ReportWire

Tag: american workers

  • Meet the world’s youngest self-made billionaire, who skipped finals to make an empire out of teaching AI ‘what only humans know’ | Fortune

    [ad_1]

    In the spring of 2023, while his classmates at Georgetown were cramming for finals, Brendan Foody was busy testing out his new theory of work.

    “I knew I wanted to drop out before finals my sophomore year,” he told Fortune. “I just didn’t go to finals.”

    By then, Foody had already found something he couldn’t learn in a lecture hall. A few months earlier, at a hackathon in São Paulo, he and his co-founders had stumbled onto a simple but powerful model: match companies with skilled engineers abroad, handle the logistics, and take a small cut of each deal. Their first client agreed to pay $500 a week for a developer; Mercor paid the engineer roughly 70% and kept the rest as a service fee.

    What began as a way to connect talent soon evolved into something more ambitious: a marketplace where humans could help train the AI systems that might one day replace them. Mercor now hires professionals—consultants, lawyers, bankers, and doctors—to create “evals” and rubrics that test and refine models’ reasoning.

    “Everyone’s been focused on what models can do,” Foody said. “But the real opportunity is teaching them what only humans know—judgment, nuance, and taste.”

    Within nine months, he and his co-founders—high school friends and debate teammates Adarsh Hiremath and Surya Midha—had turned that fledgling idea into a company with a $1 million revenue run rate. The trio’s early success was less a fluke than a proof of concept: that the same structured reasoning they once practiced on the debate circuit could be codified to teach machines how to think.

    Two years later, Mercor has become a $10 billion company, turning the trio into the world’s youngest self-made billionaires. The product of that São Paulo experiment had transformed into one of the fastest-scaling startups of the AI era, attracting major investors who view it as a linchpin in the future of human-in-the-loop automation.

    To Foody, the leap from college dropout to billionaire founder was rational.

    “When I was in college, work was something I had to be disciplined to do,” he said. “When I started Mercor, it became something I couldn’t stop thinking about.”

    Foody still hasn’t taken a day off in three years. He says even when he’s at the dinner table with his parents, he thinks about work, which, to him, doesn’t feel like work. 

    “People burn out when they work hard on things that don’t feel compounding,” he explained. “I see the ROI of my time every day.”

    That mindset has become the philosophical core of Mercor’s mission. In Foody’s view, AI isn’t eliminating labor: it’s reallocating it. As software automates repetitive white-collar tasks, humans will move up the value chain, teaching machines how to reason, decide, and create. 

    “It’s like we have this bottleneck of only so much human labor in the economy,” he said. “That shape is going to change radically over the next decade.”

    How is Mercor alleviating the bottleneck? Its platform allows enterprises to commission thousands of micro-tasks that measure model performance in real professional contexts: writing a financial memo, drafting a legal brief, or analyzing a medical chart. Human evaluators grade each output against detailed rubrics, feeding structured feedback back into the model. Every evaluation helps AI learn how people make decisions, and how they measure quality.

    At the center of that system is APEX—the AI Productivity Index, Mercor’s proprietary benchmark for assessing how well AI performs economically valuable work. Rather than test abstract reasoning or mathematical puzzles, APEX evaluates large models on 200 tasks drawn from the workflows of investment bankers, lawyers, consultants, and physicians. To build it, Mercor enlisted a heavyweight advisory group that includes former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, ex-McKinsey managing partner Dominic Barton, legal scholar Cass Sunstein, and cardiologist Eric Topol. Each helped design the evaluation rubrics and case structures to mirror the realities of high-stakes professional labor.

    As the company puts it: “It’s great to have 10,000 PhDs in your pocket—it’s even better to have a model that can reliably do your taxes.”

    The implications of Mercor’s success are sweeping. In Foody’s eyes, this new labor market could employ millions of people globally while accelerating AI progress. 

    “We’ll automate maybe two-thirds of knowledge work,” he said. “And that’ll be incredible, because it lets us do things like cure cancer and go to Mars.”

    For investors, Mercor’s growth story is irresistible. It sits at the intersection of two seismic shifts: the mainstreaming of AI and the rise of flexible, project-based work. Each corporate client adds new evaluators, and each evaluator helps refine more models, creating a flywheel of both data and demand. 

