotation” trade away from growth into value that has been playing out. Francus explains how the surge of retail traders (or “low-information traders”) has driven flows and exerted a serious influence, particularly in the sky-high volume of options contracts. Francus connects this to her theory on NOPE (“net options pricing effect”) before sharing with Bennington her advice to traders in this choppy market.

Tyler Durden
Tue, 03/23/2021 – 16:00

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3vU4DzN Tyler Durden

Where is President Biden’s Solicitor General Nominee already? And what about OLC?

Since the inauguration, the Biden Administration has made many consequential decisions before the Supreme Court. DOJ has switched positions in some cases and settled others. Yet, almost all of these pleadings have been signed by the Acting Solicitor General, Elizabeth Prelogar. (Prelogar was recused in the ACA case; Deputy SG Kneedler withdrew the government’s prior brief). To date, President Biden has not even nominated a Solicitor General. What’s the hold up?

After the election, there was a smattering of writings suggesting that Biden should nominate an African American woman for the job. But in January, we learned that a leading contender, California Supreme Court Justice Leondra Kruger “twice declined the job.” Two months later, still silence.

Last week, Elizabeth Wydra of the Constitutional Accountability Center urged Biden to nominate an SG “to meet this historic moment.”

Given renewed attacks on the right to vote by some state legislatures, as well as ongoing police violence against Black people and hate crimes targeting people of color, voting rights and racial equity are sure to dominate our nation’s legal agenda for years to come. Often, those disputes will culminate before the nine justices of the U.S. Supreme Court.

That makes another, less visible, office in the Justice Department — solicitor general of the United States — a critically important position for Biden to fill.

The question is whether he will select a nominee ready to meet this fraught moment in our history and help honor the second founding of our nation that Garland so eloquently invoked.

The time for such bold leadership is upon us again. Biden has a historic opportunity to choose a solicitor general worthy of Bristow and Marshall. Our times demand nothing less.

This timely op-ed suggests that there is still internal debates about who be selected. Wydra wants Biden to go big. Presumably, some other faction wants Biden to play it safe. I suspect race will play some factor here. If Biden selects a white man, then sectors of his base will be unhappy. Back in January, the National Law Journal floated Andy Pincus and David Frederick. Progressives for sure, but white men. It’s possible that Prelogar becomes the ultimate nominee. She is a female, but is also white. Will her nomination be enough to meet “this historic moment”?

On a related topic, what about the Office of Legal Counsel? Who is running the show now? The administration has made several important legal decisions in the last few months. Someone has to be advising the White House.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3lHihBN
via IFTTT

USPS Unveils 10-Year Sustainability Plan: Higher Prices, Worse Service

USPS Unveils 10-Year Sustainability Plan: Higher Prices, Worse Service

Congress will be reviewing Postmaster General Louis DeJoy’s 10-year business plan that calls for more packages, higher prices, and longer delivery time for first-class mail. USPS’ planned overhaul comes as it faces more than $100 billion in projected losses.

DeJoy’s 10-year business plan was first disclosed on Tuesday and reported by WSJ, and it outlines how the postmaster attempts to modernize operations and financially overhaul USPS to improve service reliability. The plan is also requesting federal relief to ease financial burdens for retiree benefits and increase new investments to expand delivery services as e-commerce booms. 

“The biggest change here is that we have a growth plan,” DeJoy said in an interview. Over the last 14-years, USPS has lost money every year with a $9.2 billion net loss in 2020. 

DeJoy’s plan is to concentrate more on e-commerce delivery than first-class mail, which is down more than 36% since 2007. Revenues from packages have tripled since 2007 due to online shipping. DeJoy said, “You have to ride the growth up,” referring to his plan to refocus efforts on expanding e-commerce shipping. 

DeJoy proposed raising rates on first-class mail to addresses the decline in volume

“The government has told us to break even, to be self-sustaining,” Ron Bloom, chairman of USPS’ board of governors, said in an interview. “They’ve also told us that the only place you get money is from the sale of your product. The only way that circle squares is if we can charge a little more for our product.”

Along with higher rates on first-class mail, shipping times will take longer, up to five days instead of three. 

DeJoy and Bloom said the agency would continue delivery services six days a week. The plan doesn’t include widespread layoffs nor winding down operations in smaller regions. 

