Business Publication #3 – Fortune Small Business
This article interested me because it was talking about H1N1 in the work place. I work at a restaurant, and that is one of the areas that the article mentions relating to the opening statement, “Almost half of America's workers can't take paid sick leave. With swine flu cases on the rise, that problem could hasten the pandemic's spread. This quote really makes the article connect”. Often, the people who are working in the most contact with the public are the ones who are not receiving sick pay. Without sick days, people who can’t afford to miss any little bit on their paycheck will go to work sick and infect others. Businesses have to look at the long term not the short term. Employers can also reduce the spread of infection in the workplace, by providing no-touch trashcans and hand sanitizer and assigning a "workplace coordinator" for flu issues. The federal guidelines also call for encouraging employees to work from home if necessary, and for "flexible, non-punitive, and well-communicated" leave policies. I think it is a really smart business decision to do that because it would be easier to have one or two people gone at a time opposed to a whole floor being sick. However, as I believe every business should allow sick days I think the minimum should be 3 days, or however long H1N1 takes to not be contagious, and the rest up to the discretion of the company so they can still function and make profit.
Business Publication #3 – The Australian
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/business/story/0,28124,26145579-5017997,00.html
I thought that this article was interesting because it showed how Nike, the world's largest sportswear company, is dealing with the economy and actually preventing loss in its first quarter. Their method is cost cuts. They plan to do this by keeping “inventories lean and work to steal market share from weaker competitors as it waits out the tough economy,” not necessarily closing down stores. The company faces a threat by tough competition from growing rival Under Armour. They pose a threat by winning over “shoppers looking for functional -- rather than purely stylish -- athletic wear”. I didn’t even think of Under Armour as a threat to Nike, but it makes a lot of sense now. Also in the Molson-Coors presentation he talked about brand. The quality of the brand is what will ultimately make a product sink or swim. The article suggests that Nike operates better than its competitors, but some of their competitors are barely keeping their heads above water, which is interesting to think about if Nike is really even doing that well if we are comparing them to companies that are practically failing.
No comments:
Post a Comment