    “We have one of the fastest revenue ramps of any company in history,” Foody said matter-of-factly.

    Foody likes to describe it as the next industrial revolution. He knows people are afraid of being replaced by AI, and constantly fields questions on the ethics of training AI to replace jobs. Foody argues we ought to just bite the bullet. 

    “It’s easy to fall into a Luddite mindset and see productivity gains as bad because they cause short-term job losses,” Foody said. “But every major technical revolution has ultimately made life better.”

    After the industrial revolution, the economy went from 75% of Americans working as farmers to about 1%, and that freed people to do everything else, Foody said. 

    “The challenge now is to be thoughtful about what comes next: the higher, better things humans will spend time on,” Foody said, “and how quickly we can help make that future real.”

    [ad_2]

    Eva Roytburg

    Source link

  • Trump immigration policies would slash workforce estimate by 15.7 million and slow GDP growth by a third over the next decade, study says | Fortune

    [ad_1]

    The U.S. immigration crackdown will cause net job losses in the millions and will lower the annual rate of economic growth by almost one-third over the next decade, a new study estimates.

    The Trump administration’s policies aimed at legal and illegal immigration would reduce the projected number of workers by 6.8 million by 2028 and 15.7 million by 2035, the National Foundation for American Policy’s study released Friday found. People entering the workforce won’t fully make up for the job losses, leading to a net reduction in the labor force by a projected 4 million workers by 2028 and 11 million in 2035. 

    “With the U.S.-born population aging and growing at a slower rate, immigrants have become an essential part of American labor force growth,” the think tank, which focuses on trade and immigration, said.

    In fact, immigrant workers were responsible for 84.7% of the labor force growth in America between 2019 and 2024, according to the report. 

    The study takes into account many of Trump’s far-reaching immigration policies for those eligible to work in the country, including reducing and suspending refugee admissions, a travel ban on 19 countries, ending Temporary Protected Status, and prohibiting international students from working on Optional Practical Training and STEM OPT after completing their coursework. The analysis does not account for a new policy that requires U.S. companies to shell out $100,000 in one-time fees for new H-1B visas.

    Labor reduction

    Trump’s immigration crackdown is already having an impact on the labor force.

    The Bureau of Labor Statistics household survey shows a decline of 1.1 million foreign-born workers since the start of the Trump administration in January through August, according to the report.

    And of the 6.8 million fewer projected workers in the U.S. labor force by 2028, 2.8 million would be due to changes in legal immigration policies, while 4 million would result from policies on illegal immigration, the study said

    At the same time, it doesn’t look as though U.S.-born workers are entering the workforce en masse as foreign-born workers exit, the report said. Instead, the labor force participation rate for U.S.-born workers aged 16 and older has ticked lower to 61.6% in August from 61.7% last year, according to the report.

    Labor economist and senior fellow at NFAP Mark Regets, said in the report it’s “wrong” to assume a decline in immigration helps U.S. workers when job growth slows.

    “Immigrants both create demand for the goods and services produced by U.S.-born workers and work alongside them in ways that increase productivity for both groups,” Regrets said. “While it is just one factor, we shouldn’t be surprised that opportunities for U.S.-born workers are falling at the same time an estimated one million fewer immigrants may be in the labor force.”

    But the White House says there’s a large pool of available U.S.-born workers.

    Over one in ten young adults in America are neither employed, in higher education, nor pursuing some sort of vocational training.” White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson told Fortune in a statement, referencing a July 2024 CNBC article. “There is no shortage of American minds and hands to grow our labor force, and President Trump’s agenda to create jobs for American workers represents this Administration’s commitment to capitalizing on that untapped potential while delivering on our mandate to enforce our immigration laws.”

    Economic fallout

    Previous reports have warned Trumps’ immigration policies also threaten negative economic consequences.

    In September, the Congressional Budget Office projected 290,000 immigrants will be removed from the country between 2026 and 2029, which may create a labor shortage and drive up inflation.

    And according to the NFAP study, Trump’s immigration policies will lower the projected average annual economic growth rate to 1.3% from 1.8% between fiscal year 2025 to fiscal year 2035. 

    There are also ramifications for the agriculture industry and food production. The Labor Department admitted earlier this month in a filing in the Federal Register that Trump’s immigration crackdown risked a “labor shortage exacerbated by the near total cessation of the inflow of illegal aliens.”