The proposal is expected to be analyzed by Congress. Union’s representing 640,000 workers are expected to chime in on the proposal soon. 

The plan also includes more trucking capacity to move first-class mail and packages than airplanes, “where it relies on third-party carriers such as FedEx Corp., a move it says will save money and improve delivery times,” said WSJ.

The goal is to shift more letter and package volumes to the ground to improve efficiency by using more space in trailers.

“We have put way too much of our cubic foot movement up on air,” DeJoy said. He noted trucks in USPS’ network generally run around 35% full. 

To increase capacity, USPS plans to integrate new automated equipment to improve efficiency in delivery services. It also plans to convert 21 distribution centers to regional package-only sites.

DeJoy will likely face criticism by congressional members for the proposed overhaul as they call for higher prices and worse service for mail. 

Tyler Durden
Tue, 03/23/2021 – 17:45

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2QzzJww Tyler Durden

Iran Threatened “USS Cole-Style Attacks” On DC Base: US Intel Officials

Iran Threatened “USS Cole-Style Attacks” On DC Base: US Intel Officials

Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

With a possible revival of the Iran nuclear deal on the table, there are many forces at work opposing a US return to the accord, known as the JCPOA. One form this opposition takes is through anonymous leaks to Western media outlets that are happy to publish whatever intelligence officials tell them to. This week, two dubiously-sourced reports came out that accused Iran of plotting an attack in Washington and operating a secret nuclear program. Missing from the stories was any evidence to back up the claims.

On Sunday, The Associated Press published a story that cited “two senior US intelligence officials” who claimed that Iran made threats against Fort McNair, a waterfront Army base in Washington DC. The officials said the NSA intercepted communications of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps discussing possible “USS Cole-style attacks” on Fort McNair, referring to the 2000 attack on a US Navy destroyer off Yemen that was launched using a small explosive-laden boat. The AP story offers no other evidence to back up the claim besides the word of the unnamed officials.

Image: US Army Corps of Engineers

Iran hawks benefit from such stories since it gives the US more reasons not to return to the JCPOA. But another reason to hype a threat to Fort McNair was explained in the AP story.

The US Army wants to create a security buffer zone extending 250 to 500 feet into the water of the Washington Channel, the busy waterway that Fort McNair sits on. Eleanor Holmes Norton, DC’s representative to Congress, has been fighting this buffer zone and said the military has shown her no evidence that constitutes a threat big enough to justify it.

“I have asked the Department of Defense to withdraw the rule because I’ve seen no evidence of a credible threat that would support the proposed restriction,” Norton said. “I have a security clearance. And they have yet to show me any classified evidence.” The AP doesn’t explain these doubts until a few paragraphs into the story, so most readers with faith in the outlet that read the headline and skimmed a few paragraphs are left believing Iran is considering attacking Washington.

Following the AP report, on Monday, The Telegraph published a story that cited unnamed “Western intelligence officials” who claimed Iran is “deliberately concealing key components of its nuclear program from UN inspectors that can be used for producing nuclear weapons.” The officials claimed that Iran is hiding equipment that can be used to enrich uranium at 90 percent, which is needed for weapons-grade.

The Telegraph report follows a familiar script. For decades now, Western and Israeli officials have claimed Iran is operating a secret nuclear weapons program. Like most of these claims, the Telegraph offers absolutely no evidence to corroborate the story. All the officials say is that they tracked containers they “believe” this equipment is held in through satellite images.

President Biden claims that he wants to revive the JCPOA but has taken no action to do so. He is demanding that Iran reverse the activity of its civilian nuclear program to comply with the limits set by the agreement before sanctions imposed by the Trump administration are lifted. Since the US is the party that violated the deal, Tehran wants Biden to act first.

While Biden has not lifted sanctions, his administration is calling for talks with Iran to restore the JCPOA. This is enough to evoke a strong response from Iran hawks in Congress. With intense domestic pressure and opposition to the JCPOA from US allies like Israel and Saudi Arabia, it is unlikely that Biden will take a unilateral action like lifting sanctions to revive the JCPOA. Dubiously-sourced reports like the ones from AP and the Telegraph give Iran hawks more ammunition to pressure Biden into not returning to the agreement. In the meantime, Iran’s economy remains under crippling economic sanctions, and ordinary Iranians continue to suffer.

