Moment of Truth Approaching for U.S. Manufacturers

Picture

Scott Malone 
October 12, 2012

BOSTON (Reuters) – How far can cost-cutting get you in a slowing economy?
That’s the question the U.S. manufacturing sector will answer over the coming weeks. Through the first half of the year, big industrial companies including General Electric Co , United Technologies Corp and Caterpillar Inc notched impressive profit growth despite shaky demand, largely thanks to their success in boosting productivity.

But that bit of management magic may have run its course – Wall Street expects manufacturers to report a sharp slowdown in earnings growth in the just-ended third quarter, as Europe’s deteriorating economy, slowing growth in Asia and the risk of the United States going over a self-imposed fiscal cliff cause customers to throttle back spending even further.

Warning signs abound. In recent weeks, Caterpillar, United Tech and FedEx Corp have noted that the world economy is slowing – and that they are bracing for an extended period of tepid growth.

FedEx, the world’s No. 2 package-delivery company, this week unveiled plans to cut costs at its air-express operation by about $1.7 billion over the next four years, because it no longer expects that business to maintain its prior growth rate, which was twice that of global GDP growth.

Despite those cost-cutting plans, analysts expect profit for FedEx’s 2013 fiscal year, which ends in May, to be roughly flat after rising about 40 percent in fiscal 2012 – suggesting that belt-tightening can only do so much to offset a weak economy.

“We are operating in the most tepid post-recession recovery in the modern era,” David Bronczek, who heads the company’s air express arm, told investors.

Others have been more bullish – GE late last month raised its full-year sales growth target, saying demand for jet engines, electric turbines and other heavy equipment has held up despite a tricky global economy.

Wall Street has ratcheted down its expectations for the manufacturing sector during the quarter and now looks for the industrial companies in the Standard & Poor’s 500 index <.SPX> to collectively report 1.9 percent earnings growth, down from a forecast of 3.7 percent as of July 1, according to Thomson Reuters I/B/E/S.

That would represent dramatically slower growth than the 14.8 percent growth notched in the second quarter and 17.4 percent increase recorded in the first quarter of 2012.

ON THE BRINK
Adding to CEOs’ worries is the U.S. fiscal cliff, Washington’s self-imposed deadline to agree on a plan to shrink the federal budget or trigger $600 billion in spending cuts and higher taxes to take effect the beginning of January.

While the spending cuts would pose the greatest challenge to companies with defense operations, such as Honeywell International Inc and Textron Inc , economists and investors fear the cutbacks could ripple across the economy, prompting businesses of all kinds to rein in spending.

“How our politicians handle that fiscal cliff can either be a potential opportunity or could be a disaster and I think could spark a global recession if it was handled really poorly,” Honeywell CEO Dave Cote said in an interview in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia this week. “I’d like to be more optimistic and say I don’t think that kind of a disaster will happen.”

Concerns about the fiscal cliff contributed to a third-quarter weakening of demand for a wide variety of industrial goods, from heating and cooling equipment to pumps, a survey of equipment distributors conducted by Barclays Capital found.

“Outlook for the remainder of the year remains highly uncertain,” said Barclays analyst Scott Davis. “We think this is a mid-cycle slowdown which is larger than we had expected but not the end of the cycle.”

RALLY REVERSAL?
Concerns about slowing profit growth have begun to weigh on industrial shares. After running up by about 24 percent in the six months spanning the fourth quarter of 2011 and first quarter of 2012, the S&P capital goods index <.GSPIC> has flattened out and is now up about 20 percent for the past 12 months, in line with the broader S&P 500.

Oliver Pursche, president of Gary Goldberg Financial Services, which manages about $600 million in assets, said he expects industrial shares to slump in the coming months.

“We’re not particularly bullish on material and industrial stocks at this point in time,” Pursche said. “If you look at the big rally that we saw in the fourth quarter of last year and the first quarter of this year, we think we’re more likely to see a selloff in part as a result of the global macro picture.”

(Additional reporting by Nick Zieminski in New York and Reem Shamseddine in Dharan, Saudi Arabia; Editing by Patricia Kranz)


Walmart Strikes Mark New Chapter In Labor's Fight With Mega-Retailer

Picture


When a strike among Walmart store employees spread to twelves cities last week, a spokesman for the largest private-sector employer in the world made a curious clarification to news outlets, including The Huffington Post: This was not the first-ever employee walkout at a Walmart store, the company argued, citing a 2006 incident in Florida.
In an apparent effort to take some air out of the striking workers’ sails — and perhaps to undermine a juicy national headline — Walmart seemed willing to remind the public all on its own that some level of employee dissatisfaction has existed at the chain for years. As with the 2006 protest, at a store in Hialeah Gardens, Fla., Walmart has mostly dismissed the recent strike as a bit of union rabble-rousing, though an internal memo shows management’s concern that the strike could spread, as HuffPost reported over the weekend.