    That’s not the only sector feeling the talent squeeze.

    The $100,000 one-time fee for workers applying for new H-1B visas is expected to disrupt companies including Amazon, Microsoft and Meta, since they heavily recruit workers under this status. 

    And the policies are projected to have far-ranging effects on most areas of business, including a potential loss of hundreds of thousands of immigrant workers in sectors like information and educational and health services.

    In addition, individuals affected by Trump’s travel ban on 19 different countries represent a significant part of the economy, the American Immigration Council, a nonprofit research organization and advocacy group, has estimated.

    Households led by the recent arrivals from the countries earned $3.2 billion in household income, paid $715.6 million in federal, state and local taxes and held $2.5 billion in spending power, according to AIC.

    “These nationals made important contributions in U.S. industries that are facing labor shortages and rely on foreign-born workers,” like hospitality, construction, retail trade and manufacturing, the report said.

    But the White House said Trump will continue “growing our economy, creating opportunity for American workers, and ensuring all sectors have the workforce they need to be successful.”

    Nan Wu, research director at AIC told Fortune the recent NFAP study may not even fully capture the broader impact of the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement efforts. 

    “Given the unprecedented scale of these actions, it’s difficult to quantify the chilling effect they may have on immigrants who might otherwise choose to move to or remain in the United States,” Wu said. “For instance, international students—who are a critical source of high-skilled talent—may increasingly opt to pursue education or career opportunities in other countries. This shift could significantly disrupt the U.S. talent pipeline, particularly in sectors that rely heavily on STEM expertise and innovation.”

    [ad_2]

    Nino Paoli

    Source link

  • AI startups are leasing luxury apartments in San Francisco for staff and offering large rent stipends to attract talent  | Fortune

    [ad_1]

    The AI boom is bringing a wave of startups to San Francisco, and employees are receiving generous benefits in one of the country’s priciest housing markets. 

    Roy Lee, CEO of AI tech startup Cluely, which makes software for job interviews and work calls, told The New York Times that he leased eight apartments for employees in a recently-built luxury complex situated just a one-minute walk away from the office. The rents in the 16-story building range from $3,000 to $12,000 a month. 

    “Going to the office should feel like you’re walking to your living room, so we really, really want people close,” Lee told The Times on Thursday.

    Flo Crivello, CEO of Lindy, another AI startup, said he offers his approximately 40 employees a $1,000 rent stipend every month if they live within a 10-minute walk of the company’s office.

    “People are so much happier and healthier when they live close to work,” he told The Times. “This makes them stick around for longer, perform better and work longer hours.”

    The AI boom has drawn a flood of money and talent to San Francisco, inflating rent in the process. The Bay Area has attracted 70% of AI venture capital funding nationwide since 2019, according to data from Pitchbook. 

    Across the U.S. and Canada, the pool of tech workers with AI skills jumped more than 50% to 517,000 from mid-2024 to mid-2025, according to a September CBRE report. The San Francisco Bay Area, New York metro and Seattle are the top U.S. markets for AI-specialty talent, accounting for 35% of the national total, the report said.

    Meanwhile, fully remote working arrangements for open positions have declined, and more employers are adopting hybrid arrangements requiring tech talent to spend three or more days in the office. In San Francisco alone, 1 out of every 4 square feet of office space was leased by an AI company over the last two and a half years, according to CBRE.

    Tightness in the office market is also seen in the residential sector. Over the past year, apartment prices in San Francisco rose 6%, on average, more than twice the 2.5% increase experienced in New York City and the highest rate in the nation, according to real estate tracker CoStar data cited by The Times. In hot spots like Mission Bay, near OpenAI’s headquarters, rents climbed 13% recently.

    Average rent for a San Francisco apartment is now $3,315 a month, just below New York City’s, the nation’s highest at $3,360.

    A September report from real estate tech company Zumper said San Francisco’s housing market bucked the national trend of flat or falling prices and instead saw the strongest annual growth across the country for two-bedroom rent, which surged 17.1%. One-bedroom rent climbed 10.7%, the third-highest increase in the nation, the report said.

