There are some interesting points raised here - helping expatriates to consider 'moving home' and making the most of the opportunities available in their previous location....but perhaps also the reminder that there are many forces influencing people's choice as to where they live in the global village affected by perceived threats...Sue Ellson
http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/news/local/states/california/13735211.htm
Top talent finds increased opportunities abroad
David DanielBy Cheryl Hall
DALLAS MORNING NEWS
DALLAS - Worried about global outsourcing? Chances are you're focused on the wrong end of the job equation.
Every day, hundreds of trained workers leave the United States for opportunities abroad.
This talent outflow poses more long-term dangers to our economy than the migration of low-skill-level jobs to cheaper foreign labor markets.
Many are going home -- lured by improving homeland economies and highly targeted recruiting programs aimed at poaching America's brainpower.
"The United States used to have a monopoly on skilled immigration," said David Heenan, a former senior executive with Citigroup and author of the newly published "Flight Capital: The Alarming Exodus of America's Best and Brightest."
"Whether it was Alfred Hitchcock, I.M. Pei, Peter Drucker or Albert Einstein, this was the place where everyone wanted to be. Few other countries were even in the game. That's no longer the case."
Now we have people like Hong Kong-born Edison Lui, former director of clinical sciences at the U.S. National Cancer Institute.
He is moving to Singapore to head that country's impressive genome institute. When Heenan asked him why, Lui said, "It's a small city-state of 4.5 million people where I can get decisions out of the government in a week, not three months."
Heenan estimates that up to 1,000 legal immigrants -- many in leading-edge professions such as science, engineering, medicine and technology -- make U-turns home each day.
He gets that admittedly squishy number by taking the figures of returning expatriates in such countries as India, China, Singapore and Ireland and then working backward.
Ireland? Yes, Ireland.
The Emerald Isle has zeroed in on more than 1,000 Irish immigrants living here and working in life sciences and technology. It's holding massive recruiting fairs and pursuing them with gusto, he said.
"For many attendees, it's shock and awe," Heenan said. "Many have been out of the country for 10 or 20 years and aren't that knowledgeable about the dramatic improvement in Ireland's educational institutions, tax system, general economy and the depth of research money.
"Of course, there's also plenty of Guinness going down the tubes," he added with a laugh. "They've clearly turned some heads."
The United States can blame terrorism for part of the problem.
"For perfectly understandable reasons, we've tightened the borders and heightened constraints on potential recruits to the United States and also those who recently arrived," said Heenan. "The atmosphere for newcomers here post-9/11 is chilling and has renewed their sense of national roots."
We've removed the welcome mat while the Australians, Canadians, New Zealanders and Singaporeans are rolling out the red carpet.
For example, in the past year, Australia hosted skilled labor expos in London, Berlin, Amsterdam and various Indian cities, Heenan said. Americans who have become more adventurous about living and working abroad are taking the recruitment bait, too.
David Daniel, president of the University of Texas at Dallas, agrees that the talent flight poses a serious threat to our economic vitality. But he's even more troubled that many brilliant minds aren't coming here to begin with.
"They now have almost equal opportunities to attend world-class universities in their home countries that weren't even on the radar screen 20 years ago," Daniel said. "They don't perceive America as hospitable and welcoming. They see post-graduation business opportunities that are comparable to those in America.
"Why should they leave?"
Adding insult to injury: The rest of the world is using America's success as a blueprint, Daniel said.
"Ireland, Singapore, Beijing, Shanghai and Bangalore are white hot and the five most interesting places on the planet," Daniel said, then added as aside, "Remember when we used to say Palo Alto and Austin were white hot?
"Of those, Singapore is the most dynamic. It's clearly on a path to create a science, technology and university magnet that will make them the high ground of Asia."
The United States can't afford to wait for a cool-down, he contends. Competition for skilled labor will only get worse.
As much as Singapore has accomplished in the past 10 years, even it's worried, Daniel said. "They see the beast across the ocean: China."
Sunday, January 29, 2006
Tuesday, January 24, 2006
G-G heralds arrival of our nation's new dawn - David McLennan, Unknown Source
G-G heralds arrival of our nation's new dawn
David McLennan
Tuesday, 24 January 2006
The flare that broke the pre-dawn darkness yesterday was the sign
for more than 500 men, women and children to think about just what
it meant to be Australian.
Families began turning up at 3am, huddling together in the cool
morning on the dusty red plains, waving flags and excitedly pointing
out the famous faces in their midst. The crowd had gathered for the
National Australia Day Council's Kalgoorlie Dawn, an event which
follows on from last year's in Uluru.
It marks the beginning of a week of Australia Day celebrations,
which culminate in tomorrow's concert on the lawns of Parliament
House, where highlights of the dawn ceremony will be shown.
Governor-General Michael Jeffery - who is considered all-but a
local, having been born in nearby Wiluna, former gold-medal winning
swimmer and council chairwoman Lisa Curry Kenny, Australian of the
Year Fiona Wood, actor and event host Noni Hazelhurst and singer
James Blundell all turned heads, but it was Australian Idol winner
Casey Donovan who elicited the biggest cheer.
Her song Shine closed the ceremony, with the sun's rays bursting
through mid-verse as dawn turned into morning. Almost as popular was
the traditional sausage-sandwich breakfast.
Earlier, at 5am and still blanketed by darkness, Kalgoorlie Dawn
began. A miner lit a flare atop a derrick at the Kalgoorlie-Boulder
Miners' and Prospectors' Hall of Fame and a choir, accompanied by
clapping sticks and didgeridoo, began singing We Are Australian,
interchanging between English and Wongatha, the language of the
original owners of the land.
Local elders welcomed the guests and crowd, saying the event was a
positive one. "It's about a community coming together, sharing a
common history but also recognising that our people hold a unique
and proud place in Australia's history," one elder said.
"It's events like this that show how reconciliation can work in a
practical way - to bring Australians together and to promote
understanding, respect and friendship."
Ms Curry Kenny said the council held the event in Kalgoorlie because
it epitomised Australia's history of exploration and development -
and it reminded people of the environmental challenges being faced
by the nation.
A highlight of the event was Young Australian of the Year and
Vietnamese boatperson Khoa Do interviewing Major-General Jeffery, a
Vietnam veteran.
They discussed growing up in the bush and, despite technological
advances, how little had really changed about surviving in the
outback. They also spoke about the importance of preserving the
environment, in particular water, and linking indigenous and non-
indigenous Australians.
Major-General Jeffery used the occasion to push for all Australians
to take a little bit more care of the nation and each other, saying
to do so would ensure the country remained successful.
"My vision of Australia is to see Australia as the nation of
excellence, the global example. That whatever we do ... we do in the
best way, in a way that sets an example for every country in the
world," he said.
Dr Wood, a burns-treatment researcher whose spray-on skin came to
international attention after the first Bali bombings, said people
who experienced it understood why yesterday's ceremony was held.
She said it made people think about Australia and how they could
affect it. "I think just seeding that thought in anybody's mind is a
positive one. 'How can I actually make this a better place?' because
every drop in the ocean matters and we all have to realise we are in
this together," she said.
"For me, that's why these things are important, because we have got
to move towards a society dependent on the integrity of each and
every individual, not the intellect of a few and that is what this
morning was about for me."
David McLennan
Tuesday, 24 January 2006
The flare that broke the pre-dawn darkness yesterday was the sign
for more than 500 men, women and children to think about just what
it meant to be Australian.
Families began turning up at 3am, huddling together in the cool
morning on the dusty red plains, waving flags and excitedly pointing
out the famous faces in their midst. The crowd had gathered for the
National Australia Day Council's Kalgoorlie Dawn, an event which
follows on from last year's in Uluru.
It marks the beginning of a week of Australia Day celebrations,
which culminate in tomorrow's concert on the lawns of Parliament
House, where highlights of the dawn ceremony will be shown.
Governor-General Michael Jeffery - who is considered all-but a
local, having been born in nearby Wiluna, former gold-medal winning
swimmer and council chairwoman Lisa Curry Kenny, Australian of the
Year Fiona Wood, actor and event host Noni Hazelhurst and singer
James Blundell all turned heads, but it was Australian Idol winner
Casey Donovan who elicited the biggest cheer.
Her song Shine closed the ceremony, with the sun's rays bursting
through mid-verse as dawn turned into morning. Almost as popular was
the traditional sausage-sandwich breakfast.
Earlier, at 5am and still blanketed by darkness, Kalgoorlie Dawn
began. A miner lit a flare atop a derrick at the Kalgoorlie-Boulder
Miners' and Prospectors' Hall of Fame and a choir, accompanied by
clapping sticks and didgeridoo, began singing We Are Australian,
interchanging between English and Wongatha, the language of the
original owners of the land.
Local elders welcomed the guests and crowd, saying the event was a
positive one. "It's about a community coming together, sharing a
common history but also recognising that our people hold a unique
and proud place in Australia's history," one elder said.
"It's events like this that show how reconciliation can work in a
practical way - to bring Australians together and to promote
understanding, respect and friendship."
Ms Curry Kenny said the council held the event in Kalgoorlie because
it epitomised Australia's history of exploration and development -
and it reminded people of the environmental challenges being faced
by the nation.
A highlight of the event was Young Australian of the Year and
Vietnamese boatperson Khoa Do interviewing Major-General Jeffery, a
Vietnam veteran.
They discussed growing up in the bush and, despite technological
advances, how little had really changed about surviving in the
outback. They also spoke about the importance of preserving the
environment, in particular water, and linking indigenous and non-
indigenous Australians.
Major-General Jeffery used the occasion to push for all Australians
to take a little bit more care of the nation and each other, saying
to do so would ensure the country remained successful.
"My vision of Australia is to see Australia as the nation of
excellence, the global example. That whatever we do ... we do in the
best way, in a way that sets an example for every country in the
world," he said.
Dr Wood, a burns-treatment researcher whose spray-on skin came to
international attention after the first Bali bombings, said people
who experienced it understood why yesterday's ceremony was held.
She said it made people think about Australia and how they could
affect it. "I think just seeding that thought in anybody's mind is a
positive one. 'How can I actually make this a better place?' because
every drop in the ocean matters and we all have to realise we are in
this together," she said.
"For me, that's why these things are important, because we have got
to move towards a society dependent on the integrity of each and
every individual, not the intellect of a few and that is what this
morning was about for me."
Monday, January 23, 2006
Racism: who’s stirring it up? - Marce Cameron, Green Left Weekly
A hopeful article that there are people willing to address the issues of racism despite the view that we are all 'inherently racist.' Sue Ellson
http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2006/653/653p13.htm
Racism: who’s stirring it up?
Marce Cameron, Sydney
‘‘Alan, it's not just a few Middle Eastern bastards at the weekend, it's thousands. Cronulla is a very long beach and it's been taken over by this scum. It's not a few causing trouble, it's all of them'' - Sydney radio 2GB ‘‘shock jock'' Alan Jones reading out an email on air three days before the Cronulla race riots.
Last December 11, thousands of Anglo-Australian racists, some waving Australian flags and signs with racist slogans, converged on Cronulla beach in the south east. The racist mob, urged on by neo-Nazi white supremacists, verbally abused and assaulted beach-goers of Middle Eastern appearance. The following two nights, dozens of outraged youths of Arab descent drove to Cronulla looking to retaliate.
The Cronulla riots erupted after a week-long campaign of incitement by the corporate media, in particular the Murdoch-owned Daily Telegraph, 2GB and 2UE. The trigger for the race riot was a minor incident: an alleged altercation between two off-duty Cronulla lifeguards and some Middle Eastern youths.
NSW Labor Premier Morris Iemma responded by deploying 800 police to Sydney's eastern and southern beaches. Police used new powers, granted by an December 15 emergency sitting of the NSW parliament, to search people and cars, to confiscate cars and mobile phones (and check text messages) and to ‘‘lock down'' popular beaches with police checkpoints. Entire suburbs also became out of bounds for non-residents.
Following the Cronulla riots, the political establishment and the corporate media launched an intensive campaign to deny what was obvious to a majority of Australians - that the mob violence against people of Middle Eastern appearance reflects an underlying racism which, on occasion, can easily be brought to the surface.
Prime Minister John Howard summed up this official denial by declaring a few days after the riots: ‘‘I do not accept there is underlying racism in this country''. This was echoed by Iemma who, after first describing the riots as race-based, changed his view saying ‘‘I don't believe Australia is a racist country or Australians are racist''.
The majority of Australians, however, don't agree. In an opinion poll in the December 20 Age, 75% of Australians ‘‘agreed there is underlying racism in Australia''.
On December 18, with just a few days organising, some 3000 people took to the streets in Sydney in a vibrant ‘‘United Against Racism'' march called by the National Union of Students and supported by many groups and individuals. Anti-racism protests were also held in Melbourne, where 2000 people marched, and in Brisbane, Newcastle and Adelaide.
Little wonder then that the Murdoch-owned Australian felt it necessary to suggest that anti-racist activists and sympathisers are just one more threat, along with Islamic terrorists, to Australia's supposedly racially harmonious society. The paper's December 22 editorial argued that ‘‘for many baby-boomers finding themselves in a post-theological world, anti-racism has become the new religion. In fact, there is a degree of racism in every society, and in every human being: to make one's mission the eradication of this ingrained element is an exercise in fanaticism.''
The Australian would have us believe that progressive struggles to end racist oppression are nothing more than a futile ‘‘exercise in fanaticism''. Martin Luther King, Malcolm X and Nelson Mandela should have known better because human beings are, apparently, inherently racist.
Contrary to the assertion that racism has always existed, the oppression of people based on the fetishisation of physical features, such as skin colour, is a relatively recent phenomenon, its origins in the capture of millions of black Africans to work as slaves on the sugar and cotton plantations of the Americas from the 16th century.
In Australia, racism thrives on the dispossession and the ongoing oppression of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, and Australia's existence as an island of wealth in a sea of Third World misery. From the theft of East Timor's oil to participation in the US-led plunder of Iraq, Australian corporations profit from exploiting the largely non-white peoples of the Third World.
Anti-racism
While fanned by the corporate media, the underlying cause of the outbreak of racist violence in Cronulla is the racist divide-and-rule political agenda of corporate Australia, its media mouthpieces and its two main political parties, the Liberal-National Coalition and the ALP. This corporate consensus is reflected in bipartisan support for the mandatory detention of refugees, the so-called ‘‘war on terror'' and new federal and state terror laws which are aimed, in large part, at criminalising dissent.
When One Nation Party leader Pauline Hanson's racist policies threatened to spark a mass anti-racist movement in the late 1990s, the powers-that-be thought better and they contrived to remove her from the spotlight while incorporating her racist policies on refugees and Indigenous people into their own platform.
From the Tampa and ‘‘children overboard'' fiascos, to the raids on the homes of alleged Muslim terror suspects in Sydney and Melbourne a month before the Cronulla riots, the Howard government and state Labor administrations have played the ‘‘race card'' whenever they could since the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on New York. Racism is the ideological basis for the so-called ‘‘war on terror'', and the actual war of terror on Afghanistan and Iraq.
This is clear in NSW opposition leader Peter Debnam's strident criticism of the NSW police for not jailing more Middle-East background youths. Then, on January 20, Iemma caved in to Liberal Party pressure and announced the establishment of a permanent Middle-Eastern organised crime squad.
As Sydney Muslim community leader and Islamic Friendship Association president Keysar Trad told Green Left Weekly, the demonisation of Muslims in particular ‘‘has led to the marginalisation of the community in the workplace, in education and even in government services.
‘‘When the Howard government, with the help of the [NSW Labor] state government, carried out the raids and arrests of so-called terror suspects just before the Cronulla riots, it diverted attention away from Howard's industrial relations changes, and Howard also attacked our civil liberties.''
In this climate of fear and insecurity, the corporate elite's racist chickens are coming home to roost. But as Trad points out, ‘‘the anti-racism rallies were most heartening and most encouraging. People came to show their support for their fellow Australians. It must have made those who are playing the race card think twice.''
From Green Left Weekly, January 25, 2006.
http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2006/653/653p13.htm
Racism: who’s stirring it up?
Marce Cameron, Sydney
‘‘Alan, it's not just a few Middle Eastern bastards at the weekend, it's thousands. Cronulla is a very long beach and it's been taken over by this scum. It's not a few causing trouble, it's all of them'' - Sydney radio 2GB ‘‘shock jock'' Alan Jones reading out an email on air three days before the Cronulla race riots.
Last December 11, thousands of Anglo-Australian racists, some waving Australian flags and signs with racist slogans, converged on Cronulla beach in the south east. The racist mob, urged on by neo-Nazi white supremacists, verbally abused and assaulted beach-goers of Middle Eastern appearance. The following two nights, dozens of outraged youths of Arab descent drove to Cronulla looking to retaliate.
The Cronulla riots erupted after a week-long campaign of incitement by the corporate media, in particular the Murdoch-owned Daily Telegraph, 2GB and 2UE. The trigger for the race riot was a minor incident: an alleged altercation between two off-duty Cronulla lifeguards and some Middle Eastern youths.
NSW Labor Premier Morris Iemma responded by deploying 800 police to Sydney's eastern and southern beaches. Police used new powers, granted by an December 15 emergency sitting of the NSW parliament, to search people and cars, to confiscate cars and mobile phones (and check text messages) and to ‘‘lock down'' popular beaches with police checkpoints. Entire suburbs also became out of bounds for non-residents.
Following the Cronulla riots, the political establishment and the corporate media launched an intensive campaign to deny what was obvious to a majority of Australians - that the mob violence against people of Middle Eastern appearance reflects an underlying racism which, on occasion, can easily be brought to the surface.
Prime Minister John Howard summed up this official denial by declaring a few days after the riots: ‘‘I do not accept there is underlying racism in this country''. This was echoed by Iemma who, after first describing the riots as race-based, changed his view saying ‘‘I don't believe Australia is a racist country or Australians are racist''.
The majority of Australians, however, don't agree. In an opinion poll in the December 20 Age, 75% of Australians ‘‘agreed there is underlying racism in Australia''.
On December 18, with just a few days organising, some 3000 people took to the streets in Sydney in a vibrant ‘‘United Against Racism'' march called by the National Union of Students and supported by many groups and individuals. Anti-racism protests were also held in Melbourne, where 2000 people marched, and in Brisbane, Newcastle and Adelaide.
Little wonder then that the Murdoch-owned Australian felt it necessary to suggest that anti-racist activists and sympathisers are just one more threat, along with Islamic terrorists, to Australia's supposedly racially harmonious society. The paper's December 22 editorial argued that ‘‘for many baby-boomers finding themselves in a post-theological world, anti-racism has become the new religion. In fact, there is a degree of racism in every society, and in every human being: to make one's mission the eradication of this ingrained element is an exercise in fanaticism.''
The Australian would have us believe that progressive struggles to end racist oppression are nothing more than a futile ‘‘exercise in fanaticism''. Martin Luther King, Malcolm X and Nelson Mandela should have known better because human beings are, apparently, inherently racist.
Contrary to the assertion that racism has always existed, the oppression of people based on the fetishisation of physical features, such as skin colour, is a relatively recent phenomenon, its origins in the capture of millions of black Africans to work as slaves on the sugar and cotton plantations of the Americas from the 16th century.
In Australia, racism thrives on the dispossession and the ongoing oppression of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, and Australia's existence as an island of wealth in a sea of Third World misery. From the theft of East Timor's oil to participation in the US-led plunder of Iraq, Australian corporations profit from exploiting the largely non-white peoples of the Third World.
Anti-racism
While fanned by the corporate media, the underlying cause of the outbreak of racist violence in Cronulla is the racist divide-and-rule political agenda of corporate Australia, its media mouthpieces and its two main political parties, the Liberal-National Coalition and the ALP. This corporate consensus is reflected in bipartisan support for the mandatory detention of refugees, the so-called ‘‘war on terror'' and new federal and state terror laws which are aimed, in large part, at criminalising dissent.