“The events that took place this week had absolutely no impact on our business whatsoever, on our ability to staff our stores adequately or serve our customers,” noted David Tovar, Walmart’s vice president of communications. “The workers that have raised issues this week represent a very small, miniscule number of the total number of associates that work at Walmart.”

The 90-odd workers who walked out of stores comprise a fraction of one percent of Walmart employees, who now number around 1.3 million in the U.S. and 2.2 million worldwide. Even among participating stores, strike participation was small. But that’s not to say a coordinated, multi-store strike doesn’t mark a new chapter in the long-running fight between organized labor and America’s premiere mega-retailer, argued Dan Schlademan, director of the United Food and Commercial Workers union’s “Making Change at Walmart” campaign.

“All of this is a new beginning for the reality of Walmart and the reality of retailers,” Schlademan said. “You can’t change standards anywhere else until you change Walmart.”

If nothing else, a not-insignificant number of Walmart workers have proved willing to declare themselves activists or, at least, dissatisfied employees. It takes a certain boldness to invite bad publicity on one’s employer, particularly in a weak economy. (The workers may have the backing of a union, but not a union contract.) It also takes some financial sacrifice. Although a strike fund is currently in the works, the employees who went on strike last week forwent their wages for the day, according to a UFCW official.

According to the historian Nelson Lichtenstein, who chronicled Walmart’s rise in The Retail Revolution: How Wal-Mart Created a Brave New World of Business, the risks taken by the striking workers warrant a notch on the Walmart timeline.

“What is big is these workers have actually identified themselves as [union] supporters, and Walmart knows who they are,” Lichtenstein said. “As a labor historian, the crucial moment in organizing campaigns is the moment when [workers] can identify themselves publicly as unionists.”

Company-wide unionization remains little more than a pipe dream for labor activists, especially considering any contracts would have to be struck on a store-by-store basis. (Walmart currently has more than 3,000 supercenter stores in the U.S.) But the UFCW, which launched the non-union worker group OUR Walmart last year, has continued to invest in pressuring Walmart to boost wages and improve benefits. It argues that raising the bar at the largest company in the world would have broader effects on the retail sector and the economy at large.

Tovar said that Walmart’s internal surveys indicate the company’s marks with employees are actually improving. He said the average wage at Walmart is now $12.50 for a full-time employee, though he couldn’t provide wage statistics for part-timers. Making Change at Walmart, however, claims the average hourly wage of a sales associate is $8.81, about a buck and a half more than the federal minimum wage and well below most areas’ living wage standards.

Walmart often notes that more than half of its workers have health coverage through the company, but it doesn’t give specific numbers when pressed by reporters. Some Walmart workers say the plans that are offered are too expensive to afford.

Dan Hindman, 28, went on strike for one day at his Walmart in Paramount, Calif. Hindman told HuffPost that his company health plan swallows roughly half of his paycheck, and that he typically gets only two shifts per week, so by giving up one he effectively cut his week’s hours in half. Tovar said a majority of Walmart workers are full-time employees, but Hindman said he and many other workers at his store struggle to get enough shifts. A veteran of the retail world since high school, Hindman said he was striking to help improve conditions not just at Walmart but throughout the industry.

“There’s a lot of people that are afraid to stand up,” said Hindman, an OUR Walmart member. “It’s not just Walmart but Target and Bestbuy. We’re striking for everybody.”

Tovar said Walmart has reached out to the workers who went on strike last week, offering them the opportunity to sit down with management and discuss their issues. “We want everybody to have a good and positive experience working at Walmart,” he said.

But it isn’t just retail workers and their affiliates who’ve been criticizing Walmart lately. Union-backed groups in the shipping and food-processing industries have recently made a point of singling out the retailer, arguing that by its sheer size and influence it helps set low standards throughout the consumer economy.

Backed by the labor group National Guestworker Alliance, a group of guestworkers from Mexico recently walked out of the Louisiana seafood processor C.J.’s Seafood, which supplied seafood to Walmart’s Sam’s Club stores. The workers claimed they worked under abusive conditions, and the Labor Department fined the company roughly $250,000 for safety and wage violations. Walmart has dropped C.J.’s as a supplier.

Similarly, temp workers who handle goods in Walmart-contracted warehouses in California and Illinois launched their own strike preceding the Walmart store workers’ walkout. Striking warehouse workers in Elwood, Ill., eventually returned to work, winning full back pay as well as new safety amenities like kneepads and large cooling fans inside the warehouse, according to Phillip Bailey, one of the striking workers.