    The report points to a “perfect storm” of tech-sector hiring and stricter return-to-office mandates driving more renters into the city as well as supply-chain constraints. The city’s vacancy rate has fallen back to pre-pandemic levels, and new housing construction is at its weakest pace in a decade, the report added.

    Will Goodman, a principal at Strada Investment Group, which developed the luxury complex where Cluely leased its eight apartments, told The Times that half of the 501 units in the complex were leased within two months of its May opening.

    “Honestly, I’ve never seen anything like it before,” he said

    [ad_2]

    Nino Paoli

    Source link

  • Over half of professionals are so annoyed by AI trainings they say it feels like a second job, LinkedIn survey finds

    [ad_1]

    Over half of professionals report that AI trainings feel like a second job, according to a recent LinkedIn survey, highlighting widespread frustration among workers with the proliferation of workplace automation programs.

    A majority of respondents (51%) expressed irritation with the intensity and frequency of AI training requirements, stating that it’s interfering with their core job responsibilities and contributing to burnout. Employees cited dense training modules, unrealistic deadlines, and a lack of clarity about practical benefits as key sources of dissatisfaction.

    LinkedIn found an 82% increase in people posting on the platform about feeling overwhelmed and navigating change this year. “The mounting pressure to upskill in AI is fueling insecurity among professionals at work — with a third (33%) admitting they feel embarrassed by how little they understand it, and 35% saying they feel nervous talking about AI at work for fear of sounding uninformed,” LinkedIn wrote.

    Workplace impact

    These findings come as employers increase investment in upskilling efforts designed to help staff adapt to new AI-based processes. Instead of feeling empowered, many professionals say these trainings add stress and extend their working hours, often without extra compensation or real improvements to workflow.

    There are real consequences for this and anecdotal evidence that workers are rational to feel insecure. IgniteTech CEO Eric Vaughan told Fortune earlier this month that he laid off nearly 80% of his staff after they failed to respond to AI training, while Joshua Wöhle of Mindstone relayed a similar story of a client/CEO who ordered his staff to dedicate all Fridays to AI retraining, and invited them to leave the company if they didn’t have a constructive report back on their findings.

    The survey also found that, amid the flood of AI-related content and programs, professionals are increasingly turning to their networks—rather than official corporate resources or search engines—for trusted advice and support in navigating workplace changes. Some 43% of professionals say “their network, the people they know, is still their #1 source for advice at work,” ahead of search engines and AI tools. Nearly two-thirds (64%) of professionals say colleagues are helping them make decisions faster and more confidently.

    Mounting frustration with mandatory AI trainings may be just the tip of the iceberg. A recent MIT study found that 95% of generative AI pilots at enterprises have failed to deliver any measurable return on investment—fueling growing concerns over an AI stock bubble as corporate spending and investor hype far outweigh results. It seems to be tied with this frustration over ineffective or stumbling AI training efforts.

    MIT’s sobering findings

    The MIT NANDA report analyzed hundreds of AI deployments and found only 5% produced rapid revenue acceleration or noticeable operational improvements. The majority of pilots stall in the testing phase or get abandoned, with large companies taking nearly a year to scale projects that rarely succeed. Flawed enterprise integration and a gap in AI literacy—not just model quality—were cited as the main barriers.

    Wall Street and institutional investors are sounding the alarm, worried that record AI investments aren’t translating to profits and could trigger a painful reckoning for overvalued tech stocks. Some have started trimming exposure, fearing that the gap between reality and hype may be unsustainable, reminiscent of prior tech bubbles. The all-important Nvidia earnings on Wednesday illustrate the jitters, as record revenue still failed to prevent investors taking a few percentage points off the stock.

    Connections to workforce concerns

    As companies pour money into AI pilots and tech stocks, employees are increasingly skeptical of both the business value and the constant upskilling requirements. With over half of professionals saying AI trainings feel like a second job, the MIT report adds new context: companies’ aggressive push for digital transformation is straining workers, not yet augmenting them, as widely billed.

    The results underscore mounting tension between the pace of technological implementation and the lived experience of professionals, suggesting that companies may need to rethink their approach to AI upskilling to avoid further alienating employees.

    For this story, Fortune used generative AI to help with an initial draft. An editor verified the accuracy of the information before publishing. 

