The Globe and Mail recently posted an article about Vale, a mining company, closing part of their operations in my hometown.  Thompson, Manitoba is a northern community that was built around a nickel mine, and Vale has announced it will be closing the smelting and refining factories in Thompson.  This will greatly impact the community, for the nickel mine is a primary source of employment.

This closure has to do with Canada’s changing environmental policies, as well as the low nickel prices.  Environmental policies restrict the emissions let out into the atmosphere each year, and the smelting and refining processes emit lots of gases.  However, these policies aren’t working as the government had hoped.  What these restrictions are actually doing is making Vale transport unrefined product out of Thompson via rail or semi, and refined somewhere else in Canada.  Therefore, the same amount of emissions are being let into the atmosphere, as well as the emissions from the transportation of the product.

I believe that this plan to shut down a part of the mine in Thompson is a bad idea because it isn’t solving anything.  The same emissions are going to be polluted, just in a different place.  The policies are just inconveniencing Thompson and Vale by creating more costs and less jobs.

Source: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/vale-potash-puts-saskatchewan-mine-project-on-hold/article27372521/

In Stephanie Burns’ blog post “Why it’s Good for your Business to do Good” on chic-ceo.com, she analyzes why it’s good for businesses to contribute to charities and host charitable events.  In my opinion, Burns makes many strong points that should encourage business owners to get involved.

One point of focus is the fact that holding charity events makes both consumers and employees see the business positively.  Consumers like buying into products or services that have strong ethics, and employees generally respect a boss who cares about the employees as well as the community.  When a business has consumer support, it leads to customer loyalty, and customers tell other people about the great things a business is doing.

Another benefit Burns touches on is the networking and advertising opportunities created through taking part in a charity event.  Customers who would never otherwise see your business as well as other members of the professional community often take part in these events.  When they see your business shares the same values they do, they will most likely think positively of your business.  Connecting with like-minded businesspeople can be beneficial for both parties, setting you up with future potential partners.

Cennedi Mills recently wrote a blog post about the vandalism of the Cereal Killer Café in East London.  The fact that people in the area are getting angry about the business isn’t surprising, but the way the activists expressed themselves in inappropriate.  If the people local to the area dislike the business, they have every right to boycott the business and say whatever they want about it, but they have no right to damage it.

The owners of the Cereal Killer Café aren’t particularly wealthy; they are just trying to make a living through their business.  If they want to sell cereal at outrageous prices in hopes that customers will be naïve enough to buy it, then let them!  There is nothing stopping customers from walking out of the café and into a grocery store, where they can purchase large quantities of cereal for cheaper.

The business model of the Cereal Killer Café is obviously flawed, but that is no reason to put employees, customers, and the owners of the business at risk of being seriously hurt.  The public should’ve just let the business fail, as it would be expected to.  Now, the café is getting much more publicity than it would’ve had it not been vandalized.  The actions of the activists have worked against their intentions, as people felt bad for what the business had been through.  The whole fiasco ended up representing the neighborhood poorly and gained the business publicity(and there’s no such thing as bad publicity).

Sources:

Cennedi Mills’ Blog:  https://blogs.ubc.ca/cmills/2015/10/03/gentrification-in-east-london/

NY Times Article:  http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/29/world/europe/london-cereal-cafe-damaged-by-anti-gentrification-protests-was-unfairly-targeted-owner-says.html?_r=0

Youth homelessness is an undeniable problem in Canadian cities.  Of those youth, the vast majority are unemployed.  HireUp is an organization with plans to change that, in turn decreasing the numbers of homeless youth in Canada.

Their strategy is all about connecting already-existing youth-serving organizations with businesses looking to employ youth.  Employers often stigmatize the integrity of a homeless youth, making it far harder to for these youth to actually find employment.  I think their strategy is a great way to solve more than one active problem in cities of Canada.  When homeless youth have no opportunities to make money, they often turn to crime, and become counter-productive to society.  Giving these kids opportunity to help themselves through getting employed and off the streets is important, and I believe not enough businesses are taking this problem seriously.

In order to live in a productive society, we need organizations like HireUp that are willing to take the initiative, get out in the world and actively help out.  These initiatives can change the futures of many youth, decrease crime rate, and reduce unemployment numbers.  Being homeless is like being trapped with nowhere else to go, and it’s time for more businesses to begin reaching out.

The “one for one” business model can be an extremely effective way to help people in need if it’s done correctly.  However, many companies are missing the mark on providing efficient and useful “one for one” services.

For example, Toms Shoes is a brand that embraces the “one for one” model, but isn’t making an efficient or useful solution to poverty-stricken families.  Yes, by giving away shoes to people who can’t afford to buy their own, Toms is succeeding.  However, the health benefits these people receive from wearing shoes can be provided through cheaper medical vaccinations, as well as health education to the poor.  Along with the inefficient health benefit, Toms shoes are poorly constructed for the environment these people are living in.  Toms are not the most durable footwear option, and paying $50 for ONE pair to be given away to a person in need is immensely inefficient. There is no way Toms cost even a quarter of the retail price to produce, and the money spent on shipping free shoes to developing countries could be spent elsewhere.

Companies like 2 Degrees that give meals to the poor are doing it right.  These companies provide a service that actively solves a problem for those in need, and do it efficiently.  I think companies like Toms should look at these companies that are doing it right, and adapt to a similar business model.

In Peter Breen’s blog post “Reaching a Tipping Point,” he explores how the concept of tipping restaurant servers is a bad idea.  He refers to tipping as “another way to get money out of people,” which is an inaccurate interpretation of what the tipping process means to the food service industry.  Tipping is an essential part of eating in a restaurant to the servers, as many of them are living off the income they receive.

In my experience working as a delivery driver for Boston Pizza, tips provided a huge incentive for myself as well as my co-workers.  The belief behind giving better service to get a higher reward is the reason many employees choose serving as a job.  Large restaurant chains usually pay minimum wage to their workers, and the current minimum wage is below the cost of living in most countries.  Tipping gives the servers money to put food on the table; therefore it is not just “another way to get money out of people.”  These large corporations that own restaurant chains are never seeing the money tips provide for servers, the tip money is getting put into the local economy.  Furthermore, many restaurants also have a “tip pool” system that relies on the assumption every customer tips.  If a server has a table that doesn’t leave a tip, the server must pay out of their own pocket to the tip pool that is redistributed throughout the kitchen workers and hosts.  Restaurant workers are often not in the most financially stable position, and tipping makes their situation a little bit better.

Peter’s Blog: https://blogs.ubc.ca/peterbreen/2015/10/04/reaching-a-tipping-point/