Although Walmart employs many workers directly at its warehouses around the country, it subcontracts much of its operations in the logistics hubs of Illinois and Southern
Califo
rnia, where workers tend to be low-paid temps. Warehouse workers from those areas plan on descending on Walmart’s Bentonville, Ark., headquarters to deliver petitions this week.

Bailey works for a company named RoadLink but moves goods bound for Walmart stores. He earns $10 an hour without benefits. He said he sees his own situation in that of the Walmart store employees who walked out. Even though Walmart does not employ Bailey, he said he blames the retailer for what he considers sub-par conditions at his warehouse.

“It’s all the same struggle,” said Bailey, who spent some of his time off last week passing out flyers outside a Walmart in the Chicago area. “It’s the same squeeze. Walmart puts the squeeze on the whole supply chain and on their store workers the same way. … The same patterns apply all throughout the chain.”

Warehouse workers like Bailey tend to have their busiest weeks of the year leading up to the shopping bonanza of Black Friday. Labor activists have long talked about warehouse workers’ potential to disturb retailers’ holiday plans through a walkout, and the Walmart store employees who went on strike last week have threatened to make Black Friday “memorable” for the retailer. It may require massive participation for striking workers to put a dent in the company’s operations, but it would take much less to usher in another round of negative publicity.

“This is really the beginning of a tipping point where workers in many aspects of Walmart’s company — whether warehouses or stores — are starting to understand that they do have a voice,” Schlademan said. “If I’m Walmart, I’m afraid of that.”

Hot Springs Manufacturing Company Alliance Rubber Reaching 90 Years

Picture

Oct 11, 2012 

HOT SPRINGS, Ark. (KTHV) — A current documentary playing in Little Rock showcases the struggles of the U.S. manufacturing business. We recently told you about the film “Death by China” on Today’s THV This Morning. But in Hot Springs a company is bucking the trend, operating almost 90 years.

You won’t find a shortage of rubber bands at this Hot Springs manufacturing plant.

“We do about 15 million pounds a year,” President Bonnie Swayze said.

Coming off the lines and into bins, rubber bands are one of the staple products at Alliance Rubber Company, which has become a staple business in Spa City.

“We’ve been here since 1944 and the next March 7th, we will celebrate our 90th anniversary,” Swayze said.

A big mile-stone, President Bonnie Swayze feels, comes from two main factors.

“It’s because of ingenuity and the perseverance of our great staff here in Hot Springs,” Swayze said.

In the past year and a half, the company’s introduced eight products, like wristbands the company designs for clients.

“These are the world’s first custom-imprinted, four-color imprint wristbands, we’re the only one in the world with it,” Swayze said.

There are new fragrance-wristbands too and more staples like lobster bands, all of originating from blocks of rubber shipped in from overseas.

“They’re 75 pounds apiece; this is the stuff that actually comes out of a tree,” Trevor Hamilton said.

Safety Training Coordinator Trevor Hamilton calls the longevity here unbelievable.

“When I came in 19 years ago, I walked in the doors and said I know there is no way that I could be here this long,” Hamilton said.

But he’s happy he has stayed here. And with the way things are going, he’s planning to stay, with innovation and company staples “banding” together. 

Alliance Rubber ships its products around the country and to 28 countries. Swayze says the company’s also received national recognition for their innovation.

U.S. Will Place Tariffs on Chinese Solar Panels

Picture

A worker in Zhejiang province in February. | Photo Credit: Reuters

Picture

By DIANE CARDWELL and KEITH BRADSHER
October 10, 2012

The Commerce Department issued its final ruling Wednesday in a long-simmering trade dispute with China, imposing tariffs ranging from about 24 to nearly 36 percent on most solar panels imported from the country.
The penalties are somewhat lower than those announced by the department earlier this year, when the government determined that Chinese companies were benefiting from unfair government subsidies and were selling their products in the United States below the cost of production, a practice known as dumping.

For one of the biggest panel makers, Suntech, the duties are slightly higher, moving to almost 36 percent from about 34 percent.

The trade case stemmed from a legal filing nearly a year ago by a coalition of manufacturers, led by SolarWorld, a German company with considerable manufacturing in the United States. The coalition contended that Chinese companies, which dominate global sales with a two-thirds market share, were competing unfairly in the American market.

“This is another important step in returning the solar marketplace in the United States to fair competition,” said Timothy C. Brightbill, a lawyer representing the companies that brought the case.

At the same time, Mr. Brightbill said, he was concerned that the Commerce Department did not expand the scope of the ruling, which applies to panels made up of Chinese-produced solar cells. That has allowed companies to sidestep the duties by assembling panels composed of cells produced elsewhere, even if their components come from China. “We are looking to the administration for an explanation on how they will close or address this loophole in the scope.”