    [ad_2]

    Nick Lichtenberg

    Source link

  • 1 in 3 employees—including in-office workers—regularly nap on the clock, survey says. Here’s who catches the most Z’s on the job and why

    1 in 3 employees—including in-office workers—regularly nap on the clock, survey says. Here’s who catches the most Z’s on the job and why

    [ad_1]

    If you work an office job, perhaps it’s happened to you. You didn’t get enough sleep last night. You’ve powered through the morning, yet your to-do list stretches on. You’re moving a bit slower, sated from lunch. Your computer screen becomes hazy. You glance out the window to see the sun starting its afternoon descent, and your eyelids droop with it. You decide to let yourself snooze just for a few minutes…

    Occasionally falling asleep at work is par for the course, according to a new survey by sleep wellness company Sleep Doctor, with 46% of respondents saying they nap during the workday at least a few times a year. What’s more, 33% reported doing so weekly—9% once per week, 18% several times per week, and 6% daily.

    Particularly if you didn’t get enough shut-eye the night before, taking a 20- to 25-minute nap may help you recharge and take on the remainder of your workday, says Sleep Doctor founder and clinical psychologist Michael Breus, Ph.D. But don’t make a habit of it.

    “While you might feel slightly sleepy between one and three in the afternoon—because everybody does, it’s due to a post-lunch dip in core body temperature—you should not require a nap,” Breus tells Fortune. “If you’re getting the sleep that you should be getting at night, you should not require a nap.”

    Midday snoozing is a big no-no for people with insomnia, Breus adds: “If you have difficulty falling asleep or staying asleep at night, napping, all that does is make it worse.”

    Nearly 1,300 full-time U.S. employees completed the survey in March via Pollfish. Sleep Doctor didn’t provide additional details about the respondents, such as their shift schedules, workplace environments, or socioeconomic statuses. Though the survey isn’t a scientific study, it offers insight into the post-pandemic habits of the nation’s workforce, Breus says.

    Half of in-person employees nap in their cars

    It’s not just remote and hybrid employees who are catching Z’s during work hours. About 27% of in-person workers reported napping at the office on a weekly basis, compared to 34% of remote and 45% of hybrid workers. In-person employees napped in these locations:

    • Car: 50%
    • Desk: 33%
    • Company-designated napping place: 20%
    • Return home: 14%
    • Bathroom: 9%

    Napping in the workplace is a luxury, says Dr. Rafael Pelayo, a clinical professor in the Division of Sleep Medicine at the Stanford University School of Medicine.

    “There are a lot of health care disparity issues related to sleep,” Pelayo tells Fortune. “You can only nap at your job if you have a place to nap and it’s accepted by your employer. So a lot of people don’t have a place to nap where they work.”

    Pelayo adds, “If you work in an assembly line and you take a train to work, you don’t have a chance to nap anywhere. Or, if you’re in a place where you don’t feel safe; somebody who is napping is vulnerable to being robbed or attacked.”

    Men, younger staffers more likely to nap during workday

    More than half of male employees, 52%, told Sleep Doctor they nap at least a few times a year during work hours, compared to 38% of females. It’s unclear whether the survey collected data on non-cisgender workers.

    A majority of younger adult employees admitted to workday napping, a higher percentage than more seasoned staffers:

    • 18–34: 54%
    • 35–54: 46%
    • 55+: 25%

    Younger adults tend to be more sleep-deprived because they have less control over their lives, Pelayo tells Fortune. They may have children interrupting their sleep, elderly parents to care for, longer commutes, and more demands on their free time.

    “When people get older and they have medical problems, medical problems interrupt our ability to sleep, like arthritis, chronic pain. But healthy elderly people sleep really, really well,” Pelayo says. “They get better sleep than healthy young people. Healthy older people, the reason they ended up being healthy old people is they had good lifestyles.”

    Middle age Asian businessman feeling sleepy during working on laptop and meeting at café office
    More than half of male employees, 52%, told Sleep Doctor they nap at least a few times a year during work hours, compared to 38% of females. It is unclear whether the March 2024 survey collected data on non-cisgender workers.

    Nattakorn Maneerat—Getty Images

    Remote workers take longest workday naps

    “Smart naps” lasting 20–30 minutes may temporarily make you feel more alert and awake, says Alaina Tiani, Ph.D., a clinical psychologist at the Cleveland Clinic Sleep Disorders Center.