When One Nation Party leader Pauline Hanson's racist policies threatened to spark a mass anti-racist movement in the late 1990s, the powers-that-be thought better and they contrived to remove her from the spotlight while incorporating her racist policies on refugees and Indigenous people into their own platform.
From the Tampa and ‘‘children overboard'' fiascos, to the raids on the homes of alleged Muslim terror suspects in Sydney and Melbourne a month before the Cronulla riots, the Howard government and state Labor administrations have played the ‘‘race card'' whenever they could since the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on New York. Racism is the ideological basis for the so-called ‘‘war on terror'', and the actual war of terror on Afghanistan and Iraq.
This is clear in NSW opposition leader Peter Debnam's strident criticism of the NSW police for not jailing more Middle-East background youths. Then, on January 20, Iemma caved in to Liberal Party pressure and announced the establishment of a permanent Middle-Eastern organised crime squad.
As Sydney Muslim community leader and Islamic Friendship Association president Keysar Trad told Green Left Weekly, the demonisation of Muslims in particular ‘‘has led to the marginalisation of the community in the workplace, in education and even in government services.
‘‘When the Howard government, with the help of the [NSW Labor] state government, carried out the raids and arrests of so-called terror suspects just before the Cronulla riots, it diverted attention away from Howard's industrial relations changes, and Howard also attacked our civil liberties.''
In this climate of fear and insecurity, the corporate elite's racist chickens are coming home to roost. But as Trad points out, ‘‘the anti-racism rallies were most heartening and most encouraging. People came to show their support for their fellow Australians. It must have made those who are playing the race card think twice.''
From Green Left Weekly, January 25, 2006.
Martin Luther King Day - Editorial, Nightly Business Report
I happened to watch this program and have waited to add the transcript to the Living in Harmony Australia Blog as I feel that there are many excellent ideas here that could easily be implemented in Australia....Sue Ellson
http://www.nbr.com/transcript/2006/transcript011606.html
Program: Monday, January 16, 2006 -MLK Day: Open For Business
Denny's Recipe For Diversity
Nordstrom's Plan Of Action
Xerox's Blue Print For Diversity
Paul Kangas' Stocks In The News
Market Stats
01/16/06: Denny's Recipe For Diversity
PAUL KANGAS: We begin tonight with Denny`s. It took a big lawsuit for the restaurant chain to realize it had a diversity problem and a public relations one, as well. Since settling that suit back in 1994, the company has made a turnaround from a symbol of racial discrimination to one of the best companies for minorities. From Denny`s headquarters in South Carolina, Darren Gersh reports.
DARREN GERSH, NIGHTLY BUSINESS REPORT CORRESPONDENT: This meeting is what makes corporate diversity different at Denny`s.
RAY HOOD, CHIEF DIVERSITY OFFICER, DENNY`S: This is the real deal. This is about a $1.4 million opportunity.
GERSH: This is Ray Hood, Denny`s chief diversity officer. And that`s Denny`s CEO Nelson Marchioli.
NELSON MARCHIOLI, CEO, DENNY`S: So, $150 more per store, for a grand total of how much?
GERSH: Ray is an officer of the company. She sits on the Denny`s management committee and is one of just seven people to report directly to the CEO. Many companies relegate diversity to a task force or give the job to a junior executive reporting to human resources. Not Denny`s.
HOOD: You don`t run finance by a council. You have a CFO. You have an SVP of human resources. Marketing is not run by a task force. So why would we do this? And actually, we felt that it was a bastardization of the business actually and that it would make diversity this appendage off to the side of the business and not integrated into the business. So we really broke the mold.
GERSH: Denny`s really had no choice. In the mid-`90s a Denny`s restaurant in Annapolis failed to serve six uniformed African American Secret Service agents in town to guard President Clinton. They sued and Denny`s became a punch line for late night comics.
HOOD: We became like an icon for corporate discrimination. And I read someplace where they called us the poster child.
GERSH: Since then, Denny`s has become the poster child for how to make diversity work. Surveys rank the company as one of the best workplaces in the country for minorities and women. Now other CEOs ask Marchioli for advice. When he offers it, he hears back doubts about the cost and extra work of hiring and managing a chief diversity officer.
MARCHIOLI: Well, what about a task force or I think this should report to HR? And I push back and advise them that it is really about your commitment as the CEO.
GERSH: It is certainly not cheap. Denny`s says it spends millions of dollars a year on diversity training.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We did have a couple that was a little grumpy negative, but once we got into it, they picked up and it was really fun.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Very good. The fact is that maybe we might have seen them originally as grumpy or maybe difficult, but the fact is you worked through it, and that`s about appreciating others and diversity.
GERSH: Every new Denny`s employee is trained in the company`s core values, including appreciating others. Over the last decade, Denny`s estimates two million people have taken its diversity training and the company claims to be the largest diversity trainer in the country. Each of Denny`s 85,000 employees receives an hour and a half of diversity training, managers: nine and a half hours. Hood says the experience can be an eye- opener, helping some understand the kind of subtle and not-so-subtle discrimination minorities face everyday.
HOOD: If someone is walking through that day in and day out, perhaps by the time they come to you and the silverware is not clean, or you sit them back of the restaurant, then it`s like, it gives me a context to understand where this is coming from. Light bulb goes off.
GERSH: From a company with no top black executives or suppliers a decade ago, Denny`s now says half its board and senior leadership team are women or people of color and more than 12 percent of total purchasing contracts are with minority suppliers. Denny`s insists these are not quotas.
HOOD: We want to see women, we want to see white males, we want to see people of color and may the best person get the job.
GERSH: Denny`s can`t afford another mistake. The company faces fierce competition from Ihop and in the crowded family dining category, Denny`s can`t risk another hit to its reputation. But Hood is not worried. She believes the company has taken the diversity message to heart.
HOOD: If I were to get hit by a bus, heaven forbid, it could go on and on and on. So that everybody owns it. It`s who we are. That`s what it means for Denny`s at this very specific point in time. And that`s big for us.
GERSH: Darren Gersh, NIGHTLY BUSINESS REPORT, Spartanburg, South Carolina.
GHARIB: Joining us now to talk more about the issues of diversity, we`re happy to have with us Bernard Anderson, professor of management at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania and David Thomas, professor of business administration at the Harvard Business School. Gentlemen, thank you so much for joining us. Dr. Thomas, let me begin with you. You know, everybody talks about diversity, but if you had to come up with a short definition of what makes a diverse workforce, what would it be?
DAVID THOMAS, PHD, PROF. OF BUSINESS ADMIN., HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL: It would be a workforce that reflects the community that the business serves and the available labor markets, as well as reflecting diversity at all levels of the company and both in the company`s peripheral and core businesses or units.
GHARIB: Dr. Anderson, do you see it the same way?
BERNARD ANDERSON, PHD, PROF. OF MANAGEMENT, WHARTON SCHOOL: Yes. I would express it a little bit differently. I would say that a diverse workforce is one in which there is a nondiscriminatory environment for the management of human resources.
GHARIB: So how would you be able to tell, Dr. Anderson, if a company has been successful at creating a diverse workforce compared to one that`s been a failure?
ANDERSON: Look at the numbers. I`m a numbers man. I think that you have to look at who is s employed in that company and at what level they are employed. A diverse workforce is one that will reflect all of the population groups in this country, all of those who are in the labor market. It is not one in which you find an overwhelming majority of senior and management positions held by one population group, namely white males.
GHARIB: Dr. Thomas, is it all about numbers? Is that what success or failure is determined on?
THOMAS: I think it`s about numbers. I also think it`s about the culture, and I think it`s also about retention. There are many organizations that are able to keep their numbers looking perfect, but when you actually look at what`s going on, they`ve got a revolving door for talent and in particular, for female talent, talent of color.
GHARIB: So, Dr. Thomas, what would you say then are the real challenges or the stumbling blocks in terms of creating a diverse workforce and then keeping it that way?
THOMAS: I think the -- probably the major stumbling block is leadership accountability and having that leadership accountability run all the way through the organization, so that after initial success with the numbers, we don`t take our eye off the ball in terms of creating the kind of culture and environment that allows people to succeed and makes people want to be retained. So I really see today`s stumbling blocks lying primarily at the level of leadership.
GHARIB: I know, Dr. Anderson, you believe a lot that corporate leaders can play a big role in creating a diverse workforce. What would you say is the key thing that a corporate leader has to do?
ANDERSON: The first thing the corporate leader has to do in my view is understand the importance of workforce diversity for the performance of the company. I think if you look at the evidence, you will find that those companies that are high-performance work companies, are high-performance organizations, are organizations that have a diverse workforce.
GHARIB: Dr. Thomas, for companies that do not embrace diversity, what`s the biggest cost for not being diverse?
THOMAS: The biggest cost is that they will fail to adapt to the environment around them. There`s plenty of evidence that shows that companies that don`t have the diversity within, in order to track what`s going on in their markets and connect well to those markets, ultimately lose their position.
GHARIB: Gentlemen, let`s take a little break here and we`ll continue our conversation with Dr. Anderson and Dr. Thomas a little later in the program.
Nightly Business Report transcripts are available on-line post broadcast. The program is transcribed by eMediaMillWorks. Updates may be posted at a later date. The views of our guests and commentators are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Community Television Foundation of South Florida, Inc. Nightly Business Report, or WPBT. Information presented on Nightly Business Report is not and should not be considered as investment advice. Copyright
(c) 2005 Community Television Foundation of South Florida, Inc. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Terms of use.
01/16/06: Nordstrom's Plan Of Action
PAUL KANGAS:If you look at the management of fashion retailer Nordstrom, it`s obvious the company takes diversity seriously. More than 30 percent of the company`s managers are people of color; more than 71 percent are women. Those numbers are even higher when looking at the chain`s total employment. As Diane Eastabrook reports from the company`s headquarters in Seattle, Nordstrom takes pride in that.
DIANE EASTABROOK, NIGHTLY BUSINESS REPORT CORRESPONDENT: Nordstrom is the department store chain known for its elegance, its attentive service -- So what I`m using on you is the long-wear gel liner.
EASTABROOK: ... and its shoes. Can I measure both feet for you?
EASTABROOK: But the Seattle-based retailer could be known for something else, as well: its commitment to diversity.
BLAKE NORDSTROM, PRESIDENT, NORDSTROM: As our country evolves, it`s a pretty diverse community out there, and so it`s important that we`re reflective of that.
EASTABROOK: Nordstrom launched its diversity program nearly 20 years ago when it began rapidly expanding outside of Washington to 26 other states. The retailer assesses every new market it enters and sets hiring benchmarks that reflect regional demographics. Today, 40 percent of Nordstrom`s 50,000 employees are minorities; 30 percent of its managers are women and people of color.
DELENA SUNDAY, EXEC. V.P., DIVERSITY AFFAIRS, NORDSTROM: We`re in the service industry and we want to service anybody. We want to service everyone. So in order to do that, we have to have, you know, someone for everyone. So when our customers shop with us, they need to see people who reflect themselves, whether that`s ethnicity, age, whatever.
EASTABROOK: The kinds of shoppers Nordstrom seeks to attract are reflected in its catalogs. It also reaches shoppers through advertisements in magazines such as "Latina," "Black Enterprise" and "Essence." Nordstrom also uses its clout as a retailer to back up its commitment to diversity. The company does business with nearly 6,000 minority-owned suppliers and vendors. Clothing from Asian designer Misook to African American designer Tracey Reese to Hispanic jewelry designer Liz Palacios appear in many Nordstrom stores. The company thinks it has benefited from those relationships as much as its suppliers have.
NORDSTROM: We`ve been able to have fresh product that maybe you can`t find somewhere else and so as merchants we`re always looking for new things.
EASTABROOK: Nordstrom`s commitment to diversity extends beyond what customers see in its more than 100 stores. The company often acts as a mentor of sorts to its many suppliers, helping them to expand and improve their businesses. Alliance Relocation, a division of the Affluence Group, is a prime example. Before it began doing business with Nordstrom seven years ago, Alliance helped other companies coordinate employee relocations by simply contracting with local moving companies. But Nordstrom wanted something more. It insisted Alliance also help relocated employees sell their homes and buy new ones. Herb Stokes, CEO of the Affluence Group, says Nordstrom`s faith in his company helped to transform it.
HERB STOKES, CEO, THE AFFLUENCE GROUP: Not many corporations would give us an opportunity to participate in that real estate component, because there is a lot of expertise required and a lot of financial investment and we couldn`t do that. Nordstrom, however, felt that we could if given the opportunity.
EASTABROOK: Nordstrom`s commitment to diversity seems almost ironic, considering it is headquartered in a city whose population is more than 70 percent white. Still, the company says its commitment is part of its heritage. Founder John W. Nordstrom was a poor Swedish immigrant who arrived in the U.S. in 1887. He opened his first shoe store in Seattle in 1901. Blake Nordstrom says, in a sense, the diversity program carries on his great grandfather`s business philosophy.
NORDSTROM: Taking care of every single person, giving them the courtesy and respect they deserve, that`s a key component of how this company was founded.
EASTABROOK: Experts say while diversity programs are very common in retailing, Nordstrom`s is a cut above the rest.
MARY ANN ODEGAARD, MANAGEMENT PROFESSOR, UNIV. OF WASHINGTON: And they practice what they say, which I think differentiates them some from some other companies that have a policy, but it isn`t necessarily embraced by everybody.
EASTABROOK: Nordstrom says it is always looking for ways to improve its diversity program, either in its stores or in its catalogs or through its suppliers.
SUNDAY: It`s not anything you ever reach the finish line. You never say, "oh, my gosh, you know, now we can take a deep breath," because our customers will continue to change. Their needs will continue to change, and we have to evolve with that. So we just continue to try to get better.
EASTABROOK: And that, says Nordstrom, has always been the key to its success. Diane Eastabrook, NIGHTLY BUSINESS REPORT, Seattle.
GHARIB: Continuing now our discussion on diversity, we`re back again with Bernard Anderson of the Wharton School and David Thomas of the Harvard Business School. Dr. Anderson, let me begin with you this time about how can minorities move into the executive suite. What`s your best advice?
ANDERSON: My best advice is for boards of directors, senior executives, to seek out and as a matter of a specific goal, attract minorities and women into some of the senior positions. That is something that is rarely done in American industry today. Let me be clear. What I mean is seeking out minorities and women, preparing them, tutoring them, mentoring them, doing what is necessary to see that they rise to the highest levels of the corporation.
GHARIB: Let`s hear what Dr. Thomas has to say. What thoughts do you have on minority advancement in the executive suite?
THOMAS: Well, I wholeheartedly agree with what Dr. Anderson has said. I would add that the thinking about bringing minority executives into the executive suite has to start fairly early in the young executive`s career. My observation is that many of the minority senior managers, by the time they get to be considered for executive level, have missed key developmental experiences and opportunities that then don`t allow them to clear that bar. And so I think addressing that development very early in career is critical.
GHARIB: And let me ask you, Dr. Thomas, do you think that affirmative action has been a success or a failure?
THOMAS: I think that affirmative action has been a success in terms of creating access at the entry levels of organizations at lower levels in the professional ranks. I don`t think affirmative action has had a great influence on the movement of minorities into the executive level. And in part, that`s because of the focus on numbers, not also on position and access in companies.
GHARIB: Let me ask both of you. We`ve been talking a lot about diversity. Is there anything missing from the current debate and discussion on diversity in America? What should people be focusing on? Dr. Anderson?
ANDERSON: I think what`s missing is to connect affirmative action and diversity. Diversity is a major goal. It is part of the conversation. We hear very little today about affirmative action. But let me tell you, you can`t get to diversity without affirmative action. And so I will use that much maligned word, affirmative action, to say that businesses need to have policies and practices in place that seek out minorities and women.
GHARIB: Dr. Thomas, what do you think is missing in the debate and discussion?
THOMAS: What I think is missing in the debate and discussion is really how you connect, how we lead organizations to the desire to have diversity in an organization. And if those two things aren`t connected, I think we wind up with a numbers game that gets played at the bottom of the corporation and at the periphery of it and not at the core and not at the top.
GHARIB: All right. Just to wrap it up, it is, after all, Martin Luther King Day and much of Dr. King`s legacy has centered on racial inequality in America. Give us a progress report on where we stand on that today. What more still needs to be done? And Dr. Anderson and Dr. Thomas, real quickly, just in a few words.
ANDERSON: I think a great deal of progress has been made in expanding the doors of opportunity since Dr. King was on the scene. However, let me emphasize we still have a long way to go.
GHARIB: Dr. Thomas, last word.
THOMAS: I think that we need to focus more on class and education. There is a group of the African-American community who are essentially being put on a path to be locked out of the economy in the 21st century and it will be a major, cataclysmic problem I think for this nation, if we don`t begin to connect that and businesses begin to see that as being in their interests.
GHARIB: Gentlemen, thank you so much. We appreciate your time and your insights.
ANDERSON: Thank you.
THOMAS: Thank you.
GHARIB: And we`ve been speaking with Bernard Anderson, professor of management of the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania and David Thomas, the professor of business administration at the Harvard Business School.
Nightly Business Report transcripts are available on-line post broadcast. The program is transcribed by eMediaMillWorks. Updates may be posted at a later date. The views of our guests and commentators are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Community Television Foundation of South Florida, Inc. Nightly Business Report, or WPBT. Information presented on Nightly Business Report is not and should not be considered as investment advice. Copyright (c) 2005 Community Television Foundation of South Florida, Inc. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Terms of use.
1/16/06: Xerox's Blue Print For Diversity
PAUL KANGAS: Xerox is known as a pioneer in document processing, but it`s also a pioneer in workplace diversity. For over 40 years, the company has made it a priority to actively recruit and promote minorities and women. As Erika Miller reports, Xerox says the moves are designed to give it a competitive edge.
ERIKA MILLER, NIGHTLY BUSINESS REPORT CORRESPONDENT: It`s 3:15 p.m. and Rita Sherman is home to greet her kids as they get off the bus. It`s something she looks forward to every school day, but Sherman is not a stay- at-home mom. She`s a senior manager at Xerox. She has arranged to work just 30 hours a week during the school year and full-time during the summer. Schedule flexibility is one reason Xerox has been successful in recruiting and retaining a diverse pool of workers.
RITA SHERMAN, TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT MANAGER, XEROX: Xerox has understood that in order to have the diversity that it wants, you have to be flexible -- I mean, not just for women, but for men, and whatever the different needs are of the different people.
MILLER: At Xerox, differences are not just tolerated; they are considered vital for business success. That belief starts at the top with Anne Mulcahy, the company`s first female chairman and CEO.
ANNE MULCAHY, CHAIRMAN & CEO, XEROX: When you have an environment that is diverse, really having it allowing people to make their full contribution and really develop and be a part of the development system of the company, I think, delivers incredible returns in terms of full employee productivity and a workplace that really does enable great work.
MILLER: Mulcahy started as a sales representative in 1976. Now she`s one of only seven women running a "Fortune" 500 company.
MULCAHY: At times during my career while I was, you know, having my children and trying to balance work and family, Xerox partnered with me to make sure that I didn`t get off track and that they helped insure that I stayed a part of Xerox and had some flexibilities at times that kept me with Xerox. There`s no question about it.
MILLER: From the corner office to the factory floors, diversity is evident throughout the organization. Xerox employees are roughly 15 percent African American, 8 percent Hispanic, 5 percent Asian and 1 percent Native American. More than 40 percent of senior executives are women, people of color or both. Xerox`s effort to promote diversity began here in Rochester in the early 1960s. At that time, race riots shook the city, prompting Xerox to mount an aggressive campaign to recruit and hire African Americans. Over time, the firm`s diversity efforts have extended to include other underrepresented groups. Currently, the company has active caucuses for Asians, Hispanics, blacks, black women, women and homosexuals. Each group has its own champion with clout.