The Chinese government had no immediate response to the decision, which was issued in the early hours of the morning Beijing time.

Some opponents of the tariffs said the ruling might not benefit the struggling United States manufacturers as much as SolarWorld and its supporters had hoped, given that Chinese firms could still make panels with cells produced in other countries.

“The fact that the Department of Commerce didn’t expand the scope means that those companies aren’t going to be banned from doing business in the U.S.,” said Jigar Shah, an entrepreneur representing a group of companies that opposed the tariffs. “We really think the Department of Commerce came down on the side of free trade.”

Shayle Kann, the head of GTM Research, a unit of Greentech Media, agreed. “There’s an impact there, but it’s not huge in terms of what it does to the market,” he said.

Wholesale prices have declined by nearly three-quarters since 2008 as Chinese companies expanded capacity and production much faster than the growth in worldwide demand. When China began the rapid expansion of its solar industry several years ago, many in the global industry expected that further technological breakthroughs would result in additional cost reductions.

But Chinese companies have driven costs down mainly through greater economies of scale from building ever-larger factories to produce conventional solar panels.

About a dozen panel makers in the United States, as well as a similar number in Europe, have gone bankrupt or closed factories since the start of last year. The European Union began the world’s largest antidumping case, covering solar panel imports from China that totaled $26.5 billion last year. The trade case has divided the American solar industry, with some manufacturers and installers siding with SolarWorld and others strongly opposing the tariffs.

The opponents argue that the duties would make it more expensive for American families and companies to install solar systems.

American manufacturers of factory equipment and raw materials have also expressed concern that the trade measures could imperil their sales to China, whose government began its own investigation into whether American and South Korean manufacturers of polysilicon, the main ingredient in the solar panels, were selling the material below cost.

Steve Ostrenga, chief executive of the panel maker Helios Solar Works USA of Milwaukee, who supported the trade case, said in a statement after Wednesday’s ruling that he was confident “that American manufacturers can compete with China on an equal footing.”

“Assuming an adequate response from the Obama administration on enforcement, we have some hope that there will continue to be a viable solar manufacturing base in the United States,” Mr. Ostrenga said.

Although the Commerce Department’s decision is final, the tariffs cannot go into effect unless the International Trade Commission finds that the Chinese pricing practices have actually harmed or threatened to harm the American industry, a determination that is not expected until November. But the commission issued a preliminary ruling that such injury had occurred, and reversals are uncommon, particularly if the domestic industry is in trouble.

The Commerce Department calculated separate penalties for unfair subsidies and dumping, reducing the antidumping penalties from the preliminary ruling for most of the manufacturers while sharply increasing the antisubsidy duties after finding that companies had benefited from additional subsidies.

But to avoid double-counting duties, the department reduced the rates importers will have to pay.

———-
This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: October 10, 2012
A Breaking News headline posted online in advance of this article misstated the range of tariffs, and an earlier version of the article referred to the range imprecisely. It is 24 percent to 36 percent, not 31 percent to 47 percent, on most manufacturers of solar panels and cells imported from China.


U.S. Solar Industry Reacts to Commerce Department Decision on Solar Trade Case

Solar Manufacturing Coalition to Look to Administration to Provide Solution to Loophole in Case
WASHINGTON, D.C., Oct. 10, 2012 — The 226-company Coalition for American Solar Manufacturing (CASM) today welcomed parts of the U.S. Department of Commerce announcement regarding duties on Chinese solar cells and panels but was very disappointed with other parts. The decision, which came nearly one year after Oregon-based coalition leader SolarWorld Industries America Inc. filed its cases, will be one step to restoring fair competition to the U.S. marketplace.

Commerce today set anti-dumping duties of 31.73 percent on imports of solar photovoltaic cells and panels from Suntech, 18.32 percent from Trina Solar, 25.96 percent from other companies that had requested but not received individual duty determinations and 249.96 percent from all other Chinese producers, including those controlled by the Chinese government. The preliminary numbers imposed in late May were 31.14 percent, 31.22 percent, 31.18 percent and 249.96 percent, respectively. In short, same or down.

In addition, Commerce found anti-subsidy duty percentages of 14.78 percent for imports from Suntech, 15.97 percent Trina Solar and 15.24 percent for all other Chinese manufacturers. Those increased significantly from preliminary anti-subsidy duties announced in March of 2.9 percent for Suntech, 4.73 percent for Trina and 3.59 percent for all other Chinese producers.