    “This increases the likelihood that your brain will stay in the lighter stages of sleep and that you will wake up refreshed,” Tiani tells Fortune via email. “When we nap much longer, we may cycle into deeper stages of sleep, which may be harder to wake from. We also recommend taking the nap as far in advance of your desired bedtime as possible to lessen the impact on your nighttime sleep quality.”

    More than half of workday dozers keep their naps under 30 minutes, according to Sleep Doctor: 

    • Fewer than 15 minutes: 26%
    • 15–29 minutes: 27%
    • 30–59 minutes: 24%
    • 1 hour: 12%
    • 2 hours: 9%
    • 3+ hours: 3%

    On average, 34% of remote and 31% of hybrid workers nap for longer than an hour, compared to 15% of in-person workers.

    That napping is less common in the Western world than other cultures made the survey data stand out to Michael Grandner, Ph.D., director of the Sleep and Health Research Program at the University of Arizona College of Medicine – Tuscson

    “The fact that many people who are working from home are more likely to take advantage of opportunities to nap was very surprising,” Grandner tells Fortune via email. “It suggests that many workers would prefer to integrate napping into their lifestyle if they could.”

    Why are employees napping at work?

    Staffers primarily cited some form of exhaustion as a reason for snoozing on the job, while others were simply bored:

    • Re-energize: 62%
    • Recover from poor sleep at night: 44%
    • Handle long working hours: 32%
    • Stress: 32%
    • Boredom: 11%
    • Avoid work: 6%

    But why are they so sleep-deprived to begin with? Ironically, the flipside of napping at work is 77% of survey respondents said job stressors cause them to lose sleep nightly. About 57% reported losing at least an hour of sleep on an average night. Most cited work-life balance as their top job stressor: 

    • Work-life balance: 56%
    • Demanding projects: 39%
    • Long hours: 39%
    • Upcoming deadlines: 37%
    • Struggling to get to work on time: 30%
    • Issues with boss: 22%
    • Interpersonal conflict in workplace: 20%
    • Fears of being fired or laid off: 19%

    Employees who lose sleep over job stress only to crave rest during the workday aren’t the norm, but their predicament isn’t rare either, Breus tells Fortune: “They kind of get their days and their nights mixed up.”

    Hybrid workers were most likely to report job stressors impacting their sleep, 88%, compared to 73% of in-person and 71% of remote workers. In addition, more higher-level employees, such as CEOs and senior managers, reported losing sleep over career stress, 84%, than lower-level employees, 71%.

    Napping on the job may have health, performance consequences

    Dozing at your desk may seem inconsequential on a slower workday or when you think your boss won’t notice. But some employees have paid the price, Sleep Doctor data show.

    Among nappers, 17% miss deadlines and 16% miss meetings at least once a month because they’re asleep on the job. About 27% of workers admit to falling asleep during a remote meeting in the past year, and 17% have done the same in person.

    While just 20% of workers faced consequences, some were serious:

    • Check in with supervisor more often: 62%
    • Workload changed: 56%
    • Sit down with manager: 49%
    • Suspended: 24%
    • Fired: 17%

    “Limiting sleep to one major nighttime window can help to ensure that you obtain an appropriate amount of sleep at night and thus do not require a daytime nap, which could interfere with work or other responsibilities,” Tiani says.

    Strategic daytime napping can be an effective tool to boost energy and productivity, Grandner says, but falling asleep at work when you don’t mean to may indicate an underlying health issue. 

    “For people who are unable to maintain consciousness, I would recommend evaluating your nighttime sleep to see if you have any untreated sleep disorders like sleep apnea, or if there are other steps you can take to achieve healthier sleep,” Gardner says.

    You should also consult your doctor if you’re typically not a napper but begin having unexplained fatigue, Pelayo says: “An abrupt change in your need for sleep would indicate a medical problem being present.”

    For more on napping during the workday: 

    [ad_2]

    Lindsey Leake

    Source link

  • New York state wants companies to protect their LGBTQ+ Gen Z and millennial workers—and it’s throwing a $260 billion retirement fund at the issue

    New York state wants companies to protect their LGBTQ+ Gen Z and millennial workers—and it’s throwing a $260 billion retirement fund at the issue

    [ad_1]

    Money talks. That’s what Thomas DiNapoli, comptroller of the state of New York, is counting on when it comes to LGBTQ+ protections in the workplace. 