Tyler Durden
Tue, 03/23/2021 – 17:25

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2QAI575 Tyler Durden

Big Oil Backs Carbon Tax


oilskynewscom

Executives from leading oil companies, including ExxonMobil, BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, and the American Petroleum Institute (API), met virtually with Biden administration officials to discuss policies aimed at addressing the problem of man-made climate change. The Wall Street Journal reported that company leaders said that “they wanted to work with the administration and pledged support for policies that would make it more expensive to emit the gases that contribute to climate change.” In a statement issued after the virtual meeting, API CEO Mike Sommers declared, “We are committed to working with the White House to develop effective government policies that help meet the ambitions of the Paris Agreement and support a cleaner future.” The API is rumored to be considering coming out in support of carbon emissions pricing.

ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips previously endorsed the bipartisan Climate Leadership Council’s (CLC) revenue neutral carbon tax and dividend proposal in which escalating taxes collected on oil and natural gas at the wellhead and on coal at the minehead would be entirely rebated in equal sums to each American as an annual payment. The CLC cites a 2018 study that finds that 70 percent of American households would receive more in dividend payments then they would pay in increased energy prices.

Once the CLC’s carbon tax plan is adopted, all other regulations and subsidies aimed at reducing carbon dioxide emissions, such as automobile fuel efficiency and renewable portfolio standards, are supposed to be permanently repealed.

However, lots of climate activists oppose carbon taxes. Why? InsideClimateNews offered the example of Matto Mildenberger, a political scientist at the University of California, Santa Barbara, who has argued that carbon taxes make climate action unpopular because they front load the costs immediately onto consumers while the eventual benefits of lower temperatures, less fierce storms, and lower sea levels stretch into the future. As InsideClimateNews explained:

In the view of Mildenberger and others who’ve studied climate politics around the world, subsidies, regulation, and other policies that provide more immediate and visible benefits—like jobs creation—are a better way to jump-start climate policy, even if they cost more in the short run. That’s because they stimulate investment to help lower the cost of alternative energy, and at the same time help broaden political support for stronger climate policy. New actors with real investments they want to protect and advance will want more aggressive action, and politicians will respond.

On the other hand, economists in general favor the idea of imposing a price on carbon emissions as an efficient way to steer economic activity toward energy efficiency and the development of cheaper no-carbon energy supplies. Carbon taxes, economists argue, should attract the support of free market conservatives. But in fact, during the procedural votes on Biden’s COVID-19 relief plan, all of the Senate’s 50 Republicans voted in favor of an amendment to prohibit the adoption of a federal carbon tax.

If oil company support for a carbon price is aimed at forestalling the rollout of big climate change regulations and expenditures, the effort has likely come too late. For example, the Biden administration’s $3 trillion infrastructure plan is anticipated to include $400 billion to combat climate change, including $46 billion on climate-change R&D, $60 billion for green transit, and billions more on upgrades to the electrical grid, energy efficiency improvements to housing, and the construction of thousands of charging stations for electric vehicles across the country. In order to pay for at least part of this costly plan, the Biden administration might happily tax carbon while forgetting all about revenue neutrality.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2P2hIGz
via IFTTT

Where is President Biden’s Solicitor General Nominee already? And what about OLC?

Since the inauguration, the Biden Administration has made many consequential decisions before the Supreme Court. DOJ has switched positions in some cases and settled others. Yet, almost all of these pleadings have been signed by the Acting Solicitor General, Elizabeth Prelogar. (Prelogar was recused in the ACA case; Deputy SG Kneedler withdrew the government’s prior brief). To date, President Biden has not even nominated a Solicitor General. What’s the hold up?

After the election, there was a smattering of writings suggesting that Biden should nominate an African American woman for the job. But in January, we learned that a leading contender, California Supreme Court Justice Leondra Kruger “twice declined the job.” Two months later, still silence.

Last week, Elizabeth Wydra of the Constitutional Accountability Center urged Biden to nominate an SG “to meet this historic moment.”

Given renewed attacks on the right to vote by some state legislatures, as well as ongoing police violence against Black people and hate crimes targeting people of color, voting rights and racial equity are sure to dominate our nation’s legal agenda for years to come. Often, those disputes will culminate before the nine justices of the U.S. Supreme Court.

That makes another, less visible, office in the Justice Department — solicitor general of the United States — a critically important position for Biden to fill.