In a separate part of the decision, Commerce did not alter its preliminary determination on the product scope, which covered photovoltaic cells produced or assembled into panels in China but not panels made from cells produced in third countries. SolarWorld’s initial, broader scope had covered all cells and panels produced in China. This decision, according to CASM, leaves a significant loophole in the final ruling as it allows Chinese manufacturers to potentially avoid the duties by using non-Chinese cells in its solar panels.

“By leaving this ‘loophole’ as defined by Members of Congress in its enforcement decision, Commerce continues to expose U.S. manufacturers to Chinese unfair trade practices,” said Gordon Brinser, president of SolarWorld Industries America Inc. “This will undercut the positive impact of Commerce’s duties. Assuming the International Trade Commission rules in our favor next month, we plan to ask the Commerce Department and Customs and Border Protection to address the circumvention issue through strict enforcement actions. As 27 Members of Congress, including Sens. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Reps. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.), Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.), Sander Levin (D-Mich.), Edward Markey (D-Mass.) and many others, have pointed out in recent weeks, the loophole will make it difficult to enforce the Commerce decision. We will work with them to pursue remedies to close the loophole. Moreover, to date, we are unaware of a single member of Congress who urged the President to leave the loophole in place.”

Commerce also reiterated its finding of critical circumstances for all companies in the CVD determination, and for all companies except Suntech in the AD determination, which means that nearly of the duties remain retroactive 90 days from the day they were announced.

“We remain confident that American manufacturers can compete with China on an equal footing,” said Steve Ostrenga, CEO of Milwaukee-based Helios Solar Works USA, one of the founding members of CASM. “Helios, and the other manufacturing members of CASM, is in this battle to win it. Assuming an adequate response from the Obama administration on enforcement, we have some hope that there will continue to be a viable solar manufacturing base in the United States.”

“On behalf of the more than 18,000 workers who belong to the coalition, I want to thank the investigators at the Commerce Department for their hard work on this politically charged case and, especially, Sen. Wyden for taking up the cause of American solar manufacturing,” added Brinser. “Without Sen. Wyden’s efforts, the industry would have never gotten as far as we have. Today’s decision is one part of a solution that will help American solar manufacturers recover from China’s unfair trade practices.”

Over the two years, China’s predatory trade practices and huge overcapacity have pushed at least 14 crystalline silicon solar producers to close plants or lay off significant numbers of workers. The two most recent announcements are the closing of a Schott Solar facility in New Mexico and a Sharp Solar facility in Tennessee. Chinese trade practices have also harmed manufacturers in other countries. Earlier this year, a coalition of European manufacturers filed both anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duty cases in the European Union.

At the same time, Chinese manufacturers have endured hundreds of billions of dollars in losses over the past year and at least two – Suntech and LDK Solar – have received bailouts from Chinese provincial governments that have allowed them to continue operations.

The final step in the case will be the International Trade Commission’s final decision on Nov. 7 on whether the trade practices of the Chinese manufacturers and government is harming the U.S. industry. Last December, the commission voted affirmatively, 6-0, in a preliminary determination.

# # #

The Coalition for American Solar Manufacturing, founded by seven companies that manufacture solar cells and panels in the United States, has about 225 employers of about 18,000 workers who have registered their support for CASM’s case. The founding manufacturers have plants in nearly every region in the United States, including the Northwest and California, the Southwest, Midwest, Northeast and South and support several thousand U.S. manufacturing jobs. For details about CASM, go to www.americansolarmanufacturing.com; email media questions to media@americansolarmanufacturing.org; other questions or comments may be emailed to contact@americansolarmanufacturing.org.

CONTACT:  Lauren Simpson
903-243-2201 (cell)
media@americansolarmanufacturing.org

If Obama Wins, You May Lose Your Job- CEO emails 7,000 employees: Defeat Obama or else

Picture

David Siegel, CEO of Westgate Resorts, warned employees that they may lose their jobs if President Obama wins re-election.

Picture

Chris Isidore 
October 10, 2012

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) — Surprise. David Siegel, the Westgate Resort CEO who is building the biggest private home in the country, really, really doesn’t like President Obama.
And while Siegel hasn’t sent any money to Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, he has gone a step farther to support him.

On Monday he sent an e-mail to all 7,000 employees of privately-held Westgate Resorts, many of them in the battleground state of Florida, warning them their jobs are at risk if the president is re-elected.

“The economy doesn’t currently pose a threat to your job. What does threaten your job however, is another 4 years of the same Presidential administration,” he said in the e-mail. (Track economy under Obama)

“If any new taxes are levied on me, or my company, as our current President plans, I will have no choice but to reduce the size of this company,” he says in the nearly 1,400-word e-mail. “Rather than grow this company I will be forced to cut back. This means fewer jobs, less benefits and certainly less opportunity for everyone.”