PHILIP HARLOW, CHIEF DIVERSITY OFFICER, XEROX: We assign a senior- level corporate executive to each one of the caucus groups that are represented within the Xerox culture. And the purpose of that is to have someone that`s directly connected to the CEO of the company to allow for ongoing exchange of communications.
MILLER: For example, Xerox says the black employee caucus helped it develop a consistent performance evaluation format company-wide. The women`s organizations advocated family friendly policies like flextime, job sharing and telecommuting. Xerox says all the groups help with minority recruitment. They also foster informal mentoring and networking.
SHERMAN: I feel that, you know, being one of fewer, you know, female minorities in the company, I have something to offer. I`ve had a lot of experience, I`ve been in a lot of different groups and I can help people understand, you know, here are the possible opportunities.
MILLER: Another way Xerox promotes diversity is through community outreach programs. Willie Robinson started as an engineer there 13 years ago. Now he oversees a program that places company engineers in Rochester public schools to teach science.
WILLIE ROBINSON, MANAGER, COMMUNITY EDUCATION PROGRAMS: We go in, letting them know that there is different career opportunities that you might want to consider regardless of where you come from, whether or not you are a male or a female.
MILLER: Because diversity is seen as a business imperative, managers are evaluated on whether they achieve diversity targets. And when layoffs take place, the company strives to mirror balanced workforce goals. Still, Xerox says this commitment to diversity does not conflict with its goal of finding the best employees.
HARLOW: This is not about quotas. This is about trying to create an environment that`s inclusive and representative based on the markets that you operate in. Xerox is a company that has very high standards as it relates to the capabilities that we look for people to have to come in.
MILLER: Xerox says its effort to encourage diversity remains a top priority. The company hopes to recruit more Hispanics and female engineers. It also wants to see more women working for Xerox abroad. Erika Miller, NIGHTLY BUSINESS REPORT, Rochester, New York.
Nightly Business Report transcripts are available on-line post broadcast. The program is transcribed by eMediaMillWorks. Updates may be posted at a later date. The views of our guests and commentators are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Community Television Foundation of South Florida, Inc. Nightly Business Report, or WPBT. Information presented on Nightly Business Report is not and should not be considered as investment advice. Copyright (c) 2005 Community Television Foundation of South Florida, Inc. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Terms of use.
http://www.nbr.com/transcript/2006/transcript011606.html
Program: Monday, January 16, 2006 -MLK Day: Open For Business
Denny's Recipe For Diversity
Nordstrom's Plan Of Action
Xerox's Blue Print For Diversity
Paul Kangas' Stocks In The News
Market Stats
01/16/06: Denny's Recipe For Diversity
PAUL KANGAS: We begin tonight with Denny`s. It took a big lawsuit for the restaurant chain to realize it had a diversity problem and a public relations one, as well. Since settling that suit back in 1994, the company has made a turnaround from a symbol of racial discrimination to one of the best companies for minorities. From Denny`s headquarters in South Carolina, Darren Gersh reports.
DARREN GERSH, NIGHTLY BUSINESS REPORT CORRESPONDENT: This meeting is what makes corporate diversity different at Denny`s.
RAY HOOD, CHIEF DIVERSITY OFFICER, DENNY`S: This is the real deal. This is about a $1.4 million opportunity.
GERSH: This is Ray Hood, Denny`s chief diversity officer. And that`s Denny`s CEO Nelson Marchioli.
NELSON MARCHIOLI, CEO, DENNY`S: So, $150 more per store, for a grand total of how much?
GERSH: Ray is an officer of the company. She sits on the Denny`s management committee and is one of just seven people to report directly to the CEO. Many companies relegate diversity to a task force or give the job to a junior executive reporting to human resources. Not Denny`s.
HOOD: You don`t run finance by a council. You have a CFO. You have an SVP of human resources. Marketing is not run by a task force. So why would we do this? And actually, we felt that it was a bastardization of the business actually and that it would make diversity this appendage off to the side of the business and not integrated into the business. So we really broke the mold.
GERSH: Denny`s really had no choice. In the mid-`90s a Denny`s restaurant in Annapolis failed to serve six uniformed African American Secret Service agents in town to guard President Clinton. They sued and Denny`s became a punch line for late night comics.
HOOD: We became like an icon for corporate discrimination. And I read someplace where they called us the poster child.
GERSH: Since then, Denny`s has become the poster child for how to make diversity work. Surveys rank the company as one of the best workplaces in the country for minorities and women. Now other CEOs ask Marchioli for advice. When he offers it, he hears back doubts about the cost and extra work of hiring and managing a chief diversity officer.
MARCHIOLI: Well, what about a task force or I think this should report to HR? And I push back and advise them that it is really about your commitment as the CEO.
GERSH: It is certainly not cheap. Denny`s says it spends millions of dollars a year on diversity training.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We did have a couple that was a little grumpy negative, but once we got into it, they picked up and it was really fun.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Very good. The fact is that maybe we might have seen them originally as grumpy or maybe difficult, but the fact is you worked through it, and that`s about appreciating others and diversity.
GERSH: Every new Denny`s employee is trained in the company`s core values, including appreciating others. Over the last decade, Denny`s estimates two million people have taken its diversity training and the company claims to be the largest diversity trainer in the country. Each of Denny`s 85,000 employees receives an hour and a half of diversity training, managers: nine and a half hours. Hood says the experience can be an eye- opener, helping some understand the kind of subtle and not-so-subtle discrimination minorities face everyday.
HOOD: If someone is walking through that day in and day out, perhaps by the time they come to you and the silverware is not clean, or you sit them back of the restaurant, then it`s like, it gives me a context to understand where this is coming from. Light bulb goes off.
GERSH: From a company with no top black executives or suppliers a decade ago, Denny`s now says half its board and senior leadership team are women or people of color and more than 12 percent of total purchasing contracts are with minority suppliers. Denny`s insists these are not quotas.
HOOD: We want to see women, we want to see white males, we want to see people of color and may the best person get the job.
GERSH: Denny`s can`t afford another mistake. The company faces fierce competition from Ihop and in the crowded family dining category, Denny`s can`t risk another hit to its reputation. But Hood is not worried. She believes the company has taken the diversity message to heart.
HOOD: If I were to get hit by a bus, heaven forbid, it could go on and on and on. So that everybody owns it. It`s who we are. That`s what it means for Denny`s at this very specific point in time. And that`s big for us.
GERSH: Darren Gersh, NIGHTLY BUSINESS REPORT, Spartanburg, South Carolina.
GHARIB: Joining us now to talk more about the issues of diversity, we`re happy to have with us Bernard Anderson, professor of management at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania and David Thomas, professor of business administration at the Harvard Business School. Gentlemen, thank you so much for joining us. Dr. Thomas, let me begin with you. You know, everybody talks about diversity, but if you had to come up with a short definition of what makes a diverse workforce, what would it be?
DAVID THOMAS, PHD, PROF. OF BUSINESS ADMIN., HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL: It would be a workforce that reflects the community that the business serves and the available labor markets, as well as reflecting diversity at all levels of the company and both in the company`s peripheral and core businesses or units.
GHARIB: Dr. Anderson, do you see it the same way?
BERNARD ANDERSON, PHD, PROF. OF MANAGEMENT, WHARTON SCHOOL: Yes. I would express it a little bit differently. I would say that a diverse workforce is one in which there is a nondiscriminatory environment for the management of human resources.
GHARIB: So how would you be able to tell, Dr. Anderson, if a company has been successful at creating a diverse workforce compared to one that`s been a failure?
ANDERSON: Look at the numbers. I`m a numbers man. I think that you have to look at who is s employed in that company and at what level they are employed. A diverse workforce is one that will reflect all of the population groups in this country, all of those who are in the labor market. It is not one in which you find an overwhelming majority of senior and management positions held by one population group, namely white males.
GHARIB: Dr. Thomas, is it all about numbers? Is that what success or failure is determined on?
THOMAS: I think it`s about numbers. I also think it`s about the culture, and I think it`s also about retention. There are many organizations that are able to keep their numbers looking perfect, but when you actually look at what`s going on, they`ve got a revolving door for talent and in particular, for female talent, talent of color.
GHARIB: So, Dr. Thomas, what would you say then are the real challenges or the stumbling blocks in terms of creating a diverse workforce and then keeping it that way?
THOMAS: I think the -- probably the major stumbling block is leadership accountability and having that leadership accountability run all the way through the organization, so that after initial success with the numbers, we don`t take our eye off the ball in terms of creating the kind of culture and environment that allows people to succeed and makes people want to be retained. So I really see today`s stumbling blocks lying primarily at the level of leadership.
GHARIB: I know, Dr. Anderson, you believe a lot that corporate leaders can play a big role in creating a diverse workforce. What would you say is the key thing that a corporate leader has to do?
ANDERSON: The first thing the corporate leader has to do in my view is understand the importance of workforce diversity for the performance of the company. I think if you look at the evidence, you will find that those companies that are high-performance work companies, are high-performance organizations, are organizations that have a diverse workforce.
GHARIB: Dr. Thomas, for companies that do not embrace diversity, what`s the biggest cost for not being diverse?
THOMAS: The biggest cost is that they will fail to adapt to the environment around them. There`s plenty of evidence that shows that companies that don`t have the diversity within, in order to track what`s going on in their markets and connect well to those markets, ultimately lose their position.
GHARIB: Gentlemen, let`s take a little break here and we`ll continue our conversation with Dr. Anderson and Dr. Thomas a little later in the program.
Nightly Business Report transcripts are available on-line post broadcast. The program is transcribed by eMediaMillWorks. Updates may be posted at a later date. The views of our guests and commentators are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Community Television Foundation of South Florida, Inc. Nightly Business Report, or WPBT. Information presented on Nightly Business Report is not and should not be considered as investment advice. Copyright
(c) 2005 Community Television Foundation of South Florida, Inc. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Terms of use.
01/16/06: Nordstrom's Plan Of Action
PAUL KANGAS:If you look at the management of fashion retailer Nordstrom, it`s obvious the company takes diversity seriously. More than 30 percent of the company`s managers are people of color; more than 71 percent are women. Those numbers are even higher when looking at the chain`s total employment. As Diane Eastabrook reports from the company`s headquarters in Seattle, Nordstrom takes pride in that.
DIANE EASTABROOK, NIGHTLY BUSINESS REPORT CORRESPONDENT: Nordstrom is the department store chain known for its elegance, its attentive service -- So what I`m using on you is the long-wear gel liner.
EASTABROOK: ... and its shoes. Can I measure both feet for you?
EASTABROOK: But the Seattle-based retailer could be known for something else, as well: its commitment to diversity.
BLAKE NORDSTROM, PRESIDENT, NORDSTROM: As our country evolves, it`s a pretty diverse community out there, and so it`s important that we`re reflective of that.
EASTABROOK: Nordstrom launched its diversity program nearly 20 years ago when it began rapidly expanding outside of Washington to 26 other states. The retailer assesses every new market it enters and sets hiring benchmarks that reflect regional demographics. Today, 40 percent of Nordstrom`s 50,000 employees are minorities; 30 percent of its managers are women and people of color.
DELENA SUNDAY, EXEC. V.P., DIVERSITY AFFAIRS, NORDSTROM: We`re in the service industry and we want to service anybody. We want to service everyone. So in order to do that, we have to have, you know, someone for everyone. So when our customers shop with us, they need to see people who reflect themselves, whether that`s ethnicity, age, whatever.
EASTABROOK: The kinds of shoppers Nordstrom seeks to attract are reflected in its catalogs. It also reaches shoppers through advertisements in magazines such as "Latina," "Black Enterprise" and "Essence." Nordstrom also uses its clout as a retailer to back up its commitment to diversity. The company does business with nearly 6,000 minority-owned suppliers and vendors. Clothing from Asian designer Misook to African American designer Tracey Reese to Hispanic jewelry designer Liz Palacios appear in many Nordstrom stores. The company thinks it has benefited from those relationships as much as its suppliers have.
NORDSTROM: We`ve been able to have fresh product that maybe you can`t find somewhere else and so as merchants we`re always looking for new things.
EASTABROOK: Nordstrom`s commitment to diversity extends beyond what customers see in its more than 100 stores. The company often acts as a mentor of sorts to its many suppliers, helping them to expand and improve their businesses. Alliance Relocation, a division of the Affluence Group, is a prime example. Before it began doing business with Nordstrom seven years ago, Alliance helped other companies coordinate employee relocations by simply contracting with local moving companies. But Nordstrom wanted something more. It insisted Alliance also help relocated employees sell their homes and buy new ones. Herb Stokes, CEO of the Affluence Group, says Nordstrom`s faith in his company helped to transform it.
HERB STOKES, CEO, THE AFFLUENCE GROUP: Not many corporations would give us an opportunity to participate in that real estate component, because there is a lot of expertise required and a lot of financial investment and we couldn`t do that. Nordstrom, however, felt that we could if given the opportunity.
EASTABROOK: Nordstrom`s commitment to diversity seems almost ironic, considering it is headquartered in a city whose population is more than 70 percent white. Still, the company says its commitment is part of its heritage. Founder John W. Nordstrom was a poor Swedish immigrant who arrived in the U.S. in 1887. He opened his first shoe store in Seattle in 1901. Blake Nordstrom says, in a sense, the diversity program carries on his great grandfather`s business philosophy.
NORDSTROM: Taking care of every single person, giving them the courtesy and respect they deserve, that`s a key component of how this company was founded.
EASTABROOK: Experts say while diversity programs are very common in retailing, Nordstrom`s is a cut above the rest.
MARY ANN ODEGAARD, MANAGEMENT PROFESSOR, UNIV. OF WASHINGTON: And they practice what they say, which I think differentiates them some from some other companies that have a policy, but it isn`t necessarily embraced by everybody.
EASTABROOK: Nordstrom says it is always looking for ways to improve its diversity program, either in its stores or in its catalogs or through its suppliers.
SUNDAY: It`s not anything you ever reach the finish line. You never say, "oh, my gosh, you know, now we can take a deep breath," because our customers will continue to change. Their needs will continue to change, and we have to evolve with that. So we just continue to try to get better.
EASTABROOK: And that, says Nordstrom, has always been the key to its success. Diane Eastabrook, NIGHTLY BUSINESS REPORT, Seattle.
GHARIB: Continuing now our discussion on diversity, we`re back again with Bernard Anderson of the Wharton School and David Thomas of the Harvard Business School. Dr. Anderson, let me begin with you this time about how can minorities move into the executive suite. What`s your best advice?
ANDERSON: My best advice is for boards of directors, senior executives, to seek out and as a matter of a specific goal, attract minorities and women into some of the senior positions. That is something that is rarely done in American industry today. Let me be clear. What I mean is seeking out minorities and women, preparing them, tutoring them, mentoring them, doing what is necessary to see that they rise to the highest levels of the corporation.
GHARIB: Let`s hear what Dr. Thomas has to say. What thoughts do you have on minority advancement in the executive suite?
THOMAS: Well, I wholeheartedly agree with what Dr. Anderson has said. I would add that the thinking about bringing minority executives into the executive suite has to start fairly early in the young executive`s career. My observation is that many of the minority senior managers, by the time they get to be considered for executive level, have missed key developmental experiences and opportunities that then don`t allow them to clear that bar. And so I think addressing that development very early in career is critical.
GHARIB: And let me ask you, Dr. Thomas, do you think that affirmative action has been a success or a failure?
THOMAS: I think that affirmative action has been a success in terms of creating access at the entry levels of organizations at lower levels in the professional ranks. I don`t think affirmative action has had a great influence on the movement of minorities into the executive level. And in part, that`s because of the focus on numbers, not also on position and access in companies.
GHARIB: Let me ask both of you. We`ve been talking a lot about diversity. Is there anything missing from the current debate and discussion on diversity in America? What should people be focusing on? Dr. Anderson?
ANDERSON: I think what`s missing is to connect affirmative action and diversity. Diversity is a major goal. It is part of the conversation. We hear very little today about affirmative action. But let me tell you, you can`t get to diversity without affirmative action. And so I will use that much maligned word, affirmative action, to say that businesses need to have policies and practices in place that seek out minorities and women.
GHARIB: Dr. Thomas, what do you think is missing in the debate and discussion?
THOMAS: What I think is missing in the debate and discussion is really how you connect, how we lead organizations to the desire to have diversity in an organization. And if those two things aren`t connected, I think we wind up with a numbers game that gets played at the bottom of the corporation and at the periphery of it and not at the core and not at the top.
GHARIB: All right. Just to wrap it up, it is, after all, Martin Luther King Day and much of Dr. King`s legacy has centered on racial inequality in America. Give us a progress report on where we stand on that today. What more still needs to be done? And Dr. Anderson and Dr. Thomas, real quickly, just in a few words.
ANDERSON: I think a great deal of progress has been made in expanding the doors of opportunity since Dr. King was on the scene. However, let me emphasize we still have a long way to go.
GHARIB: Dr. Thomas, last word.
THOMAS: I think that we need to focus more on class and education. There is a group of the African-American community who are essentially being put on a path to be locked out of the economy in the 21st century and it will be a major, cataclysmic problem I think for this nation, if we don`t begin to connect that and businesses begin to see that as being in their interests.
GHARIB: Gentlemen, thank you so much. We appreciate your time and your insights.
ANDERSON: Thank you.
THOMAS: Thank you.
GHARIB: And we`ve been speaking with Bernard Anderson, professor of management of the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania and David Thomas, the professor of business administration at the Harvard Business School.
Nightly Business Report transcripts are available on-line post broadcast. The program is transcribed by eMediaMillWorks. Updates may be posted at a later date. The views of our guests and commentators are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Community Television Foundation of South Florida, Inc. Nightly Business Report, or WPBT. Information presented on Nightly Business Report is not and should not be considered as investment advice. Copyright (c) 2005 Community Television Foundation of South Florida, Inc. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Terms of use.
1/16/06: Xerox's Blue Print For Diversity
PAUL KANGAS: Xerox is known as a pioneer in document processing, but it`s also a pioneer in workplace diversity. For over 40 years, the company has made it a priority to actively recruit and promote minorities and women. As Erika Miller reports, Xerox says the moves are designed to give it a competitive edge.
ERIKA MILLER, NIGHTLY BUSINESS REPORT CORRESPONDENT: It`s 3:15 p.m. and Rita Sherman is home to greet her kids as they get off the bus. It`s something she looks forward to every school day, but Sherman is not a stay- at-home mom. She`s a senior manager at Xerox. She has arranged to work just 30 hours a week during the school year and full-time during the summer. Schedule flexibility is one reason Xerox has been successful in recruiting and retaining a diverse pool of workers.
RITA SHERMAN, TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT MANAGER, XEROX: Xerox has understood that in order to have the diversity that it wants, you have to be flexible -- I mean, not just for women, but for men, and whatever the different needs are of the different people.
MILLER: At Xerox, differences are not just tolerated; they are considered vital for business success. That belief starts at the top with Anne Mulcahy, the company`s first female chairman and CEO.
ANNE MULCAHY, CHAIRMAN & CEO, XEROX: When you have an environment that is diverse, really having it allowing people to make their full contribution and really develop and be a part of the development system of the company, I think, delivers incredible returns in terms of full employee productivity and a workplace that really does enable great work.
MILLER: Mulcahy started as a sales representative in 1976. Now she`s one of only seven women running a "Fortune" 500 company.
MULCAHY: At times during my career while I was, you know, having my children and trying to balance work and family, Xerox partnered with me to make sure that I didn`t get off track and that they helped insure that I stayed a part of Xerox and had some flexibilities at times that kept me with Xerox. There`s no question about it.