The question is whether he will select a nominee ready to meet this fraught moment in our history and help honor the second founding of our nation that Garland so eloquently invoked.

The time for such bold leadership is upon us again. Biden has a historic opportunity to choose a solicitor general worthy of Bristow and Marshall. Our times demand nothing less.

This timely op-ed suggests that there is still internal debates about who be selected. Wydra wants Biden to go big. Presumably, some other faction wants Biden to play it safe. I suspect race will play some factor here. If Biden selects a white man, then sectors of his base will be unhappy. Back in January, the National Law Journal floated Andy Pincus and David Frederick. Progressives for sure, but white men. It’s possible that Prelogar becomes the ultimate nominee. She is a female, but is also white. Will her nomination be enough to meet “this historic moment”?

On a related topic, what about the Office of Legal Counsel? Who is running the show now? The administration has made several important legal decisions in the last few months. Someone has to be advising the White House.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3lHihBN
via IFTTT

Firefighters Battle Three-Alarm Fire On Top Of Manhattan Building 

Firefighters Battle Three-Alarm Fire On Top Of Manhattan Building 

A 3 alarm fire has been reported on the top floor of a 6-story building in Manhattan on Tuesday afternoon, according to the New York City Fire Department (FDNY). 

“FDNY members are operating on scene of a 3-alarm fire at 303 East 37th Street in Manhattan,” tweeted FDNY. 

The fire was first reported in the late afternoon of a six-floor building at 393 E. 37th St. in Tudor City. 

Multiple hook-and-ladder fire trucks have been dispatched to the incident area as the heavy smoke rises from the building. 

Streets around the building have been closed off as more than 100 firefighters attempt to extinguish the blaze. 

Here’s another view of the dense brown smoke rising from the top floor of the building. 

Twitter users report a massive presence of first responders. 

*This story is developing… 

Tyler Durden
Tue, 03/23/2021 – 17:03

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2OYOokg Tyler Durden

Citigroup CEO Introduces “Zoom-Free Fridays” & “Citi Reset Day,” Encourages Vacations

Citigroup CEO Introduces “Zoom-Free Fridays” & “Citi Reset Day,” Encourages Vacations

More than a year since the virus pandemic began, many companies, such as Citigroup Inc., are finding hybrid work models for their employees are becoming more permanent. 

In a memo to employees, first seen by Bloomberg, Citigroup Inc. CEO Jane Fraser is trying to shake up the workweek for employees working at home. She barred video calls on Fridays and encouraged vacations. 

Fraser replaced Michael Corbat earlier this year and told employees in the memo that the workweek’s final day should be known as “Zoom-Free Fridays.” She also gave employees a day off on May 28 to extend their Memorial day weekend. She designated May 28 as a holiday to be known as “Citi Reset Day.”

The memo also stated that employees working at home should avoid scheduling meetings outside of normal operational hours. 

“I know, from your feedback and my own experience, the blurring of lines between home and work and the relentlessness of the pandemic workday have taken a toll on our well-being,” Fraser wrote in the memo. “It’s simply not sustainable.”

She encouraged employees to take vacations which will be good for their mind, body, and soul, considering many have been cooped up in their homes for nearly a year. The idea of traveling to a resort destination and working from there is what some employees have already done. 

The pandemic has forever altered the workweek as a hybrid model becomes widely popular among large firms. This means employees will have a few options: first, permanently work from home; second, split up the workweek between home and office. 

… and maybe the four-day week is catching on… Will Stronge, director of research at Autonomy, said: “The four-day week is picking up momentum. For the large majority of firms, reducing working hours is an entirely realistic goal.”

Deutsche Bank is another large corporation that has embraced a hybrid work model between home and office. 

Deutsche Bank U.K. CEO Tiina Lee recently said being in the office 5 days a week “feels to me a little bit like a wasted opportunity.” Lee said that staff wants to work from home, and “that is something that we’re looking to explore.”

Even when the pandemic is over, Ford Motor Co. told 30,000 employees this month they can work from home. British Petroleum is another firm that has recently allowed staff to work from home two days a week as part of a pandemic-inspired shift to flexible working patterns.

This is the latest warning shot for corporate real estate in some of the world’s most valuable markets that companies are set to decrease their corporate footprint as hybrid work models become permanent. 

Tyler Durden
Tue, 03/23/2021 – 17:05

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2NJruwI Tyler Durden