Siegel doesn’t mention Romney’s name anywhere in the e-mail, and he writes he “certainly wouldn’t interfere with your right to vote for whomever you choose.” And he insisted Tuesday that he wasn’t threatening to fire employees if Obama is re-elected. But he proudly stands behind the e-mail.

“I wanted the employees to know what the situation is, and not listen to campaign commercials but hear it from the horse’s mouth,” he told CNNMoney.

Siegel actually has been hiring in recent years.

He said Westgate had 12,000 employees and $1 billion in annual revenue four years ago, before the financial meltdown caused credit markets to freeze up. “We were fat, dumb and happy,” he said.

Employment at the company dropped as low as 5,000 and revenue fell by 50% at the worst point during to the credit crunch. Jobs have bounced back by about 40% since then, but Siegel said he doesn’t believe the company can continue to thrive if taxes are raised and Obamacare is put into place.

Siegel based his e-mail on an anti-Obama letter that was widely circulated before the 2008 election, but he said he made many changes, adding many of his own views and personal history. He is particularly angry by what he sees as unfair attacks on the nation’s wealthiest by the Obama administration, which is seeking to raise taxes on top earners.

“What most people see is the nice house and the lavish lifestyle. What the press certainly does not want you to see, is the true story of the hard work and sacrifices I’ve made,” he wrote. “Now, the economy is falling apart and people like me who made all the right decisions and invested in themselves are being forced to bail out all the people who didn’t…We are being taxed to death and the government thinks we don’t pay enough.’

He acknowledged his 90,000-square foot home now under construction in the letter. The home is the subject of a critical documentary, “The Queen of Versailles.”

Siegel said he was forced to stop work on the home four years ago because he had to pour all his money back into the company during the lean years, but that he’s ready to start work on the home again — assuming Obama is defeated. 
“If the wrong people stay in power, I’ll have to stop it again,” he told CNNMoney. “I don’t see a good future.”


SOURCE: CNNMoney

Manufacturer Helps Vets Turn Military Skills Into Jobs

Picture

ATS maintenance techs program an automated Finn Power metal punching machine. | Photo Credit: Advanced Technology Services

Picture

By: Heesun Wee
October 10, 2012

Advanced Technology Services, a company that maintains manufacturing plant equipment, has fashioned a unique way to fill their vacant jobs—specifically recruit and hire America’s returning veterans.
Turns out soldiers trained in handling guns, radios and other kinds of equipment possess the ideal skills to work in America’s manufacturing plants.

“They have all these great skills and manufacturing is a perfect place for them to transition into,” said Holly Mosack, director of military recruiting for Advanced Technology Services, based in Peoria, Ill.

Whether U.S. manufacturing can thrive again is a perennial question. But recent economic data suggests sector improvement. The Institute for Supply Management (ISM) last week said the manufacturing sector expanded in September—shaking off three months of weakness as new orders and employment edged higher.

Advanced Technology Services helps factories improve productivity and profitability. Their clients include Caterpillar, Honeywell, Eaton and Textron.

Advanced Technology Services began focusing on military hiring in 2006. That emphasis was ramped up last year as more vets began returning home from conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

But transitioning from the battlefield to private-sector work is challenging, as jobs data shows. The unemployment rate for veterans—who served on active duty in the U.S. Armed Forces at any time since September 2001—was 12.1 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics said earlier this year. (Read moreVeterans Face New Battle in Private-Sector Job Market)

Applying for the wrong jobs

Mosack said she noticed vets applying for the wrong jobs. “They were going for positions they were under or over qualified for.”

Other veterans need help on basic skills such as how to address supervisors. Some veterans “feel silly asking, ‘What am I supposed to call my boss?’ ” she said. Advanced Technology Services’ program helps veterans navigate these dilemmas and other tasks they’ve never managed before such as health-care forms and 401(k)s.

Roughly 25 percent or 650 of the company’s 2,600 U.S.-based employees are veterans. Brian Aschenbrenner, a former Air Force officer is among them. A military communications officer, Aschenbrenner handled radios, radars, satellites and other communication equipment at Air Force bases and in Iraq, Jordan and Qatar.

After nearly 24 years in the military, Aschenbrenner found himself looking for a civilian job for the first time in his life a few months ago. Advanced Technology Services caught his attention.

“Looking into what they did, I could see the relationship to maintaining factory equipment,” he said. Aschenbrenner now supervises maintenance activity on plant industrial equipment in Oklahoma. “The military is full of guys, who have a variety of technical skills.”