    In what seem to be the first ever moves of their kind, DiNapoli’s New York State Common Retirement Fund, which manages $260 billion in assets, is pushing for more details about companies’ human capital management strategy work related to LGBTQ+ employees.

    In proxy statements published this month, $45 billion Lennar Corp. and $13.5 billion International Paper disclosed matching shareholder proposals from the retirement fund. The proposals are backed by a supporting statement explaining that demographic shifts show that 20.8% of Gen Z identifies as LGBTQ+, which is twice that of the 10.5% of millennials who identify that way. Furthermore, a third of people who identify as LGBTQ+ report experiencing harassment or discrimination in recent years and, nearly half, 45.5%, report facing discrimination at some point in their lives.

    Lennar and International Paper have recommended that investors vote against both proposals.

    Expanding focus

    The proposal is a new front in some investors’ quest to get more expansive data on diversity from companies, and similar efforts have been fruitful in obtaining more granularity on policies related to gender, race, and ethnicity. Now, investors are expanding their focus to include LGBTQ+ employees. Investors have used the more detailed reporting in recent years to hold boards and C-suite teams to account for public diversity pledges on investments, promotion among senior executive ranks and recruitment of new employees.

    Accordingly, companies should tell investors whether they have equitable employee benefits, non-discrimination policies and employee support groups, the New York fund wrote in the statement. In the proposals at both Lennar and International Paper, New York referred to the companies’ own disclosures about inclusivity in the workforce, respect for diverse backgrounds and their general statements about fostering high-performing workplace cultures via their diversity efforts. New York holds about $15.8 million in International Paper stock and $33 million in Lennar stock, according to the fund’s 2023 asset listing

    Both proposals quoted a 2019 report from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation, Business Success and Growth Through LGBT-Inclusive Culture. “Companies that adopt LGBT-inclusive practices tend to improve their financial standing and do better than companies that do not adopt them. Additionally, employees, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity, express greater job satisfaction at companies where these practices are in place.”

    Miami-headquartered homebuilder Lennar’s board wrote that the company was “built on a culture of inclusivity” and brings together the best talent to drive the success of the “Lennar family.” The board said its “Everyone’s Included” initiative represents an evolution of that focus, including an advisory council that brings together diverse cross-representation. Its code of ethics and business conduct already specifically prohibit discrimination and harassment on the basis of “color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, age, disability, veteran status, genetic information or any other legally protected status,” the board said. “Producing the proposed report is unnecessary and inefficient.”

    International Paper board members said its annual report discussed diversity and inclusion initiatives, including its long-term goals. “Among the Company’s primary Vision 2030 Goals, the Company aims to promote employee well-being by providing safe, caring, and inclusive workplaces and strengthening the resilience of its communities,” the board said (emphasis in original).

    The company also has a global diversity and inclusion council and employee networking groups. “Requiring the Company to produce an additional report limited to a subset of its overall diversity, equity and inclusion efforts would prove unduly burdensome for the Company, divert time and attention of Company management, and give rise to undue expenses, all while providing little to no additional value considering the Company’s robust diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives, culture and disclosure practices, including with respect to LGBTQ+ matters,” the IP board said.

    The proposals are an escalation from the fund’s efforts last year that involved writing letters to 55 portfolio companies that signed the Human Rights Campaign and Freedom for All American Business Statement on Anti-LGBTQ+ Legislation. The campaign prompted new discussions about workplace policies, the state said in an annual report

    Subscribe to the CFO Daily newsletter to keep up with the trends, issues, and executives shaping corporate finance. Sign up for free.

    [ad_2]

    Amanda Gerut

    Source link

  • New Harris Poll Survey Finds 67% of U.S. Employees Have Experienced ‘Therapy Speak’ at Work

    New Harris Poll Survey Finds 67% of U.S. Employees Have Experienced ‘Therapy Speak’ at Work

    [ad_1]

    American Employees Increasingly Skeptical of Employers’ Intentions, Desiring Genuine Communication Amid Uncertain Economy

    Two-thirds of American workers (67%) have experienced “therapy speak” at their workplace, according to the “Work & Talk Survey,” the latest research from The Harris Poll Thought Leadership Practice, released today. “Therapy speak” refers to an empathetic-sounding language or tone used as a sign of understanding but often fails with appropriate follow-through.