MILLER: From the corner office to the factory floors, diversity is evident throughout the organization. Xerox employees are roughly 15 percent African American, 8 percent Hispanic, 5 percent Asian and 1 percent Native American. More than 40 percent of senior executives are women, people of color or both. Xerox`s effort to promote diversity began here in Rochester in the early 1960s. At that time, race riots shook the city, prompting Xerox to mount an aggressive campaign to recruit and hire African Americans. Over time, the firm`s diversity efforts have extended to include other underrepresented groups. Currently, the company has active caucuses for Asians, Hispanics, blacks, black women, women and homosexuals. Each group has its own champion with clout.
PHILIP HARLOW, CHIEF DIVERSITY OFFICER, XEROX: We assign a senior- level corporate executive to each one of the caucus groups that are represented within the Xerox culture. And the purpose of that is to have someone that`s directly connected to the CEO of the company to allow for ongoing exchange of communications.
MILLER: For example, Xerox says the black employee caucus helped it develop a consistent performance evaluation format company-wide. The women`s organizations advocated family friendly policies like flextime, job sharing and telecommuting. Xerox says all the groups help with minority recruitment. They also foster informal mentoring and networking.
SHERMAN: I feel that, you know, being one of fewer, you know, female minorities in the company, I have something to offer. I`ve had a lot of experience, I`ve been in a lot of different groups and I can help people understand, you know, here are the possible opportunities.
MILLER: Another way Xerox promotes diversity is through community outreach programs. Willie Robinson started as an engineer there 13 years ago. Now he oversees a program that places company engineers in Rochester public schools to teach science.
WILLIE ROBINSON, MANAGER, COMMUNITY EDUCATION PROGRAMS: We go in, letting them know that there is different career opportunities that you might want to consider regardless of where you come from, whether or not you are a male or a female.
MILLER: Because diversity is seen as a business imperative, managers are evaluated on whether they achieve diversity targets. And when layoffs take place, the company strives to mirror balanced workforce goals. Still, Xerox says this commitment to diversity does not conflict with its goal of finding the best employees.
HARLOW: This is not about quotas. This is about trying to create an environment that`s inclusive and representative based on the markets that you operate in. Xerox is a company that has very high standards as it relates to the capabilities that we look for people to have to come in.
MILLER: Xerox says its effort to encourage diversity remains a top priority. The company hopes to recruit more Hispanics and female engineers. It also wants to see more women working for Xerox abroad. Erika Miller, NIGHTLY BUSINESS REPORT, Rochester, New York.
Nightly Business Report transcripts are available on-line post broadcast. The program is transcribed by eMediaMillWorks. Updates may be posted at a later date. The views of our guests and commentators are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Community Television Foundation of South Florida, Inc. Nightly Business Report, or WPBT. Information presented on Nightly Business Report is not and should not be considered as investment advice. Copyright (c) 2005 Community Television Foundation of South Florida, Inc. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Terms of use.
Tuesday, January 17, 2006
Open for Business - Nordstrom - Story on Nightly Business Report Television Program
Explaining how diversity can work for better business in America. This transcript is from 12/1 and I will follow up with more details from the program on Monday 16/1/06 when the transcript is available...Sue Ellson
http://www.nbr.com/transcript/2006/transcript011206.html
1/12/06: "Open For Business"-Nordstrom
JEFF YASTINE: FEDERATED DEPARTMENT STORES SAID TODAY IT WILL PUT ITS LORD & TAYLOR DIVISION UP FOR SALE AS IT FOCUSES ON ITS MACY'S AND BLOOMINGDALE'S BRANDS SEPARATELY. TONIGHT WE TAKE A CLOSER LOOK AT FEDERATED RIVAL NORDSTROM. IT'S ONE OF AMERICA'S OLDEST RETAILERS, AND IT HAS ONE OF THE BEST TRACK RECORDS IN THE INDUSTRY WHEN IT COMES TO DIVERSITY IN THE WORKPLACE. AS WE CONTINUE OUR SERIES "OPEN FOR BUSINESS," DIANE EASTABROOK TAKES US TO SEATTLE, NORDSTROM'S HOME BASE.
DIANE EASTABROOK, NIGHTLY BUSINESS REPORT CORRESPONDENT: NORDSTROM IS THE DEPARTMENT STORE CHAIN KNOWN FOR ITS ELEGANCE, ITS ATTENTIVE SERVICE...
MAKE UP ARTIST: SO WHAT I'M USING ON YOU IS THE LONG-WEAR GEL LINER.
DIANE EASTABROOK: AND ITS SHOES.
SHOE SALES PERSON: CAN I MEASURE BOTH FEET FOR YOU?
EASTABROOK: BUT THE SEATTLE- BASED RETAILER COULD BE KNOWN FOR SOMETHING ELSE AS WELL: ITS COMMITMENT TO DIVERSITY.
BLAKE NORDSTROM, PRESIDENT, NORDSTROM INC.: AS OUR COUNTRY EVOLVES IT'S A PRETTY DIVERSE COMMUNITY OUT THERE, AND SO IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE'RE REFLECTIVE OF THAT.
EASTABROOK: NORDSTROM LAUNCHED ITS DIVERSITY PROGRAM NEARLY 20 YEARS AGO WHEN IT BEGAN RAPIDLY EXPANDING OUTSIDE OF WASHINGTON TO 26 OTHER STATES. THE RETAILER ASSESSES EVERY NEW MARKET IT ENTERS AND THEN SETS HIRING BENCHMARKS THAT REFLECT REGIONAL DEMOGRAPHICS. TODAY 40% OF NORDSTROM'S 50,000 EMPLOYEES ARE MINORITIES. 30% OF ITS MANAGERS ARE WOMEN AND PEOPLE OF COLOR.
DELENA SUNDAY, EXECUTIVE, VICE PRESIDENT OF DIVERSITY AFFAIRS, NORDSTROM: WE'RE IN THE SERVICE INDUSTRY AND WE WANT TO SERVICE ANYBODY. WE WANT TO SERVICE EVERYONE, SO IN ORDER TO DO THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, SOMEONE FOR EVERYONE. SO WHEN OUR CUSTOMERS SHOP WITH US THEY NEED TO SEE PEOPLE WHO REFLECT THEMSELVES-- WHETHER THAT'S ETHNICITY, AGE, WHATEVER.
EASTABROOK: THE KINDS OF SHOPPERS NORDSTROM SEEKS TO ATTRACT ARE REFLECTED IN ITS CATALOGS. IT ALSO REACHES SHOPPERS THROUGH ADVERTISEMENTS IN MAGAZINES SUCH AS "LATINA," "BLACK ENTERPRISE," AND "ESSENCE." NORDSTROM ALSO USES ITS CLOUT AS A RETAILER TO BACK UP ITS COMMITMENT TO DIVERSITY. THE COMPANY DOES BUSINESS WITH NEARLY 6,000 MINORITY-OWNED SUPPLIERS AND VENDORS. CLOTHING FROM ASIAN DESIGNER MISOOK TO AFRICAN-AMERICAN DESIGNER TRACEY REESE TO HISPANIC JEWELRY DESIGNER LIZ PALACIOS APPEAR IN MANY NORDSTROM STORES. THE COMPANY THINKS IT HAS BENEFITED FROM THOSE RELATIONSHIPS AS MUCH AS ITS SUPPLIERS HAVE.
NORSDSTROM: WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO HAVE FRESH PRODUCT THAT MAYBE YOU CAN'T FIND SOMEPLACE ELSE, AND SO AS MERCHANTS WE'RE ALWAYS LOOKING FOR NEW THINGS.
EASTABROOK: BUT NORDSTROM'S COMMITMENT TO DIVERSITY OFTEN EXTENDS BEYOND WHAT CUSTOMERS SEE IN ITS MORE THAN 100 STORES. THE COMPANY OFTEN ACTS AS A MENTOR OF SORTS TO ITS MANY SUPPLIERS, HELPING THEM TO IMPROVE AND EXPAND THEIR BUSINESSES.
PHONE OPERATOR: GOOD MORNING, CHRIS. HOW ARE YOU?
EASTABROOK: ALLIANCE RELOCATION, A DIVISION OF THE AFFLUENCE GROUP, IS A PRIME EXAMPLE. BEFORE IT BEGAN DOING BUSINESS WITH NORDSTROM SEVEN YEARS AGO, ALLIANCE HELPED OTHER COMPANIES COORDINATE EMPLOYEE RELOCATIONS BY SIMPLY CONTRACTING WITH LOCAL MOVING COMPANIES. BUT NORDSTROM WANTED SOMETHING MORE. IT INSISTED ALLIANCE ALSO HELP RELOCATED EMPLOYEES SELL THEIR HOMES AND BUY NEW ONES. HERB STOKES, C.E.O. OF THE AFFLUENCE GROUP, SAYS NORDSTROM'S FAITH IN HIS COMPANY HELPED TO TRANSFORM IT.
HERB STOKES, C.E.O. OF THE AFFLUENCE GROUP: NOT MANY CORPORATIONS WOULD GIVE US AN OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE IN THAT REAL ESTATE COMPONENT, BECAUSE THERE IS A LOT OF EXPERTISE REQUIRED AND A LOT OF FINANCIAL INVESTMENT, AND WE COULDN'T DO THAT. NORDSTROM, HOWEVER, FELT THAT WE COULD IF GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY.
EASTABROOK: NORDSTROM'S COMMITMENT TO DIVERSITY SEEMS ALMOST IRONIC, CONSIDERING IT IS HEADQUARTERED IN A CITY WHOSE POPULATION IS MORE THAN 70% WHITE. STILL, THE COMPANY SAYS ITS COMMITMENT IS PART OF ITS HERITAGE. FOUNDER JOHN W. NORDSTROM WAS A POOR SWEDISH IMMIGRANT WHO ARRIVED IN THE U.S. IN 1887. HE OPENED HIS FIRST SHOE STORE IN SEATTLE IN 1901. BLAKE NORDSTROM SAYS IN A SENSE THE DIVERSITY PROGRAM CARRIES ON HIS GREAT GRANDFATHER'S BUSINESS PHILOSOPHY.
NORDSTROM: TAKING CARE OF EVERY SINGLE PERSON, GIVING THEM THE CARE AND RESPECT THEY DESERVE, THAT IS A KEY COMPONENT OF HOW THIS COMPANY WAS FOUNDED.
EASTABROOK: EXPERTS SAY WHILE DIVERSITY PROGRAMS ARE VERY COMMON IN RETAILING, NORDSTROM'S IS A CUT ABOVE THE REST.
MARY ANN ODEGAARD, MANAGEMENT PROFESSOR, UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON: THEY PRACTICE WHAT THEY SAY, WHICH I THINK DIFFERENTIATES THEM SOME FROM SOME OTHER COMPANIES THAT HAVE A POLICY, BUT IT ISN'T NECESSARILY EMBRACED BY EVERYBODY.
EASTABROOK: NORDSTROM SAYS IT IS ALWAYS LOOKING FOR WAYS TO IMPROVE ITS DIVERSITY PROGRAM, EITHER IN ITS STORES, OR IN ITS CATALOGS OR THROUGH ITS SUPPLIERS.
SUNDAY: IT'S NOT ANYTHING WHERE YOU EVER REACH THE FINISH LINE. YOU NEVER SAY, "OH, MY GOSH, NOW WE CAN TAKE A DEEP BREATH" BECAUSE OUR CUSTOMERS WILL CONTINUE TO CHANGE, THEIR NEEDS WILL CONTINUE TO CHANGE, AND WE HAVE TO EVOLVE WITH THAT, AND SO WE'LL JUST CONTINUE TO TRY TO GET BETTER.
EASTABROOK: AND THAT, SAYS NORDSTROM, HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE KEY TO ITS SUCCESS. DIANE EASTABROOK, "NIGHTLY BUSINESS REPORT," SEATTLE.
Nightly Business Report transcripts are available on-line post broadcast. The program is transcribed by eMediaMillWorks. Updates may be posted at a later date. The views of our guests and commentators are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Community Television Foundation of South Florida, Inc. Nightly Business Report, or WPBT. Information presented on Nightly Business Report is not and should not be considered as investment advice. Copyright (c) 2005 Community Television Foundation of South Florida, Inc. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Terms of use
http://www.nbr.com/transcript/2006/transcript011206.html
1/12/06: "Open For Business"-Nordstrom
JEFF YASTINE: FEDERATED DEPARTMENT STORES SAID TODAY IT WILL PUT ITS LORD & TAYLOR DIVISION UP FOR SALE AS IT FOCUSES ON ITS MACY'S AND BLOOMINGDALE'S BRANDS SEPARATELY. TONIGHT WE TAKE A CLOSER LOOK AT FEDERATED RIVAL NORDSTROM. IT'S ONE OF AMERICA'S OLDEST RETAILERS, AND IT HAS ONE OF THE BEST TRACK RECORDS IN THE INDUSTRY WHEN IT COMES TO DIVERSITY IN THE WORKPLACE. AS WE CONTINUE OUR SERIES "OPEN FOR BUSINESS," DIANE EASTABROOK TAKES US TO SEATTLE, NORDSTROM'S HOME BASE.
DIANE EASTABROOK, NIGHTLY BUSINESS REPORT CORRESPONDENT: NORDSTROM IS THE DEPARTMENT STORE CHAIN KNOWN FOR ITS ELEGANCE, ITS ATTENTIVE SERVICE...
MAKE UP ARTIST: SO WHAT I'M USING ON YOU IS THE LONG-WEAR GEL LINER.
DIANE EASTABROOK: AND ITS SHOES.
SHOE SALES PERSON: CAN I MEASURE BOTH FEET FOR YOU?
EASTABROOK: BUT THE SEATTLE- BASED RETAILER COULD BE KNOWN FOR SOMETHING ELSE AS WELL: ITS COMMITMENT TO DIVERSITY.
BLAKE NORDSTROM, PRESIDENT, NORDSTROM INC.: AS OUR COUNTRY EVOLVES IT'S A PRETTY DIVERSE COMMUNITY OUT THERE, AND SO IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE'RE REFLECTIVE OF THAT.
EASTABROOK: NORDSTROM LAUNCHED ITS DIVERSITY PROGRAM NEARLY 20 YEARS AGO WHEN IT BEGAN RAPIDLY EXPANDING OUTSIDE OF WASHINGTON TO 26 OTHER STATES. THE RETAILER ASSESSES EVERY NEW MARKET IT ENTERS AND THEN SETS HIRING BENCHMARKS THAT REFLECT REGIONAL DEMOGRAPHICS. TODAY 40% OF NORDSTROM'S 50,000 EMPLOYEES ARE MINORITIES. 30% OF ITS MANAGERS ARE WOMEN AND PEOPLE OF COLOR.
DELENA SUNDAY, EXECUTIVE, VICE PRESIDENT OF DIVERSITY AFFAIRS, NORDSTROM: WE'RE IN THE SERVICE INDUSTRY AND WE WANT TO SERVICE ANYBODY. WE WANT TO SERVICE EVERYONE, SO IN ORDER TO DO THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, SOMEONE FOR EVERYONE. SO WHEN OUR CUSTOMERS SHOP WITH US THEY NEED TO SEE PEOPLE WHO REFLECT THEMSELVES-- WHETHER THAT'S ETHNICITY, AGE, WHATEVER.
EASTABROOK: THE KINDS OF SHOPPERS NORDSTROM SEEKS TO ATTRACT ARE REFLECTED IN ITS CATALOGS. IT ALSO REACHES SHOPPERS THROUGH ADVERTISEMENTS IN MAGAZINES SUCH AS "LATINA," "BLACK ENTERPRISE," AND "ESSENCE." NORDSTROM ALSO USES ITS CLOUT AS A RETAILER TO BACK UP ITS COMMITMENT TO DIVERSITY. THE COMPANY DOES BUSINESS WITH NEARLY 6,000 MINORITY-OWNED SUPPLIERS AND VENDORS. CLOTHING FROM ASIAN DESIGNER MISOOK TO AFRICAN-AMERICAN DESIGNER TRACEY REESE TO HISPANIC JEWELRY DESIGNER LIZ PALACIOS APPEAR IN MANY NORDSTROM STORES. THE COMPANY THINKS IT HAS BENEFITED FROM THOSE RELATIONSHIPS AS MUCH AS ITS SUPPLIERS HAVE.
NORSDSTROM: WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO HAVE FRESH PRODUCT THAT MAYBE YOU CAN'T FIND SOMEPLACE ELSE, AND SO AS MERCHANTS WE'RE ALWAYS LOOKING FOR NEW THINGS.
EASTABROOK: BUT NORDSTROM'S COMMITMENT TO DIVERSITY OFTEN EXTENDS BEYOND WHAT CUSTOMERS SEE IN ITS MORE THAN 100 STORES. THE COMPANY OFTEN ACTS AS A MENTOR OF SORTS TO ITS MANY SUPPLIERS, HELPING THEM TO IMPROVE AND EXPAND THEIR BUSINESSES.
PHONE OPERATOR: GOOD MORNING, CHRIS. HOW ARE YOU?
EASTABROOK: ALLIANCE RELOCATION, A DIVISION OF THE AFFLUENCE GROUP, IS A PRIME EXAMPLE. BEFORE IT BEGAN DOING BUSINESS WITH NORDSTROM SEVEN YEARS AGO, ALLIANCE HELPED OTHER COMPANIES COORDINATE EMPLOYEE RELOCATIONS BY SIMPLY CONTRACTING WITH LOCAL MOVING COMPANIES. BUT NORDSTROM WANTED SOMETHING MORE. IT INSISTED ALLIANCE ALSO HELP RELOCATED EMPLOYEES SELL THEIR HOMES AND BUY NEW ONES. HERB STOKES, C.E.O. OF THE AFFLUENCE GROUP, SAYS NORDSTROM'S FAITH IN HIS COMPANY HELPED TO TRANSFORM IT.
HERB STOKES, C.E.O. OF THE AFFLUENCE GROUP: NOT MANY CORPORATIONS WOULD GIVE US AN OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE IN THAT REAL ESTATE COMPONENT, BECAUSE THERE IS A LOT OF EXPERTISE REQUIRED AND A LOT OF FINANCIAL INVESTMENT, AND WE COULDN'T DO THAT. NORDSTROM, HOWEVER, FELT THAT WE COULD IF GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY.
EASTABROOK: NORDSTROM'S COMMITMENT TO DIVERSITY SEEMS ALMOST IRONIC, CONSIDERING IT IS HEADQUARTERED IN A CITY WHOSE POPULATION IS MORE THAN 70% WHITE. STILL, THE COMPANY SAYS ITS COMMITMENT IS PART OF ITS HERITAGE. FOUNDER JOHN W. NORDSTROM WAS A POOR SWEDISH IMMIGRANT WHO ARRIVED IN THE U.S. IN 1887. HE OPENED HIS FIRST SHOE STORE IN SEATTLE IN 1901. BLAKE NORDSTROM SAYS IN A SENSE THE DIVERSITY PROGRAM CARRIES ON HIS GREAT GRANDFATHER'S BUSINESS PHILOSOPHY.
NORDSTROM: TAKING CARE OF EVERY SINGLE PERSON, GIVING THEM THE CARE AND RESPECT THEY DESERVE, THAT IS A KEY COMPONENT OF HOW THIS COMPANY WAS FOUNDED.
EASTABROOK: EXPERTS SAY WHILE DIVERSITY PROGRAMS ARE VERY COMMON IN RETAILING, NORDSTROM'S IS A CUT ABOVE THE REST.