SOURCE:  CNBC

Why I, a Former GOP Senator, Will Vote for Obama

Picture

By Larry Pressler
October  9, 2012

As a combat veteran of two tours in Vietnam with twenty-two years of service as a Republican member of the U.S. House and Senate, I endorse President Barack Obama for a second term as our Commander-in-Chief. Candidates publicly praise our service members, veterans and their families, but President Obama supports them in word and deed, anywhere and every time.

As a Vietnam vet, one of the reasons I support President Obama is because he has consistently shown he understands that our commitment to our servicemen and women may begin when they put on their uniform, but that it must never end.

This decision is not easy for any lifelong Republican. In 2008 I voted for Barack Obama, the first time I ever voted for a Democrat, because the Republican Party was drifting toward a dangerous path that put extreme party ideology above national interest. Mitt Romney heads a party remaining on that dangerous path, proving the emptiness of their praise as they abandon our service members, veterans and military families along the way.

What really set me off was Romney’s reference to 47% of Americans to be written off – including any veteran collecting disability like myself, as a post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) veteran.

Behind closed doors with his donors, Romney made clear he’d write off half of America – including service members and veterans – because, as he said “I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility for their lives.” But there’s no greater personal responsibility than to wear your country’s uniform and defend the rights we all enjoy as Americans. We don’t sow division between “us” versus “them.” The Commander-in-Chief sets the bar for all to follow and fight for the entire country. Mitt Romney fails that test. As a veteran I feel written off.

Just as revealing is what Romney actually says publicly. As a former Foreign Service Officer, I find it offensive that Romney, Congressman Paul Ryan and their Republican Party are politicizing the death of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other brave Americans who lost their lives in Libya. Being Commander-in-Chief requires a resolve and steadiness that’s immune to politics and fear mongering. Mitt Romney fails that test.

And along with high-profile Republican surrogates, Romney and Ryan are pandering to election-year politics rather than focusing on pending cuts to military spending. Strategy should drive our military priorities, not party purity.

We are a nation at war – the longest war in our nation’s history – and we must remember the sacrifice that so many have given for the protection of our country and our values. That’s why it’s so surprising that Republican nominee Mitt Romney has given five speeches on foreign policy – and will be giving another one today – and has yet to outline any plan to end the war in Afghanistan or bring our troops home. That’s unacceptable for anyone running to be Commander-in-Chief.

President Obama ended one war, is ending another and meeting our national security needs with support of our military leaders. He’s laid out a clear plan that would reduce the deficit and prevent the mandatory military spending cuts that no one wants. But today’s Republican Party, including Ryan who voted for the deal that would trigger the cuts, is willing to bring our country’s defenses to the fiscal cliff – just so a multimillionaire doesn’t have to pay a single extra penny in taxes. And the real lack of leadership? Failing to own up to your role in racking up a record debt from two unpaid wars and two massive unpaid for tax cuts. Mitt Romney leads the party that fails this leadership test.

And as former member of the U.S. Senate Budget Committee, the Senate Finance Committee and Chairman of the then Commerce Committee, I came to know the federal budget in detail. I’m disappointed that just as our troops are returning home after a decade of war, Romney and Ryan might gut by up to 20 percent investments in the Department of Veterans Affairs – and even suggest privatizing the veterans’ health care. Again, they would short change our national security and the education, health care and employment benefits our veterans have earned and deserve just to cut taxes for the wealthiest Americans.

Let’s be clear, Romney and Ryan would be disastrous for America’s service members, veterans and military families. Public praise rings hollow when you fail to mention an ongoing war in accepting your party’s nomination to be president, or veterans in a speech to the Veterans of Foreign Wars, a so-called jobs plan or in a budget that should be a blue print of our nation’s values.

Meanwhile President Obama recognizes our sacred trust with those who serve starts when they take their oath and never ends. He’s enacted tax credits to spur businesses to hire unemployed veterans and wounded warriors. He implemented and improved the post-9/11 GI Bill, the largest investment in veterans education since the original GI Bill over sixty years ago. He’s proposing a Veterans Jobs Corps that would put returning service members to work as police officers, firefighters and first responders. As part of his achievable plan to keep moving our country forward, the President would use half the savings from ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to help pay down our debt and invest in nation building here at home, putting Americans back to work – including our veterans – fixing our roadways and runways, bridges and schools.

And something that hits close to home, President Obama also secured the largest increase in VA investments in decades so our veterans get the care and benefits they earned, like treatment for PTSD and traumatic brain injury. As someone with service-related PTSD, I meet with younger veterans weekly to help them through the treatment and transition to a productive civilian life. It makes a difference for them knowing their President has their back.

That’s the difference in this election. In word and deed anywhere and every time, President Obama never forgets that standing by those who serve is the heart, soul and core value of this country. As a life-long Republican, I stand by him as he stands by all of us, putting national allegiance ahead of party affiliation. I endorse President Obama for reelection in 2012.