    Out of those who said they experienced “therapy speak,” 34% said that it came from a direct manager, 33% from company leadership, and 30% from colleagues. The percentage is higher among Millennials, with eight in 10 experiencing “therapy speak” at work (79%).  

    Within the last year, 66% of workers have experienced at least one kind of a cutback, including layoffs (28%), as well as slashed raises, and bonuses (29%). The survey also shows that 37% suffered from reduced spending budgets, 33% from a hiring freeze, and 28% from announcing layoffs.  

    “The data clearly points to a disconnect in the workplace. While employers feel they are connecting empathetically, employees are increasingly skeptical of platitudes that are too often used with no follow through,” said Abbey Lunney, managing director at The Harris Poll Thought Leadership and Futures Practice. 

    Employees reported that their employers were very or somewhat insensitive in the way they approached a situation through communication, especially regarding bad news, including when announcing reduced or eliminated raises, discussing autonomy for remote or hybrid work, and communicating about layoffs. 

    Employer’s catchphrases also did not ring true and came across as disingenuous sentiments. Among the worst was “Your feedback is important to us” with 72% of employers using the phrase, and “We’re all in this together” used 69% of the time. 

    “This matters for building strong relationships, retaining employees, and maintaining productivity,” Lunney said. “There is an opportunity for more genuine engagement that is thoughtful, compassionate, and human to rise above the ‘therapy speak.’”  

    The survey indicates that employees are seeing right through the communications tactics, and they are becoming increasingly skeptical of their employers’ intentions.  

    • 71% of workers: “I can easily see through my company’s ingenuine friendly or empathetic tone in their communications.” 
    • 69% of workers: “It’s hypocritical of my leadership to cut corners in my workplace (e.g., decreasing budgets or hiring); while pocketing in a lot of money in bonuses.” 
    • 55% of workers: “I feel like my employer ‘listens,’ but only to win arguments.” 

    Half of the employees said they are thinking of looking for a new job and have become more resentful and less excited at work. Encountering “therapy speak” in the workplace makes 61% more hesitant to recommend the employer to others, 59% feel less excited about their job, 57% have resentment toward the leadership team, and 55% feel less valued as an employee. 

    How does this make employee-employer relationships feel more transactional and transitory? 

    • 60% of workers: “I noticed that my work relationships (e.g., with my boss, colleagues, business partners, or clients) have become more transactional in nature (i.e., everything is strictly ‘business’) in the last three years.” 
    • 56% of workers: “My company’s caring is very short-lived (i.e., there is no follow-through on plans, etc.).”
    • 55% of workers: “I don’t feel like my employer has my back in difficult situations (i.e., layoffs, reduced or eliminated incentives or benefits, etc.).”

    Finally, the survey found eight in 10 employees say communication at work heavily affects how they feel about their jobs. They would prefer an employer that is more genuine and honest.

    • 79% of workers: “Communication at work heavily affects how I feel about my job.”
    • 81% of workers: “I prefer a genuine and honest communication over ‘therapy speak’ at work.” 

    The survey was conducted online April 28-30, 2023, among 2,075 U.S. adults comprising 810 full-time employees.  

    For more information, please visit The Harris Poll Thought Leadership Practice or subscribe to their newsletter, The Next Big Think, for the latest research

    About Harris Poll Thought Leadership Practice 

    Building on 50+ years of experience pulsing societal opinion, we design research that is credible, creative, and culturally relevant. Our practice drives thought leadership and unearthed trends for today’s biggest brands. We are focused on helping our clients get ahead of what is next. 

    About Harris Poll  

    The Harris Poll is one of the longest-running surveys in the U.S., tracking public opinion, motivations, and social sentiment since 1963, and is now part of Harris Insights & Analytics, a global consulting and market research firm that delivers social intelligence for transformational times. We work with clients in three primary areas: building 21st-century corporate reputation, crafting brand strategy and performance tracking, and earning organic media through public relations research. Our mission is to provide insights and guidance to help leaders make the best decisions possible. To learn more, please visit www.theharrispoll.com.

    Source: Harris Poll

    [ad_2]

    Source link