MARY ANN ODEGAARD, MANAGEMENT PROFESSOR, UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON: THEY PRACTICE WHAT THEY SAY, WHICH I THINK DIFFERENTIATES THEM SOME FROM SOME OTHER COMPANIES THAT HAVE A POLICY, BUT IT ISN'T NECESSARILY EMBRACED BY EVERYBODY.
EASTABROOK: NORDSTROM SAYS IT IS ALWAYS LOOKING FOR WAYS TO IMPROVE ITS DIVERSITY PROGRAM, EITHER IN ITS STORES, OR IN ITS CATALOGS OR THROUGH ITS SUPPLIERS.
SUNDAY: IT'S NOT ANYTHING WHERE YOU EVER REACH THE FINISH LINE. YOU NEVER SAY, "OH, MY GOSH, NOW WE CAN TAKE A DEEP BREATH" BECAUSE OUR CUSTOMERS WILL CONTINUE TO CHANGE, THEIR NEEDS WILL CONTINUE TO CHANGE, AND WE HAVE TO EVOLVE WITH THAT, AND SO WE'LL JUST CONTINUE TO TRY TO GET BETTER.
EASTABROOK: AND THAT, SAYS NORDSTROM, HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE KEY TO ITS SUCCESS. DIANE EASTABROOK, "NIGHTLY BUSINESS REPORT," SEATTLE.
Nightly Business Report transcripts are available on-line post broadcast. The program is transcribed by eMediaMillWorks. Updates may be posted at a later date. The views of our guests and commentators are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Community Television Foundation of South Florida, Inc. Nightly Business Report, or WPBT. Information presented on Nightly Business Report is not and should not be considered as investment advice. Copyright (c) 2005 Community Television Foundation of South Florida, Inc. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Terms of use
Monday, January 16, 2006
Migrating to a world with no borders - James Button, The Age
http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/migrating-to-a-world-with-no-borders/2006/01/15/1137259941215.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap3
Migrating to a world with no borders
By James Button
January 16, 2006
AdvertisementAdvertisement
You see them on the London Tube, groups of tall, fair men dressed in overalls and speaking their mysterious language. They - and their women compatriots - work machines, cook pizza, clean the homes of the middle class and fill countless other largely thankless but vital jobs. They are part of Britain's huge influx of eastern Europeans, predominantly Poles.
When eight eastern European countries joined the European Union in May 2004, the 15 old member states could choose either to allow the new countries' workers to join their workforce or to delay their entry for up to seven years. France, afraid of an invasion of low-wage workers when unemployment is 10 per cent, chose delay. The feared arrival of the mythical "Polish plumber" was a big subject in French politics last year. In Britain, on the other hand, the Polish plumber has landed - along with more than 200,000 eastern Europeans in the past 20 months - and hardly anyone has noticed.
There you have two pictures of modern migration. One is Fortress Europe, where in some countries immigration has dwindled to a trickle. The other is Britain, which is experiencing a huge human turnover. In 2004 nearly 500,000 non-British migrants arrived and more than 200,000 Britons left: both figures were records.
It isn't that Britain is suddenly a migrants' paradise: many newcomers work long hours for lousy pay. Nor has hostility to immigration disappeared.
But its mix of new settlers and temporary workers - the hundreds of thousands of mainly young people who help make London so lively - suggests Britain may be on the way to creating a new kind of economy, based on the free movement not only of goods but of people.
It sounds unthinkable and it is certainly far off. But if a report published in Britain late last year is right, immigration to the West is on the brink of profound change, and it is not in the direction of putting up more walls.
The report - Migration: A Welcome Opportunity, written by a group of economists, business people and academics who make up the Migration Commission of the Royal Society of the Arts - makes an economic and intellectual case for liberalising migration.
It seeks to address a set of connected problems. One, the West needs labour but governments are timid about supporting immigration for fear of a voter backlash. Two, illegal immigration seems unstoppable: despite all sorts of well-publicised crackdowns. Three, illegal migrants often face severe exploitation.
The commission's answer, put simply, is to legalise it. Allow people to move freely for work within some limits - but also require them to go home. What's more, make migration a tool of global policy, "to restructure the world economy in favour of the world's poor".
In recent years, many Western countries, including Australia, have geared their migration programs to skilled workers. Unskilled workers need not apply, it would seem.
But the commission says that situation cannot last. In four sectors of the British economy - agriculture, construction, hospitality and health - it is already an "entirely utopian" hope that unskilled jobs could be filled without migrant workers.
That is because of an apparent paradox: high-skilled economies generate a lot of low-skilled work. Think of the hospital orderlies, hotel staff, waiters, labourers and cleaners needed to run the modern, service economy.
These jobs have two significant characteristics: unlike factory work, they cannot be exported to China. And in Britain and elsewhere, the increasingly well-educated local-born no longer want to do them.
As populations age, worker shortages will only increase - so much so, the report argues, that Britain will soon have to look further afield than eastern Europe.
For poor countries, that is good and bad news. On the one hand, migrants send huge amounts of money home. On official figures, remittances from migrants in wealthy countries are worth $US150 billion ($A198 billion) a year to poor countries.
Yet emigration also has a downside for poor countries. In Ghana, where one in 10 children die before the age of five, about 80 per cent of trained nurses work in Britain. Tiny Swaziland, where one in five people has AIDS, trained 200 nurses last year; 150 of them work in Britain.
So, emigration can help and can hurt poor countries. Can the contradiction be solved? The report argues that it can, through new forms of temporary migration.
Under one scenario, workers could enter a country for two years then have to return home - for a year, say - before being allowed to apply for another work visa.
That doesn't necessarily mean that settlement programs, which have worked so well for Australia, would be abolished, but they would be part of an expanded migration scheme. The goal would be to create a circular flow of people.
Is this realistic? Wouldn't temporary migrants all want to stay in their new countries? Not necessarily. The report says that around the world temporary migration is the norm: millions of Asian workers move for seasonal labour each year, for example.
The report even argues that tougher immigration policies can have the perverse effect of stopping migrants returning home, for fear that if they do they will never get back to the country they migrated to. In the 1980s illegal Mexican workers only stayed an average of three years in the US. In the late 1990s, after the border had been fortified and crossing became much harder, they stayed an average of nine years. Numbers are up, from 4 million to 11 million illegal immigrants to the US in the past 20 years. Now Congress is considering building a wall along the Mexican frontier. But business says it needs labour and President George Bush is pushing for a program of temporary migration.
To the Migration Commission these are signs of what is to come. Some of its members even say governments will find it impossible to manage these flows and will have to "introduce externally the same migratory system that prevails internally: unhampered movement".
The idea raises many questions. To some it will sound like a recipe for chaos. But in the long run it may be inevitable, at least when seen from London, where old ideas of national workforces, citizens and foreigners, who's in and who's out, are already beginning to dissolve.
James Button is Europe correspondent.
Migrating to a world with no borders
By James Button
January 16, 2006
AdvertisementAdvertisement
You see them on the London Tube, groups of tall, fair men dressed in overalls and speaking their mysterious language. They - and their women compatriots - work machines, cook pizza, clean the homes of the middle class and fill countless other largely thankless but vital jobs. They are part of Britain's huge influx of eastern Europeans, predominantly Poles.
When eight eastern European countries joined the European Union in May 2004, the 15 old member states could choose either to allow the new countries' workers to join their workforce or to delay their entry for up to seven years. France, afraid of an invasion of low-wage workers when unemployment is 10 per cent, chose delay. The feared arrival of the mythical "Polish plumber" was a big subject in French politics last year. In Britain, on the other hand, the Polish plumber has landed - along with more than 200,000 eastern Europeans in the past 20 months - and hardly anyone has noticed.
There you have two pictures of modern migration. One is Fortress Europe, where in some countries immigration has dwindled to a trickle. The other is Britain, which is experiencing a huge human turnover. In 2004 nearly 500,000 non-British migrants arrived and more than 200,000 Britons left: both figures were records.
It isn't that Britain is suddenly a migrants' paradise: many newcomers work long hours for lousy pay. Nor has hostility to immigration disappeared.
But its mix of new settlers and temporary workers - the hundreds of thousands of mainly young people who help make London so lively - suggests Britain may be on the way to creating a new kind of economy, based on the free movement not only of goods but of people.
It sounds unthinkable and it is certainly far off. But if a report published in Britain late last year is right, immigration to the West is on the brink of profound change, and it is not in the direction of putting up more walls.
The report - Migration: A Welcome Opportunity, written by a group of economists, business people and academics who make up the Migration Commission of the Royal Society of the Arts - makes an economic and intellectual case for liberalising migration.
It seeks to address a set of connected problems. One, the West needs labour but governments are timid about supporting immigration for fear of a voter backlash. Two, illegal immigration seems unstoppable: despite all sorts of well-publicised crackdowns. Three, illegal migrants often face severe exploitation.
The commission's answer, put simply, is to legalise it. Allow people to move freely for work within some limits - but also require them to go home. What's more, make migration a tool of global policy, "to restructure the world economy in favour of the world's poor".
In recent years, many Western countries, including Australia, have geared their migration programs to skilled workers. Unskilled workers need not apply, it would seem.
But the commission says that situation cannot last. In four sectors of the British economy - agriculture, construction, hospitality and health - it is already an "entirely utopian" hope that unskilled jobs could be filled without migrant workers.
That is because of an apparent paradox: high-skilled economies generate a lot of low-skilled work. Think of the hospital orderlies, hotel staff, waiters, labourers and cleaners needed to run the modern, service economy.
These jobs have two significant characteristics: unlike factory work, they cannot be exported to China. And in Britain and elsewhere, the increasingly well-educated local-born no longer want to do them.
As populations age, worker shortages will only increase - so much so, the report argues, that Britain will soon have to look further afield than eastern Europe.
For poor countries, that is good and bad news. On the one hand, migrants send huge amounts of money home. On official figures, remittances from migrants in wealthy countries are worth $US150 billion ($A198 billion) a year to poor countries.
Yet emigration also has a downside for poor countries. In Ghana, where one in 10 children die before the age of five, about 80 per cent of trained nurses work in Britain. Tiny Swaziland, where one in five people has AIDS, trained 200 nurses last year; 150 of them work in Britain.
So, emigration can help and can hurt poor countries. Can the contradiction be solved? The report argues that it can, through new forms of temporary migration.
Under one scenario, workers could enter a country for two years then have to return home - for a year, say - before being allowed to apply for another work visa.
That doesn't necessarily mean that settlement programs, which have worked so well for Australia, would be abolished, but they would be part of an expanded migration scheme. The goal would be to create a circular flow of people.
Is this realistic? Wouldn't temporary migrants all want to stay in their new countries? Not necessarily. The report says that around the world temporary migration is the norm: millions of Asian workers move for seasonal labour each year, for example.
The report even argues that tougher immigration policies can have the perverse effect of stopping migrants returning home, for fear that if they do they will never get back to the country they migrated to. In the 1980s illegal Mexican workers only stayed an average of three years in the US. In the late 1990s, after the border had been fortified and crossing became much harder, they stayed an average of nine years. Numbers are up, from 4 million to 11 million illegal immigrants to the US in the past 20 years. Now Congress is considering building a wall along the Mexican frontier. But business says it needs labour and President George Bush is pushing for a program of temporary migration.
To the Migration Commission these are signs of what is to come. Some of its members even say governments will find it impossible to manage these flows and will have to "introduce externally the same migratory system that prevails internally: unhampered movement".
The idea raises many questions. To some it will sound like a recipe for chaos. But in the long run it may be inevitable, at least when seen from London, where old ideas of national workforces, citizens and foreigners, who's in and who's out, are already beginning to dissolve.
James Button is Europe correspondent.
Sunday, January 15, 2006
AUSSIE ICONS: Are the symbols that make us feel `True Blue' changing? - Jim Kelly, The Sunday Times
Some interesting points on including Aboriginal Studies in school curriculums but no clear definition on what symbols we could use to help us define 'Australian' - will it be more about relationships than icons?...Sue Ellson
http://www.sundaytimes.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,7034,17825151%255E949,00.html
AUSSIE ICONS: Are the symbols that make us feel `True Blue' changing?
In the aftermath of Sydney's race riots, January 26, 2006 could be one of our most significant Australia Days. As we step into the 21st century, has our identity and what symbolises "being Aussie" changed that much? Jim Kelly analyses what it means to be Australian, and the icons that signify our patriotism
15jan06
AFTER a turbulent year for multiculturalism, many Australians are approaching our national day wondering what lies beyond beer and barbecues.
What defines being Australian is found in the icons that have become ingrained in our cultural identity. The Outback, slouch hats, beaches and surf lifesavers have all been adopted as symbols of who we are.
The sense of being Australian draws heavily from the land, but equally it can be found in attitudes and the belief in a fair go.
It's even found in a jar of Vegemite. What represents Australia is as varied as the people who call the country home.
But as more migrants come into the country, what it means to be Australian is changing – and as the Sydney race riots proved, some Aussies are feeling threatened.
The most recent head count, the 2001 census, showed we were increasingly becoming a multicultural mixing pot.
More than 30 per cent of our population was born overseas.
Curtin University head of cultural studies Jon Stratton said, like it or not, migration would change what it meant to be Australian.
"It is not about replacing cultural icons, it is about transforming them,` he said.
"The Aussie barbecue will never disappear, but maybe in future we might be having a kebab as well as sausages."
Prof Stratton compares Australia today with the US in the 1920s and '30s.
A huge influx of migrants to America caused what became known as "the salad-bowl effect", where people from differing backgrounds were tossed together to create a new blended culture.
He said the downside of multiculturalism in Australia was that it classified and often alienated minority ethnic groups.
The tensions that this creates were seen in Cronulla when a drunken mob turned on anyone of Middle- Eastern appearance in a backlash against the Lebanese community.
Most of those targeted by the youths, some carrying the national flag, were born in this country.
"Australia has an emphasis on Anglo-Celtic culture and tends to think of other cultures as add-ons," Prof Stratton said.
"We have to integrate and accept that the dominant Australian culture is going to be transformed.
"Some people are threatened by that, but we have reached a point in our migration history where we have children from all sorts of backgrounds who see themselves as unapologetically Australian.
Islamic Council of WA president Rahim Ghauri says his community is feeling the brunt of Australia's growing pains.
He said Muslims wanted to become part of the country's future, but felt they were not welcome.
"Some people equate all Muslims with terrorism," he said.
"But we want to get on with the work of building Australia, feel part of the community and celebrate Australia Day as Australians.
"We should be able to get together under the one flag and hold our heads high."
For the indigenous community, the challenge is to maintain a voice in an increasingly diverse society.
Aboriginal Legal Service chief executive Dennis Eggington said indigenous culture should be part of all Australians' national identity.
said the country should learn from the experience of Canada and New Zealand, where indigenous culture was part of everyday life.
Mr Eggington is a strong advocate of making Aboriginal language and cultural studies compulsory in schools.
"Aboriginal culture has been devalued for a long time," he said.
"It is going to be very difficult for some people, particularly older people, to be re-educated and realise that they are part of a rich indigenous culture.
"Aboriginal identity has to be an identity where Aboriginal culture has a significant point of expression.
"Our culture should be in your face."
Prof Stratton said the future of multiculturalism was already being seen in WA classrooms, where children from different backgrounds played together unaffected by their different backgrounds.
In an evolving society, they shared the same dream of being accepted as True Blue.
http://www.sundaytimes.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,7034,17825151%255E949,00.html
AUSSIE ICONS: Are the symbols that make us feel `True Blue' changing?
In the aftermath of Sydney's race riots, January 26, 2006 could be one of our most significant Australia Days. As we step into the 21st century, has our identity and what symbolises "being Aussie" changed that much? Jim Kelly analyses what it means to be Australian, and the icons that signify our patriotism
15jan06
AFTER a turbulent year for multiculturalism, many Australians are approaching our national day wondering what lies beyond beer and barbecues.
What defines being Australian is found in the icons that have become ingrained in our cultural identity. The Outback, slouch hats, beaches and surf lifesavers have all been adopted as symbols of who we are.
The sense of being Australian draws heavily from the land, but equally it can be found in attitudes and the belief in a fair go.
It's even found in a jar of Vegemite. What represents Australia is as varied as the people who call the country home.
But as more migrants come into the country, what it means to be Australian is changing – and as the Sydney race riots proved, some Aussies are feeling threatened.
The most recent head count, the 2001 census, showed we were increasingly becoming a multicultural mixing pot.
More than 30 per cent of our population was born overseas.
Curtin University head of cultural studies Jon Stratton said, like it or not, migration would change what it meant to be Australian.
"It is not about replacing cultural icons, it is about transforming them,` he said.
"The Aussie barbecue will never disappear, but maybe in future we might be having a kebab as well as sausages."
Prof Stratton compares Australia today with the US in the 1920s and '30s.
A huge influx of migrants to America caused what became known as "the salad-bowl effect", where people from differing backgrounds were tossed together to create a new blended culture.
He said the downside of multiculturalism in Australia was that it classified and often alienated minority ethnic groups.
The tensions that this creates were seen in Cronulla when a drunken mob turned on anyone of Middle- Eastern appearance in a backlash against the Lebanese community.
Most of those targeted by the youths, some carrying the national flag, were born in this country.
"Australia has an emphasis on Anglo-Celtic culture and tends to think of other cultures as add-ons," Prof Stratton said.
"We have to integrate and accept that the dominant Australian culture is going to be transformed.
"Some people are threatened by that, but we have reached a point in our migration history where we have children from all sorts of backgrounds who see themselves as unapologetically Australian.
Islamic Council of WA president Rahim Ghauri says his community is feeling the brunt of Australia's growing pains.
He said Muslims wanted to become part of the country's future, but felt they were not welcome.
"Some people equate all Muslims with terrorism," he said.
"But we want to get on with the work of building Australia, feel part of the community and celebrate Australia Day as Australians.
"We should be able to get together under the one flag and hold our heads high."
For the indigenous community, the challenge is to maintain a voice in an increasingly diverse society.
Aboriginal Legal Service chief executive Dennis Eggington said indigenous culture should be part of all Australians' national identity.
said the country should learn from the experience of Canada and New Zealand, where indigenous culture was part of everyday life.
Mr Eggington is a strong advocate of making Aboriginal language and cultural studies compulsory in schools.
"Aboriginal culture has been devalued for a long time," he said.
"It is going to be very difficult for some people, particularly older people, to be re-educated and realise that they are part of a rich indigenous culture.
"Aboriginal identity has to be an identity where Aboriginal culture has a significant point of expression.
"Our culture should be in your face."
Prof Stratton said the future of multiculturalism was already being seen in WA classrooms, where children from different backgrounds played together unaffected by their different backgrounds.
In an evolving society, they shared the same dream of being accepted as True Blue.
Naturalization - benefits and limitations - David Kessel, American Chronicle
It is sad to think that people who become citizens can be somehow less of a citizen of a country than someone who is born there - legally no...but in terms of the society they live in...Sue Ellson
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=4818
Naturalization - benefits and limitations
David Kessel
January 14, 2006
I think naturalization is a great thing. It is wonderful if you can go to another country, live there, learn the language and then apply for citizenship. It is refreshing to stand in front of a new flag and give an oath of allegiance. Feel something new, patriotic, and say “ Now I am ( put the new nationality here)".
However, while the official "paper" naturalization is rather simple, the social one is much harder if sometimes not downright near impossible. Take your new compatriots, the “native” people, with their natural human inquisitiveness. They will ask you the same question no matter where you go- the "Where are you from?" question. Unless you are some linguistic genius and have a good musical ear, you will have an accent. Or, if you are of a different ethnic group, you will look different from the majority of people. Your name may also stand out. So, people, I mean people everywhere, will ask you the same thing over and over again: “Where are you from?” Sure, now you can tell them about your new residence in the country, the new town where you live. They will then probably grimace un-satisfied-ly and ask you a more direct , more insightful question that you simply cannot avoid now- “Where are you from, originally?”. Now, this is a tough one. Unless you want to lie, you will have to tell them the truth. So, in social situations, you often, if not always, remain a foreigner. In spite of the oath you took.