BEGIN YOUR COMMENT BELOW


Made in America, Again: Why Manufacturing Will Return to the USA

Made in America, Again: Why Manufacturing Will Return to the USA

For over a decade, deciding where to build a manufacturing plant to supply the world was simple for many companies. China was the clear choice with its seemingly limitless supply of low-cost labor, an enormous, rapidly developing domestic market, an artificially low currency, and significant government incentives to attract foreign investment. Read more

China Needs Its Own Dream

Picture


On Nov. 8, China is set to hold the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party. We already know who will be the next party leader: Vice President Xi Jinping. What we don’t know is what matters: Does Xi have a “Chinese Dream” that is different from the “American Dream?” Because if Xi’s dream for China’s emerging middle class — 300 million people expected to grow to 800 million by 2025  — is just like the American Dream (a big car, a big house and Big Macs for all) then we need another planet.
Spend a week in China and you’ll see why. Here’s a Shanghai Daily headline from Sept. 7: “City Warned of Water Resource Shortage.” The article said: “Shanghai may face a shortage of water resources if the population continues to soar. … The current capacity of the city’s water supply was about 16 million tons per day, which is able to cover the demand of 26 million people. However, once the population reaches 30 million, the demand would rise to 18 million tons per day, exceeding the current capacity.” Shanghai will hit 30 million in about seven years!

“Success in the ‘American Dream,’ ” notes Peggy Liu, the founder of the Joint U.S.-China Collaboration on Clean Energy, or Juccce, “used to just mean a house, a family of four, and two cars, but now it’s escalated to conspicuous consumption as epitomized by Kim Kardashian. China simply cannot follow that path — or the planet will be stripped bare of natural resources to make all that the Chinese consumers want to consume.”

Liu, an M.I.T. graduate and former McKinsey consultant, argues that Chinese today are yearning to create a new national identity, one that merges traditional Chinese values, like balance, respect and flow, with its modern urban reality. She believes that the creation of a sustainable “Chinese Dream” that breaks the historic link between income growth and rising resource consumption could be a part of that new identity, one that could resonate around the world.

So Juccce has been working with Chinese mayors and social networks, sustainability experts and Western advertising agencies to catalyze sustainable habits in the emergent consuming class by redefining personal prosperity — which so many more Chinese are gaining access to for the first time — as “more access to better products and services, not necessarily by owning them, but also by sharing — so everyone gets a piece of a better pie.”

That means, among other things, better public transportation, better public spaces and better housing that encourages dense vertical buildings, which are more energy efficient and make shared services easier to deliver, and more e-learning and e-commerce opportunities that reduce commuting. Emphasizing access versus ownership isn’t just more sustainable, it helps ease friction from the differences between rich and poor. Indeed, Juccce translates Chinese Dream as “Harmonious and Happy Dream” in Mandarin. (“Green” doesn’t sell in China.)

Chinese are more open to this than ever. A decade ago, the prevailing attitude was, “Hey, you Americans got to grow dirty for 150 years. Now it is our turn.” A couple of weeks ago, though, I took part in the opening day of Tongji University’s Urban Planning and Design Institute in Shanghai and asked students whether they still felt that way. I got a very different answer. Zhou Lin, a graduate student studying energy systems, stood up and declared, with classmates nodding, “You can politicize this issue as much as you want, but, in the end, it doesn’t do us any good.” It is not about fairness anymore, he said. It is in China’s best interest to find a “cleaner” growth path.

To say China needs its own dream in no way excuses Americans or Europeans from redefining theirs. We all need to be rethinking how we sustain rising middle classes with rising incomes in a warming world, otherwise the convergence of warming, consuming and crowding will mean we grow ourselves to death.

China’s latest five-year plan —  2011-15 — has set impressive sustainability goals for cutting energy and water intensity per unit of G.D.P. All of these goals are critical to the greening of China, but they are not sufficient, argues Liu. With retail sales growing 17 percent a year since 2005 and urban incomes up 150 percent in the last decade, “the government must also have a plan to steer consumer behavior toward a sustainable path,” adds Liu. “But it doesn’t yet.” 

So Xi Jinping has two very different challenges from his predecessor. He needs to ensure that the Communist Party continues to rule — despite awakened citizen pressure for reform — and that requires more high growth to keep the population satisfied with party control. But he also needs to manage all the downsides of that growth — from widening income gaps to massive rural-urban migration to choking pollution and environmental destruction. The only way to square all that is with a new Chinese Dream that marries people’s expectations of prosperity with a more sustainable China. Does Xi know that, and, if he does, can he move the system fast enough? So much is riding on the answers to those questions.