The US- Mexican border people usually ask you "What is your citizenship" before admitting you to the US. However, once a border guard there asked me "Where were you born"? After I told him, a mini-interrogation ensued. My family and I had to pull over, pull out our US passports, he had to examine them, asking how my family and I had acquired US citizenship, how long we had been in the US, all sorts of things. I understand the security concern, but for some reason this "born" thing is somehow so important to Americans. There was once a celebration in the news of "American-born" athletes. There are a proud song- "Born in the USA", and "Hello, America, how are you, don't you know that I'm your native son?" . It all shows that the nativist sentiment is quite strong in the US. Then, they wonder why some immigrants are not as patriotic as they should be. How can you be a full patriot if you are not really and truly seen as a 100% citizen because of this "not born here" thing? Something you had no control over but which is somehow often held against you.
The drive for diversity and political correctness in the US sometimes does more harm than good as far as "becoming an American" is concerned . There was once a company in the US that had a very international staff from many different countries. The top manager was so proud of the diversity of the workplace that he had a map on the wall with pins stuck in it indicating where every employee was born. His intentions were good, but if you are a naturalized US citizen, wouldn't you rather just think of yourself as an American now and not have a pin stuck somewhere that ,even with the best of intentions, still says-" He is from another country"?
In France I have heard, the complaint of a lot of people is that even after you become a citizen, they still treat you as a non-citizen. So, I guess, in some places, one should not harbor too many illusions about now belonging there.
In the US it is illegal to ask about birth place on job applications, but in some other countries it is not. When applying for a job you end up putting it. What next? You may be rejected for that job because of that - local people come first. You are not from there, you know. Not originally. And often, people will not ask you "What is your citizenship?" except in passport offices of foreign embassies. They will simply ask you the same "dooming" questions: "Where are you from?" or "Where were you born?"
If people get angry at you for any reason, they may even tell you to “Go back to ( put the name of the country here)!”. Or, in hard economic times, they will tell you that they have to hire ( put the name of your new nationality here) and not "foreigners". If you protest and say " I am not a foreigner, I am a citizen", an answer may come your way- "I mean, a foreigner- not born here!" Such is sometimes the reality of being a naturalized citizen. You may feel like a stepson, not a real native son. Especially if you deal with uneducated "native" people.
Now, it is nice to get a new passport and proclaim with pride: “I am a citizen of ( put the country here)”. However, somehow, not even one country in the world issues a passport that does not have your birthplace written in it. So, if you travel, people that check your passport may start asking you questions, sometimes innocent, but, sometimes, suspicious ones and treat you as a person of that old country, not the new one you are a citizen of. And God forbid if that country has a bad reputation in the one you are visiting. You can be called all sorts of names. Or even refused entry.
In newspapers also, or in any media, in articles about you, they will call you a “( put the name of a country + “ese” or “ian” here) immigrant”. They will call you like that before the naturalization, and after the naturalization. Ten, twenty, thirty years from now, you will remain an "immigrant". The US TV newscasters are very fond of that, for one.
I think this is a new item in the area of political correctness that liberals should work on eliminating. In the US, for one, there has once been a positive term " New American" in the press. It should gain more popularity as I have not been hearing it too often lately. The term "first generation American" too, often means "first generation 'born' in the US". This should also change. It should include first generation naturalized citizens, as well.
In the English-language press anywhere they love using the name of the country and the word “born” after it, i.e. Polish-born, German-born., etc. Regardless of your new US-, Canadian or whatever other citizenship. Why do they do that? Is it really that important? Why can't the say a "Canadian national", for one, and a "US national"? Why is this birth thing ( a result of the parents' feelings for one another on the territory of a country that you now owe no allegiance to) so crucial that it needs to be rubbed in all the time- for decades?
Sometimes, they will use something like “Australian-turned-American“, etc. They will also talk about your “homeland” -meaning your old country, not the new one, even though you have taken an oath to reject your old country thoroughly and completely.
Then, also, you hear things like “He is a second generation Iranian”. Meaning: "he is a child of Iranians who immigrated to country X". Let's say your parents are Iranians and you were born in the US. Your parents also became US citizens. Aren't you now a second-generation 'American'? Shouldn’t a “second generation Iranian” be a child of people who became naturalized 'Iranian' citizens in Iran? Another area that the PC people haven’t gotten to yet.
Lots of countries are like that in the way they talk about naturalized citizens. To one degree or another. And few if any of such citizens became presidents or prime ministers of their new country. That is another thing that needs to be changed. Particularly in the US, there is a law that prohibits foreign-born people from becoming President. Say, if someone came from Canada at age 1 and does not know any other country except the US, he cannot become President. However, if someone was born in the US, but left at age 1, and knows very little about it( such as a son of some tourists) he is eligible to become one. I think it is unfair. You have not done anything bad but it is as if people do not fully trust you. Can you ever become a full patriot? I do not think so.
What if there is a Civics class and children are asked what they would do if they were President or Prime-minister? Some kids will feel like they are second-class. Not completely second class, but slightly below the "true citizen", the "born-and-raised-here" one. This must change one day.
Then, there is another thing. In some countries they have censuses that talk about “foreign-born population”, meaning “immigrants“. So, they will dump illegal ones, legal non-citizens, and naturalized citizens into the same category. Makes you feel like you do not fully belong. Whenever a naturalized citizen reads publications that mentions such statistics, his feeling of patriotism for his country often suffers a bit of a setback. How come one is put into the same class with people who are not citizens yet? Didn’t one go through all the requirements for the citizenship tests and all? Didn’t one swear on the Bible his new allegiance rejecting every other country? Don't they trust me?
And did you ever wonder why it is that they call it "citi-zenship"? It is another misnomer, in my view. Shouldn't it be called "countryzenship", or just "nationality"? After all, we do not became members of a "city", but a nation. "Citizenship" is just anouther carry-over from the time of city-states, a very distant period in world history. We have nation-states now.
And is "naturalization" a good term? Like you were "unnatural" before and then became "natural"? Like you were a robot before and now you are a human being? One thing I like about Argentina and Uruguay is that they do not have the term "naturalization"- they call it "nacionalizacion". Immigrants are "nationalized", not "naturalized". Maybe, that is the word that should be used in all the other countries who are generous enough to admit new people as members of their society.
However, one should not discount the positive things of naturalization. In many countries non-citizens cannot own property. This is the reason many people become citizens to begin with. If you want to own land there, become one.
Also, you are legally what your new passport says no matter what people may say. You can vote and qualify for many government jobs; you can now travel abroad on the new passport and take employment in countries whose employers prefer citizens of your new country. So, benefits abound. It is important to concentrate on those, and try and minimize the lingering “Where are you from?" reality.
Lastly, naturalized citizens in the US and everywhere else should unite and work on changing societal attitudes towards them. Black people in America rallied hard to change all sorts of nasty words applied to them to a much more pleasant “African- American”. Maybe naturalized citizens should organize and do the same? But while things have not changed, one should really try and equip oneself with skills and money to counteract the possible discrimination against one. One will need to work harder, study harder. Try and drop that accent. That's just the way it is. Some things take a long time to change.
Above all, naturalization should be seen as a practical tool, not something that can fulfill your romantic aspirations.
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=4818
Naturalization - benefits and limitations
David Kessel
January 14, 2006
I think naturalization is a great thing. It is wonderful if you can go to another country, live there, learn the language and then apply for citizenship. It is refreshing to stand in front of a new flag and give an oath of allegiance. Feel something new, patriotic, and say “ Now I am ( put the new nationality here)".
However, while the official "paper" naturalization is rather simple, the social one is much harder if sometimes not downright near impossible. Take your new compatriots, the “native” people, with their natural human inquisitiveness. They will ask you the same question no matter where you go- the "Where are you from?" question. Unless you are some linguistic genius and have a good musical ear, you will have an accent. Or, if you are of a different ethnic group, you will look different from the majority of people. Your name may also stand out. So, people, I mean people everywhere, will ask you the same thing over and over again: “Where are you from?” Sure, now you can tell them about your new residence in the country, the new town where you live. They will then probably grimace un-satisfied-ly and ask you a more direct , more insightful question that you simply cannot avoid now- “Where are you from, originally?”. Now, this is a tough one. Unless you want to lie, you will have to tell them the truth. So, in social situations, you often, if not always, remain a foreigner. In spite of the oath you took.
The US- Mexican border people usually ask you "What is your citizenship" before admitting you to the US. However, once a border guard there asked me "Where were you born"? After I told him, a mini-interrogation ensued. My family and I had to pull over, pull out our US passports, he had to examine them, asking how my family and I had acquired US citizenship, how long we had been in the US, all sorts of things. I understand the security concern, but for some reason this "born" thing is somehow so important to Americans. There was once a celebration in the news of "American-born" athletes. There are a proud song- "Born in the USA", and "Hello, America, how are you, don't you know that I'm your native son?" . It all shows that the nativist sentiment is quite strong in the US. Then, they wonder why some immigrants are not as patriotic as they should be. How can you be a full patriot if you are not really and truly seen as a 100% citizen because of this "not born here" thing? Something you had no control over but which is somehow often held against you.
The drive for diversity and political correctness in the US sometimes does more harm than good as far as "becoming an American" is concerned . There was once a company in the US that had a very international staff from many different countries. The top manager was so proud of the diversity of the workplace that he had a map on the wall with pins stuck in it indicating where every employee was born. His intentions were good, but if you are a naturalized US citizen, wouldn't you rather just think of yourself as an American now and not have a pin stuck somewhere that ,even with the best of intentions, still says-" He is from another country"?
In France I have heard, the complaint of a lot of people is that even after you become a citizen, they still treat you as a non-citizen. So, I guess, in some places, one should not harbor too many illusions about now belonging there.
In the US it is illegal to ask about birth place on job applications, but in some other countries it is not. When applying for a job you end up putting it. What next? You may be rejected for that job because of that - local people come first. You are not from there, you know. Not originally. And often, people will not ask you "What is your citizenship?" except in passport offices of foreign embassies. They will simply ask you the same "dooming" questions: "Where are you from?" or "Where were you born?"
If people get angry at you for any reason, they may even tell you to “Go back to ( put the name of the country here)!”. Or, in hard economic times, they will tell you that they have to hire ( put the name of your new nationality here) and not "foreigners". If you protest and say " I am not a foreigner, I am a citizen", an answer may come your way- "I mean, a foreigner- not born here!" Such is sometimes the reality of being a naturalized citizen. You may feel like a stepson, not a real native son. Especially if you deal with uneducated "native" people.
Now, it is nice to get a new passport and proclaim with pride: “I am a citizen of ( put the country here)”. However, somehow, not even one country in the world issues a passport that does not have your birthplace written in it. So, if you travel, people that check your passport may start asking you questions, sometimes innocent, but, sometimes, suspicious ones and treat you as a person of that old country, not the new one you are a citizen of. And God forbid if that country has a bad reputation in the one you are visiting. You can be called all sorts of names. Or even refused entry.
In newspapers also, or in any media, in articles about you, they will call you a “( put the name of a country + “ese” or “ian” here) immigrant”. They will call you like that before the naturalization, and after the naturalization. Ten, twenty, thirty years from now, you will remain an "immigrant". The US TV newscasters are very fond of that, for one.
I think this is a new item in the area of political correctness that liberals should work on eliminating. In the US, for one, there has once been a positive term " New American" in the press. It should gain more popularity as I have not been hearing it too often lately. The term "first generation American" too, often means "first generation 'born' in the US". This should also change. It should include first generation naturalized citizens, as well.
In the English-language press anywhere they love using the name of the country and the word “born” after it, i.e. Polish-born, German-born., etc. Regardless of your new US-, Canadian or whatever other citizenship. Why do they do that? Is it really that important? Why can't the say a "Canadian national", for one, and a "US national"? Why is this birth thing ( a result of the parents' feelings for one another on the territory of a country that you now owe no allegiance to) so crucial that it needs to be rubbed in all the time- for decades?
Sometimes, they will use something like “Australian-turned-American“, etc. They will also talk about your “homeland” -meaning your old country, not the new one, even though you have taken an oath to reject your old country thoroughly and completely.
Then, also, you hear things like “He is a second generation Iranian”. Meaning: "he is a child of Iranians who immigrated to country X". Let's say your parents are Iranians and you were born in the US. Your parents also became US citizens. Aren't you now a second-generation 'American'? Shouldn’t a “second generation Iranian” be a child of people who became naturalized 'Iranian' citizens in Iran? Another area that the PC people haven’t gotten to yet.
Lots of countries are like that in the way they talk about naturalized citizens. To one degree or another. And few if any of such citizens became presidents or prime ministers of their new country. That is another thing that needs to be changed. Particularly in the US, there is a law that prohibits foreign-born people from becoming President. Say, if someone came from Canada at age 1 and does not know any other country except the US, he cannot become President. However, if someone was born in the US, but left at age 1, and knows very little about it( such as a son of some tourists) he is eligible to become one. I think it is unfair. You have not done anything bad but it is as if people do not fully trust you. Can you ever become a full patriot? I do not think so.
What if there is a Civics class and children are asked what they would do if they were President or Prime-minister? Some kids will feel like they are second-class. Not completely second class, but slightly below the "true citizen", the "born-and-raised-here" one. This must change one day.
Then, there is another thing. In some countries they have censuses that talk about “foreign-born population”, meaning “immigrants“. So, they will dump illegal ones, legal non-citizens, and naturalized citizens into the same category. Makes you feel like you do not fully belong. Whenever a naturalized citizen reads publications that mentions such statistics, his feeling of patriotism for his country often suffers a bit of a setback. How come one is put into the same class with people who are not citizens yet? Didn’t one go through all the requirements for the citizenship tests and all? Didn’t one swear on the Bible his new allegiance rejecting every other country? Don't they trust me?
And did you ever wonder why it is that they call it "citi-zenship"? It is another misnomer, in my view. Shouldn't it be called "countryzenship", or just "nationality"? After all, we do not became members of a "city", but a nation. "Citizenship" is just anouther carry-over from the time of city-states, a very distant period in world history. We have nation-states now.
And is "naturalization" a good term? Like you were "unnatural" before and then became "natural"? Like you were a robot before and now you are a human being? One thing I like about Argentina and Uruguay is that they do not have the term "naturalization"- they call it "nacionalizacion". Immigrants are "nationalized", not "naturalized". Maybe, that is the word that should be used in all the other countries who are generous enough to admit new people as members of their society.
However, one should not discount the positive things of naturalization. In many countries non-citizens cannot own property. This is the reason many people become citizens to begin with. If you want to own land there, become one.
Also, you are legally what your new passport says no matter what people may say. You can vote and qualify for many government jobs; you can now travel abroad on the new passport and take employment in countries whose employers prefer citizens of your new country. So, benefits abound. It is important to concentrate on those, and try and minimize the lingering “Where are you from?" reality.
Lastly, naturalized citizens in the US and everywhere else should unite and work on changing societal attitudes towards them. Black people in America rallied hard to change all sorts of nasty words applied to them to a much more pleasant “African- American”. Maybe naturalized citizens should organize and do the same? But while things have not changed, one should really try and equip oneself with skills and money to counteract the possible discrimination against one. One will need to work harder, study harder. Try and drop that accent. That's just the way it is. Some things take a long time to change.
Above all, naturalization should be seen as a practical tool, not something that can fulfill your romantic aspirations.
Saturday, January 14, 2006
The neo-liberal hijack - Allan Patience, The Age
I felt that this article made some interesting observations about what may be perceived as the 'old Australian' way of life. I also feel that there is more of an individualistic nature creeping into Australian society...Sue Ellson
http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/the-neoliberal-hijack/2006/01/13/1137118964513.html
The neo-liberal hijack
By Allan Patience
January 14, 2006
Page 1 of 2
Right-Wing forays into the intellectual arena of Australian politics are becoming particularly strident and nasty these days. There is little joy or generosity in the triumphalism that increasingly marks the approach of the radical right in the infamous culture wars. Their style is censorious, vindictive, and sour. They take no prisoners.
It seems that all critics of the Government, whatever their stripe, are now branded "Howard-haters" despite legitimate concerns about Government policies on Iraq, the US alliance, Asia, asylum seekers, Aborigines, industrial relations, voluntary student unionism, welfare, education, infrastructure decay and taxation. Meanwhile, the policy analyses from the pens of some senior commentators remain transfixed by a strangely stagnant realism and old-fashioned positivism. They are often intellectually out of date.
Is this because the media protagonists on the right are realising that the only roles they will ever be allowed to play will be as handmaidens to a power elite that is contemptuous of all men and women of ideas, no matter where they sit on the political spectrum? Can they ever be really satisfied to play the role of intellectual eunuchs in the neo-liberal harem that now runs the Liberal Party? They don't have much choice because the party long ago abandoned any pretence at real conservatism.
Indeed, one of the most egregious and frequent errors that the radical right now makes is to bestow the title of conservative on John Howard, on his Government, and upon themselves. Columnist after columnist of late has been crowing about the "conservative" successes of the Howard decade. Yet few of the alleged achievements, and even fewer of the columnists, appear to be in the slightest bit conservative. Overwhelmingly, they are neo-liberal.
Within English political history, conservatism is a philosophical tradition stretching back at least to 18th-century Irish Catholic philosopher and MP Edmund Burke. Other savants in this honourable line include poet Samuel Taylor Coleridge and, more recently, late political theorist Michael Oakeshott. Malcolm Fraser is an Australian heir to this British tradition.
Real conservatives know where they come from. They are deeply respectful of history. They admire the authenticity of different cultures. They are unruffled by human differences and eccentricities. They know the intrinsic value of learning and scholarship.
They may be affluent but they don't flaunt their affluence to the world. They much prefer restraint to extravagance, tolerance to bigotry, dignified subtlety to showing off. They know that affluence brings obligations, to others and to the community. Some of the greatest philanthropists are (or were) genuine conservatives.
The neo-liberal hijack
*
* Email
* Print
* Normal font
* Large font
AdvertisementAdvertisement
By Allan Patience
January 14, 2006
Page 2 of 2
Right-Wing forays into the intellectual arena of Australian politics are becoming particularly strident and nasty these days. There is little joy or generosity in the triumphalism that increasingly marks the approach of the radical right in the infamous culture wars. Their style is censorious, vindictive, and sour. They take no prisoners.
It seems that all critics of the Government, whatever their stripe, are now branded "Howard-haters" despite legitimate concerns about Government policies on Iraq, the US alliance, Asia, asylum seekers, Aborigines, industrial relations, voluntary student unionism, welfare, education, infrastructure decay and taxation. Meanwhile, the policy analyses from the pens of some senior commentators remain transfixed by a strangely stagnant realism and old-fashioned positivism. They are often intellectually out of date.
Is this because the media protagonists on the right are realising that the only roles they will ever be allowed to play will be as handmaidens to a power elite that is contemptuous of all men and women of ideas, no matter where they sit on the political spectrum? Can they ever be really satisfied to play the role of intellectual eunuchs in the neo-liberal harem that now runs the Liberal Party? They don't have much choice because the party long ago abandoned any pretence at real conservatism.
Indeed, one of the most egregious and frequent errors that the radical right now makes is to bestow the title of conservative on John Howard, on his Government, and upon themselves. Columnist after columnist of late has been crowing about the "conservative" successes of the Howard decade. Yet few of the alleged achievements, and even fewer of the columnists, appear to be in the slightest bit conservative. Overwhelmingly, they are neo-liberal.
Within English political history, conservatism is a philosophical tradition stretching back at least to 18th-century Irish Catholic philosopher and MP Edmund Burke. Other savants in this honourable line include poet Samuel Taylor Coleridge and, more recently, late political theorist Michael Oakeshott. Malcolm Fraser is an Australian heir to this British tradition.
Real conservatives know where they come from. They are deeply respectful of history. They admire the authenticity of different cultures. They are unruffled by human differences and eccentricities. They know the intrinsic value of learning and scholarship.
They may be affluent but they don't flaunt their affluence to the world. They much prefer restraint to extravagance, tolerance to bigotry, dignified subtlety to showing off. They know that affluence brings obligations, to others and to the community. Some of the greatest philanthropists are (or were) genuine conservatives.
They are aware that society is a fragile organism that needs to be treated with great care, to ensure its equilibrium and sustainability. They look for enduring friendships based on the richness of people's uncalculating or selfless love for each other, rather than on what use they may be for whatever instrumental ends are in vogue.
Conservatives are alert to the dangers of populism and mob politics. They know that progress has rarely been achieved by resentful ideologues. They favour compromise over confrontation, patient conversation over raucous sloganeering, poetry over propaganda. They are as bemused by glib secularism as they are by religious and political fundamentalism.
This is not to say that conservatives are perfect. In the past they have been guilty of complacency and lack of originality. Sometimes they are too hesitant when decisiveness is needed. On occasion they have failed to see that their adoration of what exists flies in the face of gross injustices crying out for reform. But conservatism has a finer public policy record than neo-liberalism will ever have. That may be why neo-liberals are anxious to grasp the conservative mantle for themselves.
Yet neo-liberals are deeply at odds with most mainstream conservative ideas. Their obsession with egoism and selfishness - which they mistake for individualism - is a clear sign that they belong to completely different value systems. Conservatives know that society has to be articulated in far more complicated ways than the simple-minded economism proposed by neo-liberal market fundamentalism.
Above all else, neo-liberals and conservatives are at odds over what constitutes society. For neo-liberals, society doesn't exist. They believe in the malevolent fiction of competitive individuals who co-operate reluctantly in order to achieve larger, ego-driven goals. For neo-liberals, life is all about possessive individualism. It has little to do with social harmony or social connectedness. In this "solitary, nasty and brutish" world, only the strongest (i.e. richest) can survive. Everyone else is inconsequential.
For conservatives, the individual is inconceivable outside the rich interplay of social networks that include families, friends, colleagues, associates, officials, churches, voluntary service organisations, neighbourhoods, trade unions, and all the other manifestations of society ("civil society") in all its complexity. Society might not make the individuals, but it does have a major formative role to play in this sacred task.
Conservatives are wedded to a sociality that leads them often to side with socialists in public policy debates about issues such as welfare, industrial relations, education, health and taxation. Genuine conservatives have nothing in common with the primitive selfishness and crude economism driving the radical right in Australia today. It's time for true conservatives to speak out against the prevailing narcissism and negativism, particularly among those in the media who are poisoning a once-decent society.
Professor Allan Patience is a visiting fellow in the Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, Australian National University, Canberra.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/the-neoliberal-hijack/2006/01/13/1137118964513.html
The neo-liberal hijack
By Allan Patience
January 14, 2006
Page 1 of 2
Right-Wing forays into the intellectual arena of Australian politics are becoming particularly strident and nasty these days. There is little joy or generosity in the triumphalism that increasingly marks the approach of the radical right in the infamous culture wars. Their style is censorious, vindictive, and sour. They take no prisoners.
It seems that all critics of the Government, whatever their stripe, are now branded "Howard-haters" despite legitimate concerns about Government policies on Iraq, the US alliance, Asia, asylum seekers, Aborigines, industrial relations, voluntary student unionism, welfare, education, infrastructure decay and taxation. Meanwhile, the policy analyses from the pens of some senior commentators remain transfixed by a strangely stagnant realism and old-fashioned positivism. They are often intellectually out of date.
Is this because the media protagonists on the right are realising that the only roles they will ever be allowed to play will be as handmaidens to a power elite that is contemptuous of all men and women of ideas, no matter where they sit on the political spectrum? Can they ever be really satisfied to play the role of intellectual eunuchs in the neo-liberal harem that now runs the Liberal Party? They don't have much choice because the party long ago abandoned any pretence at real conservatism.
Indeed, one of the most egregious and frequent errors that the radical right now makes is to bestow the title of conservative on John Howard, on his Government, and upon themselves. Columnist after columnist of late has been crowing about the "conservative" successes of the Howard decade. Yet few of the alleged achievements, and even fewer of the columnists, appear to be in the slightest bit conservative. Overwhelmingly, they are neo-liberal.
Within English political history, conservatism is a philosophical tradition stretching back at least to 18th-century Irish Catholic philosopher and MP Edmund Burke. Other savants in this honourable line include poet Samuel Taylor Coleridge and, more recently, late political theorist Michael Oakeshott. Malcolm Fraser is an Australian heir to this British tradition.
Real conservatives know where they come from. They are deeply respectful of history. They admire the authenticity of different cultures. They are unruffled by human differences and eccentricities. They know the intrinsic value of learning and scholarship.
They may be affluent but they don't flaunt their affluence to the world. They much prefer restraint to extravagance, tolerance to bigotry, dignified subtlety to showing off. They know that affluence brings obligations, to others and to the community. Some of the greatest philanthropists are (or were) genuine conservatives.
The neo-liberal hijack
*
* Normal font
* Large font
AdvertisementAdvertisement
By Allan Patience
January 14, 2006
Page 2 of 2
Right-Wing forays into the intellectual arena of Australian politics are becoming particularly strident and nasty these days. There is little joy or generosity in the triumphalism that increasingly marks the approach of the radical right in the infamous culture wars. Their style is censorious, vindictive, and sour. They take no prisoners.
It seems that all critics of the Government, whatever their stripe, are now branded "Howard-haters" despite legitimate concerns about Government policies on Iraq, the US alliance, Asia, asylum seekers, Aborigines, industrial relations, voluntary student unionism, welfare, education, infrastructure decay and taxation. Meanwhile, the policy analyses from the pens of some senior commentators remain transfixed by a strangely stagnant realism and old-fashioned positivism. They are often intellectually out of date.
Is this because the media protagonists on the right are realising that the only roles they will ever be allowed to play will be as handmaidens to a power elite that is contemptuous of all men and women of ideas, no matter where they sit on the political spectrum? Can they ever be really satisfied to play the role of intellectual eunuchs in the neo-liberal harem that now runs the Liberal Party? They don't have much choice because the party long ago abandoned any pretence at real conservatism.
Indeed, one of the most egregious and frequent errors that the radical right now makes is to bestow the title of conservative on John Howard, on his Government, and upon themselves. Columnist after columnist of late has been crowing about the "conservative" successes of the Howard decade. Yet few of the alleged achievements, and even fewer of the columnists, appear to be in the slightest bit conservative. Overwhelmingly, they are neo-liberal.
Within English political history, conservatism is a philosophical tradition stretching back at least to 18th-century Irish Catholic philosopher and MP Edmund Burke. Other savants in this honourable line include poet Samuel Taylor Coleridge and, more recently, late political theorist Michael Oakeshott. Malcolm Fraser is an Australian heir to this British tradition.
Real conservatives know where they come from. They are deeply respectful of history. They admire the authenticity of different cultures. They are unruffled by human differences and eccentricities. They know the intrinsic value of learning and scholarship.
They may be affluent but they don't flaunt their affluence to the world. They much prefer restraint to extravagance, tolerance to bigotry, dignified subtlety to showing off. They know that affluence brings obligations, to others and to the community. Some of the greatest philanthropists are (or were) genuine conservatives.
They are aware that society is a fragile organism that needs to be treated with great care, to ensure its equilibrium and sustainability. They look for enduring friendships based on the richness of people's uncalculating or selfless love for each other, rather than on what use they may be for whatever instrumental ends are in vogue.
Conservatives are alert to the dangers of populism and mob politics. They know that progress has rarely been achieved by resentful ideologues. They favour compromise over confrontation, patient conversation over raucous sloganeering, poetry over propaganda. They are as bemused by glib secularism as they are by religious and political fundamentalism.
This is not to say that conservatives are perfect. In the past they have been guilty of complacency and lack of originality. Sometimes they are too hesitant when decisiveness is needed. On occasion they have failed to see that their adoration of what exists flies in the face of gross injustices crying out for reform. But conservatism has a finer public policy record than neo-liberalism will ever have. That may be why neo-liberals are anxious to grasp the conservative mantle for themselves.
Yet neo-liberals are deeply at odds with most mainstream conservative ideas. Their obsession with egoism and selfishness - which they mistake for individualism - is a clear sign that they belong to completely different value systems. Conservatives know that society has to be articulated in far more complicated ways than the simple-minded economism proposed by neo-liberal market fundamentalism.
Above all else, neo-liberals and conservatives are at odds over what constitutes society. For neo-liberals, society doesn't exist. They believe in the malevolent fiction of competitive individuals who co-operate reluctantly in order to achieve larger, ego-driven goals. For neo-liberals, life is all about possessive individualism. It has little to do with social harmony or social connectedness. In this "solitary, nasty and brutish" world, only the strongest (i.e. richest) can survive. Everyone else is inconsequential.
For conservatives, the individual is inconceivable outside the rich interplay of social networks that include families, friends, colleagues, associates, officials, churches, voluntary service organisations, neighbourhoods, trade unions, and all the other manifestations of society ("civil society") in all its complexity. Society might not make the individuals, but it does have a major formative role to play in this sacred task.
Conservatives are wedded to a sociality that leads them often to side with socialists in public policy debates about issues such as welfare, industrial relations, education, health and taxation. Genuine conservatives have nothing in common with the primitive selfishness and crude economism driving the radical right in Australia today. It's time for true conservatives to speak out against the prevailing narcissism and negativism, particularly among those in the media who are poisoning a once-decent society.
Professor Allan Patience is a visiting fellow in the Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, Australian National University, Canberra.
Aborigines can beat the statistics - George Megalogenis, The Weekend Australian
This article highlights some interesting statistics and draws some interesting conclusions. I found it thought provoking....Sue Ellson
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,17812998%255E28737,00.html
Aborigines can beat the statistics
George Megalogenis
January 14, 2006
LET'S play a little race game with numbers. Should the Minister for Indigenous Affairs shut down those settlements in which there are more residents on welfare than working in regular jobs?
Here's a clue. Barely 30 towns and suburbs of various ethnic hues out of a national list of more than 1300 postcodes match this profile.
If the answer is yes, pull the plug on all of them, then try explaining to the folk of Coolangatta why their slice of the Queensland coastline south of Brisbane is, "unviable", to borrow minister Amanda Vanstone's description of remote indigenous communities.
Coolangatta has 1653 workers and 1654 beneficiaries, comprising 977 on the dole or disability support and another 677 on the age pension. That's a ratio of the idle to the active of 100.1 per cent. Australia-wide, the average figure is 42.4 per cent. Inner Sydney has it down to just 5.9 per cent.
When you have finished telling Coolangatta where to go, drive a few hours north of Brisbane, to former One Nation territory at Hervey Bay. Here, the dependency ratio is 105.9 per cent, which is a fraction higher than Cape York Peninsula, where indigenous leader Noel Pearson wants to jolt his people off the welfare drip.
Imagine how Pauline Hanson would have responded to social engineering on this scale. Actually, she has told us already, in her maiden speech to parliament 10 years ago. "I am fed up with being told, 'This is our land.' Well, where the hell do I go? I was born here and so were my parents and children."
Obviously, Vanstone didn't have Coolangatta or Hervey Bay in mind last month when she questioned the viability of Aboriginal communities that are too small to be called towns.
"There are around 1000 communities with less than 100 people, and of those, more than 80 per cent have less than 50 people," she said in a speech titled Beyond Conspicuous Consumption. "Despite the higher rate of population growth of Aboriginal people, it is unlikely that many of these homelands will grow to become viable towns." She wondered whether governments should "explicitly draw a line on the level of service that can be provided to homeland settlements".
It was a sensible matter to raise. But her next line jarred a little. "Listening to indigenous Australians does not mean blindly accepting, for example, that services like education, health and housing can be delivered at equal levels and equally well in townships and the homelands for the same people. We have to be realistic and we have to be honest."
Imagine a government minister saying the same thing about National Party senator Barnaby Joyce's constituents in the Queensland bush during last year's negotiations on the Telstra privatisation.
"Listening to Queenslanders does not mean blindly accepting, for example, that telephone services can be delivered at equal levels and equally well ..." Doesn't seem right, does it?
Now let's tackle another data set, this one dealing with the number of immigrants in jail. By way of background, 1.66 in every 1000 Australian-born adults were prisoners in 2004, a small rise on the 1.59 recorded in 2001. What do you think happened to the Lebanese-born in that period? Their incarceration rate rose from 1.88 to 2.25 in every 1000.
Are you hissing yet? Before you do, bear in mind that there are five immigrant groups well above them on the ladder: Tongans (5.32), Romanians (4.67), Samoans (4.45), Vietnamese (3.96) and Laotians (3.28).
All of which proves precisely nothing. The lock-up rate for indigenous Australians was 15.6 per 1000 adults in 2005, according to more recent figures. "Indigenous persons [are] 12 times more likely than non-indigenous persons to be in prison," the Australian Bureau of Statistics said last month.
One of the many mind-numbing contradictions in the race debate is that elements of the media and academe are hoping to prove that Lebanese-Australians are somehow different from all other immigrant groups, as if this somehow justifies their stint at the wog whipping post. The problem is the statistics can tell any story you wish, if you close one eye hard enough, which is why the argument is so easily polarised.
Lebanese-Australians have higher levels of youth unemployment than the mainstream, and some experts have been zeroing in on this detail to explain last month's mob violence on Sydney's beaches. But Vietnamese-Australians also have higher youth unemployment rates than the norm. It was the same for the Greek and Italian-Australians before them.
The Australian-born children of non-English-speaking immigrants generally fall into two camps: over-achiever or misfit. They have a higher rate of participation at university than the Australian average. Yet those who don't make it to tertiary education are less likely to walk into a low-skilled job than an Australian under-achiever of the same age whose family are not recent immigrants.
The explanation for this U-shaped distribution is not hard to work out. Just pretend you are one of the bulk of employers. Without a trace of prejudice in your blood, if you are running a McDonald's franchise, which high-school drop-out would you be inclined to hire to flip burgers and pour cappuccinos: a blue-eyed Australian or a swarthy Lebanese? What if there were two jobs to fill, and the third applicant was an Aborigine?
Which brings us back to Vanstone. The problem she touches on has no obvious solution. She stopped short of saying "bring them to the big smoke", even though that was the implication of ending the "cultural museums" where they presently dwell.
A good life does not await all indigenous Australians who move to towns or cities. Those already there are, on average, well behind the white folk and the immigrants on the key measures of education, income and life expectancy. If you doubt this, look again at the imprisonment rates.
It's not the Lebanese-Australians who are alien to us. We happen to be treating them no differently from previous new arrivals. The only people who are marginalised at every level of society are those who were here all along. No other group is told, however obliquely by government, where and how they should live.
The paradox is that indigenous Australians may need to think more like wogs if they are to break the cycle. Immigration involves two tangible jumps in living standards. To the new arrival, Australia is better than the place they left behind. But it is the children of the immigrants who reshape Australia in their own image, because they prove to be the best the nation has in their peer group. Australia changes with each wave it accepts, because both sides are making an accommodation.
But the mistake white folk make is to assume that wogs submerge their identity, and are making merely a material journey: acquiring the degree, the career and freehold title to a block of flats. Wogs don't forget where they come from, which is why they start out by sending a fair chunk of the money they make back to the mother country. Greeks and Italians may not need to now, but Afghan and Iraqi refugees do. Why should anyone judge them for sticking up for their families?
Indigenous Australians conceivably have the best of both worlds. Their over-achievers can earn and learn in the big smoke, and then take some of the money back with them to their country. But telling their families they should pack up their meagre possessions, like John Steinbeck's white-trash Okies in The Grapes of Wrath, and head for the promised land misses the point.
The choice should be theirs to make, not ours to impose.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,17812998%255E28737,00.html
Aborigines can beat the statistics
George Megalogenis
January 14, 2006
LET'S play a little race game with numbers. Should the Minister for Indigenous Affairs shut down those settlements in which there are more residents on welfare than working in regular jobs?
Here's a clue. Barely 30 towns and suburbs of various ethnic hues out of a national list of more than 1300 postcodes match this profile.
If the answer is yes, pull the plug on all of them, then try explaining to the folk of Coolangatta why their slice of the Queensland coastline south of Brisbane is, "unviable", to borrow minister Amanda Vanstone's description of remote indigenous communities.
Coolangatta has 1653 workers and 1654 beneficiaries, comprising 977 on the dole or disability support and another 677 on the age pension. That's a ratio of the idle to the active of 100.1 per cent. Australia-wide, the average figure is 42.4 per cent. Inner Sydney has it down to just 5.9 per cent.
When you have finished telling Coolangatta where to go, drive a few hours north of Brisbane, to former One Nation territory at Hervey Bay. Here, the dependency ratio is 105.9 per cent, which is a fraction higher than Cape York Peninsula, where indigenous leader Noel Pearson wants to jolt his people off the welfare drip.
Imagine how Pauline Hanson would have responded to social engineering on this scale. Actually, she has told us already, in her maiden speech to parliament 10 years ago. "I am fed up with being told, 'This is our land.' Well, where the hell do I go? I was born here and so were my parents and children."
Obviously, Vanstone didn't have Coolangatta or Hervey Bay in mind last month when she questioned the viability of Aboriginal communities that are too small to be called towns.
"There are around 1000 communities with less than 100 people, and of those, more than 80 per cent have less than 50 people," she said in a speech titled Beyond Conspicuous Consumption. "Despite the higher rate of population growth of Aboriginal people, it is unlikely that many of these homelands will grow to become viable towns." She wondered whether governments should "explicitly draw a line on the level of service that can be provided to homeland settlements".
It was a sensible matter to raise. But her next line jarred a little. "Listening to indigenous Australians does not mean blindly accepting, for example, that services like education, health and housing can be delivered at equal levels and equally well in townships and the homelands for the same people. We have to be realistic and we have to be honest."
Imagine a government minister saying the same thing about National Party senator Barnaby Joyce's constituents in the Queensland bush during last year's negotiations on the Telstra privatisation.
"Listening to Queenslanders does not mean blindly accepting, for example, that telephone services can be delivered at equal levels and equally well ..." Doesn't seem right, does it?
Now let's tackle another data set, this one dealing with the number of immigrants in jail. By way of background, 1.66 in every 1000 Australian-born adults were prisoners in 2004, a small rise on the 1.59 recorded in 2001. What do you think happened to the Lebanese-born in that period? Their incarceration rate rose from 1.88 to 2.25 in every 1000.
Are you hissing yet? Before you do, bear in mind that there are five immigrant groups well above them on the ladder: Tongans (5.32), Romanians (4.67), Samoans (4.45), Vietnamese (3.96) and Laotians (3.28).
All of which proves precisely nothing. The lock-up rate for indigenous Australians was 15.6 per 1000 adults in 2005, according to more recent figures. "Indigenous persons [are] 12 times more likely than non-indigenous persons to be in prison," the Australian Bureau of Statistics said last month.
One of the many mind-numbing contradictions in the race debate is that elements of the media and academe are hoping to prove that Lebanese-Australians are somehow different from all other immigrant groups, as if this somehow justifies their stint at the wog whipping post. The problem is the statistics can tell any story you wish, if you close one eye hard enough, which is why the argument is so easily polarised.
Lebanese-Australians have higher levels of youth unemployment than the mainstream, and some experts have been zeroing in on this detail to explain last month's mob violence on Sydney's beaches. But Vietnamese-Australians also have higher youth unemployment rates than the norm. It was the same for the Greek and Italian-Australians before them.
The Australian-born children of non-English-speaking immigrants generally fall into two camps: over-achiever or misfit. They have a higher rate of participation at university than the Australian average. Yet those who don't make it to tertiary education are less likely to walk into a low-skilled job than an Australian under-achiever of the same age whose family are not recent immigrants.
The explanation for this U-shaped distribution is not hard to work out. Just pretend you are one of the bulk of employers. Without a trace of prejudice in your blood, if you are running a McDonald's franchise, which high-school drop-out would you be inclined to hire to flip burgers and pour cappuccinos: a blue-eyed Australian or a swarthy Lebanese? What if there were two jobs to fill, and the third applicant was an Aborigine?
Which brings us back to Vanstone. The problem she touches on has no obvious solution. She stopped short of saying "bring them to the big smoke", even though that was the implication of ending the "cultural museums" where they presently dwell.
A good life does not await all indigenous Australians who move to towns or cities. Those already there are, on average, well behind the white folk and the immigrants on the key measures of education, income and life expectancy. If you doubt this, look again at the imprisonment rates.
It's not the Lebanese-Australians who are alien to us. We happen to be treating them no differently from previous new arrivals. The only people who are marginalised at every level of society are those who were here all along. No other group is told, however obliquely by government, where and how they should live.
The paradox is that indigenous Australians may need to think more like wogs if they are to break the cycle. Immigration involves two tangible jumps in living standards. To the new arrival, Australia is better than the place they left behind. But it is the children of the immigrants who reshape Australia in their own image, because they prove to be the best the nation has in their peer group. Australia changes with each wave it accepts, because both sides are making an accommodation.
But the mistake white folk make is to assume that wogs submerge their identity, and are making merely a material journey: acquiring the degree, the career and freehold title to a block of flats. Wogs don't forget where they come from, which is why they start out by sending a fair chunk of the money they make back to the mother country. Greeks and Italians may not need to now, but Afghan and Iraqi refugees do. Why should anyone judge them for sticking up for their families?
Indigenous Australians conceivably have the best of both worlds. Their over-achievers can earn and learn in the big smoke, and then take some of the money back with them to their country. But telling their families they should pack up their meagre possessions, like John Steinbeck's white-trash Okies in The Grapes of Wrath, and head for the promised land misses the point.
The choice should be theirs to make, not ours to impose.
Tuesday, January 10, 2006
Migrants blamed for IT jobs cut - Jewel Topsfield, The Age
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/migrants-blamed-for-it-jobs-cut/2006/01/09/1136771500496.html
Migrants blamed for IT jobs cut
By Jewel Topsfield, Canberra
January 10, 2006
AUSTRALIA'S intake of skilled migrants with information technology expertise should be reduced to improve the prospects of local IT graduates who are struggling to find jobs, says an immigration analyst.
Bob Kinnaird, of labour market consultants Kinnaird and Associates, said the Federal Government had brought in large numbers of IT workers over the past four years, even though there was a serious oversupply in the Australian labour market, particularly of graduates. He said the skilled migration program had effectively increased the IT graduate labour supply by nearly 80 per cent in recent years. During this time, 30 per cent of Australian IT graduates could not find full-time work.
The policy had been a "miserable failure", Mr Kinnaird said, leading to an oversupply of entry-level programmers, high graduate unemployment and lower wages.
In his paper, commissioned by the Centre for Population and Urban Research at Monash University, Mr Kinnaird said that in the past four years the number of visas granted to overseas students graduating in IT from Australian universities had increased by 62 per cent.
The report said this had been accompanied by plummeting enrolments by Australian students in IT courses, which dropped by 36 per cent between 2001 and 2004.
Mr Kinnaird said migrants were also losing out.
"People lured to Australia on the promise of lucrative jobs in IT get here and find they don't have a hope of getting a job," he said.
"It's a human disaster for these people who, in many cases, uprooted themselves and their families, leaving behind reasonably paid jobs, and find they are worse off when they come here.There's a heck of a lot of people driving cabs and working as security guards who are IT graduates."
Mr Kinnaird called on the Government to "substantially reduce" the intake of IT graduates through the skilled migration program until the market could absorb Australian IT graduates.
He said entry-level programmers should be taken off the skilled occupation list.
He also said the Australian Computer Society, which accredits the IT qualifications of applicants for permanent residency, should introduce tougher English tests and insist that overseas students spend three years studying IT in Australia, rather than two.
But Australian Computer Society chief executive officer Dennis Furini said that while there was possibly an oversupply of entry-level programmers, there was a shortage of specialists in areas such as e-commerce and network security.
An Immigration Department spokesman said it relied on information from the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations to draw up the skilled occupation list.
"The Immigration Department has no information suggesting IT jobs should be taken off the skilled occupation list," he said.
With MEAGHAN SHAW
Migrants blamed for IT jobs cut
By Jewel Topsfield, Canberra
January 10, 2006
AUSTRALIA'S intake of skilled migrants with information technology expertise should be reduced to improve the prospects of local IT graduates who are struggling to find jobs, says an immigration analyst.
Bob Kinnaird, of labour market consultants Kinnaird and Associates, said the Federal Government had brought in large numbers of IT workers over the past four years, even though there was a serious oversupply in the Australian labour market, particularly of graduates. He said the skilled migration program had effectively increased the IT graduate labour supply by nearly 80 per cent in recent years. During this time, 30 per cent of Australian IT graduates could not find full-time work.
The policy had been a "miserable failure", Mr Kinnaird said, leading to an oversupply of entry-level programmers, high graduate unemployment and lower wages.
In his paper, commissioned by the Centre for Population and Urban Research at Monash University, Mr Kinnaird said that in the past four years the number of visas granted to overseas students graduating in IT from Australian universities had increased by 62 per cent.
The report said this had been accompanied by plummeting enrolments by Australian students in IT courses, which dropped by 36 per cent between 2001 and 2004.
Mr Kinnaird said migrants were also losing out.
"People lured to Australia on the promise of lucrative jobs in IT get here and find they don't have a hope of getting a job," he said.
"It's a human disaster for these people who, in many cases, uprooted themselves and their families, leaving behind reasonably paid jobs, and find they are worse off when they come here.There's a heck of a lot of people driving cabs and working as security guards who are IT graduates."
Mr Kinnaird called on the Government to "substantially reduce" the intake of IT graduates through the skilled migration program until the market could absorb Australian IT graduates.
He said entry-level programmers should be taken off the skilled occupation list.
He also said the Australian Computer Society, which accredits the IT qualifications of applicants for permanent residency, should introduce tougher English tests and insist that overseas students spend three years studying IT in Australia, rather than two.
But Australian Computer Society chief executive officer Dennis Furini said that while there was possibly an oversupply of entry-level programmers, there was a shortage of specialists in areas such as e-commerce and network security.
An Immigration Department spokesman said it relied on information from the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations to draw up the skilled occupation list.
"The Immigration Department has no information suggesting IT jobs should be taken off the skilled occupation list," he said.
With MEAGHAN SHAW
Mind Games - John Aglionby, The Guardian
As many people have said in the past, education is important when looking at positive and proactive ways to overcome possible terrorist attacks....Sue Ellson
http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/story/0,5500,1682610,00.html
Mind games
In the wake of terrorist attacks, the west is ploughing cash into education in Islamic countries. By John Aglionby
Tuesday January 10, 2006
The Guardian
The six teenage rugby players rush forward to protect their teammate, who is charging into the opposition with the ball tucked under his right arm. Within seconds they are all on the sodden ground, laughing. "No, no no," hollers their coach in a broad Yorkshire accent. "You've got to stay on your feet."
This training session is not at one of Jakarta's swanky international schools, and the players here are not the spoilt sons of expatriates. The 50-odd boys are all Indonesians and mostly from the Asshiddiquiyah Islamic boarding school on the outskirts of Indonesia's sprawling capital.
The aim of the organiser, Indonesian Rugby Development, is primarily to spread rugby across the archipelago but also to give boys in Islamic schools a chance to get some form of physical exercise. For, like the vast majority of Indonesia's 10,000-plus Islamic boarding schools, known as pesantren, sports facilities at Asshiddiquiyah are virtually non-existent.
"[An American educator] and I were talking about pesantren not really having any sports," explains Muhammed Syahadat, the teacher who accompanies the boys. "It's really a shame because if you don't have something to do, then ..."
He has no need to finish his sentence because we are speaking just days after the government released a video featuring the young men who detonated suicide bombs in Bali restaurants on October 1, killing 22 people. All three of the suicide bombers had been educated at pesantren
After the 9/11 attacks on America and a spate of other terrorist strikes around the globe, the world, it appears, has come to the same conclusion. If radicalism is going to be defeated, and mutual understanding bolstered, huge investment is needed in developing nations' education.
"Since 9/11 [radical Islam] has been a source of instability in the world and we should bring to bear what we can to make a difference," says Mike Hardy, the head of the British Council in Indonesia.
Other donor countries have similar views. Bruce Davis, director general of the Australian government aid agency, AusAid, made no secret in a recent speech of his country's motivation in massively expanding its aid programmes, including education. "The Australian government [now has] a greater openness to more sophisticated definitions of security, definitions that range beyond physical security to include concepts such as food security, livelihood security and security of access to resources such as water," he said. When contacted by Education Guardian, he said: "A lot of the ways you're going to make a difference on governance issues is to think long term and expose future generations to different ways of learning and different opportunities."
Focus on Indonesia
Indonesia has attracted particular attention. It is the world's most populous Muslim nation and is predominantly moderate. It has suffered a major bombing every year since 1992, and bore the brunt of the 2004 tsunami.
"It's not just a reaction to perceived Islamic threats," said William Ryan, an American working closely with many pesantren. "I think people in the development world are smartening up and realising that if there's crap education, nothing is going to change."
Senior Islamic educators, however, believe it is no coincidence that the level of foreign assistance has intensified significantly since 9/11. "Virtually every big donor is now active in the education sector here," says Dr Azumardi Azra, the head of Jakarta's State Islamic University and one of the country's leading moderate Islamic educators. "These programmes are important to strengthen and empower moderate and mainstream Muslim institutions. But they are also addressing the deeper weaknesses of the education system."
A spokesman for the United Nations' children's organisation, Unicef, said his organisation's programme is reaching 275,078 children in 1,419 schools in 42 districts, while another 323,000 pupils are benefiting from private-sector support.
There are plenty of weaknesses to address. Some 55% of the adult population has only a primary school education; millions of pupils are dropping out every year - in a recent spot check by the World Bank some 20% of teachers were absent.
"Kids are still learning by rote, but they need to be learning by doing," says Rozi Munir, senior member of Nahdlatul Ulama (NU), a Muslim social organisation that claims some 40million members. "Children's creativity needs to be bolstered."
Average standards in pesantren and other Islamic schools are even lower than in the state sector, according to Azra. "Pesantren usually don't have the financing and take anyone as teachers," he said.
Accelerating globalisation is also driving the agenda, Hardy believes. "Never before has our world been such a small place - a world where what we do affects others and what others do affects us," he said. "Only when our education systems, the schools, teachers and the curricula become more outward-looking and confident in embracing the challenges out in a diverse world do we begin to equip our young people and adults for life in a global society and for work in a global economy."
Different donors take different approaches. Some strengthen school administration; others address poor teacher training. Some place teachers in schools and some focus on exchange programmes to address mutual misunderstandings.
All, however, insist they are not trying to impose anything, especially not western liberalism. "It's all about how Indonesians can be better prepared for their futures, their participation in democratic activities and being able to compete better in the wider world," says an American official.
"We're not bringing answers, we're bringing a toolkit," says Hardy. "What we're doing is getting alongside the debate and helping Indonesians to find solutions. It would be a waste of everyone's time if we dictated to them."
British initiatives include major programmes with both NU and Indonesia's other major moderate social Islamic organisation, Muhammadiyah. More than 50 deputy heads of NU-affiliated pesantren attend month-long courses on school management at a British university and then, on their return, have to disseminate what they've learned to deputy heads of 10 other schools.
A British diplomat said that the Indonesians also do subliminal educating while in Britain. "This is not a one-way street. We expect them to educate as much as being educated," the diplomat said. "It's a programme that aims to avoid the misunderstandings that have occurred between western culture and Islamic communities. People [in Indonesia] don't understand that the UK is a multicultural society."
Azra is not at all surprised Britain is pursuing such a policy. "There's a growing resentment towards England [for being] an ally of America," he said. "The English government realises it needs people to understand about 'real life' in England."
Meeting the enemy
Programmes placing foreign teachers in Indonesian schools generate particularly large benefits, says Ryan. "Many of these people have never met an American," he says. "If they have a professor living in their community who is a good guy, then it makes a big difference."
Syahadat doesn't mind what the donor nations' motivation is. "There's always an underlying motive, but since we want to be closer to the west and improve mutual understanding, we're happy to engage."
The rugby players say their horizons are being broadened by just engaging with westerners on the rugby pitch. "Before I played rugby, I had no interaction with westerners," said Dondy Ziksy, aged 17.
Indonesia's education minister, Bambang Sudibyo, declined to be interviewed. "There have been no major initiatives from the government," says Azra. "[The minister] has never invited university rectors for a brainstorming session on how to improve education in Indonesia or sought input from the public."
Despite this, and because of the huge influx of foreign aid, the education system is starting to improve, albeit slowly, Munir believes. "Children are now being taught how to discuss and debate," he says. "But we've got to wait several more years to see the true impact."
http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/story/0,5500,1682610,00.html
Mind games
In the wake of terrorist attacks, the west is ploughing cash into education in Islamic countries. By John Aglionby
Tuesday January 10, 2006
The Guardian
The six teenage rugby players rush forward to protect their teammate, who is charging into the opposition with the ball tucked under his right arm. Within seconds they are all on the sodden ground, laughing. "No, no no," hollers their coach in a broad Yorkshire accent. "You've got to stay on your feet."
This training session is not at one of Jakarta's swanky international schools, and the players here are not the spoilt sons of expatriates. The 50-odd boys are all Indonesians and mostly from the Asshiddiquiyah Islamic boarding school on the outskirts of Indonesia's sprawling capital.
The aim of the organiser, Indonesian Rugby Development, is primarily to spread rugby across the archipelago but also to give boys in Islamic schools a chance to get some form of physical exercise. For, like the vast majority of Indonesia's 10,000-plus Islamic boarding schools, known as pesantren, sports facilities at Asshiddiquiyah are virtually non-existent.
"[An American educator] and I were talking about pesantren not really having any sports," explains Muhammed Syahadat, the teacher who accompanies the boys. "It's really a shame because if you don't have something to do, then ..."
He has no need to finish his sentence because we are speaking just days after the government released a video featuring the young men who detonated suicide bombs in Bali restaurants on October 1, killing 22 people. All three of the suicide bombers had been educated at pesantren
After the 9/11 attacks on America and a spate of other terrorist strikes around the globe, the world, it appears, has come to the same conclusion. If radicalism is going to be defeated, and mutual understanding bolstered, huge investment is needed in developing nations' education.
"Since 9/11 [radical Islam] has been a source of instability in the world and we should bring to bear what we can to make a difference," says Mike Hardy, the head of the British Council in Indonesia.
Other donor countries have similar views. Bruce Davis, director general of the Australian government aid agency, AusAid, made no secret in a recent speech of his country's motivation in massively expanding its aid programmes, including education. "The Australian government [now has] a greater openness to more sophisticated definitions of security, definitions that range beyond physical security to include concepts such as food security, livelihood security and security of access to resources such as water," he said. When contacted by Education Guardian, he said: "A lot of the ways you're going to make a difference on governance issues is to think long term and expose future generations to different ways of learning and different opportunities."
Focus on Indonesia
Indonesia has attracted particular attention. It is the world's most populous Muslim nation and is predominantly moderate. It has suffered a major bombing every year since 1992, and bore the brunt of the 2004 tsunami.
"It's not just a reaction to perceived Islamic threats," said William Ryan, an American working closely with many pesantren. "I think people in the development world are smartening up and realising that if there's crap education, nothing is going to change."
Senior Islamic educators, however, believe it is no coincidence that the level of foreign assistance has intensified significantly since 9/11. "Virtually every big donor is now active in the education sector here," says Dr Azumardi Azra, the head of Jakarta's State Islamic University and one of the country's leading moderate Islamic educators. "These programmes are important to strengthen and empower moderate and mainstream Muslim institutions. But they are also addressing the deeper weaknesses of the education system."
A spokesman for the United Nations' children's organisation, Unicef, said his organisation's programme is reaching 275,078 children in 1,419 schools in 42 districts, while another 323,000 pupils are benefiting from private-sector support.
There are plenty of weaknesses to address. Some 55% of the adult population has only a primary school education; millions of pupils are dropping out every year - in a recent spot check by the World Bank some 20% of teachers were absent.
"Kids are still learning by rote, but they need to be learning by doing," says Rozi Munir, senior member of Nahdlatul Ulama (NU), a Muslim social organisation that claims some 40million members. "Children's creativity needs to be bolstered."
Average standards in pesantren and other Islamic schools are even lower than in the state sector, according to Azra. "Pesantren usually don't have the financing and take anyone as teachers," he said.
Accelerating globalisation is also driving the agenda, Hardy believes. "Never before has our world been such a small place - a world where what we do affects others and what others do affects us," he said. "Only when our education systems, the schools, teachers and the curricula become more outward-looking and confident in embracing the challenges out in a diverse world do we begin to equip our young people and adults for life in a global society and for work in a global economy."
Different donors take different approaches. Some strengthen school administration; others address poor teacher training. Some place teachers in schools and some focus on exchange programmes to address mutual misunderstandings.
All, however, insist they are not trying to impose anything, especially not western liberalism. "It's all about how Indonesians can be better prepared for their futures, their participation in democratic activities and being able to compete better in the wider world," says an American official.
"We're not bringing answers, we're bringing a toolkit," says Hardy. "What we're doing is getting alongside the debate and helping Indonesians to find solutions. It would be a waste of everyone's time if we dictated to them."
British initiatives include major programmes with both NU and Indonesia's other major moderate social Islamic organisation, Muhammadiyah. More than 50 deputy heads of NU-affiliated pesantren attend month-long courses on school management at a British university and then, on their return, have to disseminate what they've learned to deputy heads of 10 other schools.
A British diplomat said that the Indonesians also do subliminal educating while in Britain. "This is not a one-way street. We expect them to educate as much as being educated," the diplomat said. "It's a programme that aims to avoid the misunderstandings that have occurred between western culture and Islamic communities. People [in Indonesia] don't understand that the UK is a multicultural society."
Azra is not at all surprised Britain is pursuing such a policy. "There's a growing resentment towards England [for being] an ally of America," he said. "The English government realises it needs people to understand about 'real life' in England."
Meeting the enemy
Programmes placing foreign teachers in Indonesian schools generate particularly large benefits, says Ryan. "Many of these people have never met an American," he says. "If they have a professor living in their community who is a good guy, then it makes a big difference."
Syahadat doesn't mind what the donor nations' motivation is. "There's always an underlying motive, but since we want to be closer to the west and improve mutual understanding, we're happy to engage."
The rugby players say their horizons are being broadened by just engaging with westerners on the rugby pitch. "Before I played rugby, I had no interaction with westerners," said Dondy Ziksy, aged 17.
Indonesia's education minister, Bambang Sudibyo, declined to be interviewed. "There have been no major initiatives from the government," says Azra. "[The minister] has never invited university rectors for a brainstorming session on how to improve education in Indonesia or sought input from the public."
Despite this, and because of the huge influx of foreign aid, the education system is starting to improve, albeit slowly, Munir believes. "Children are now being taught how to discuss and debate," he says. "But we've got to wait several more years to see the true impact."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
