• Workers and companies are trying non-traditional job benefits to combat the rising cost of living.
• Housing assistance, student loan repayments, and commuting support are increasingly popular.
• Unconventional benefits could also entice remote workers back to the office.

As Americans deal with the rising cost of living, more companies and workers are rethinking the types of job benefits that are most important.

Recent surveys have shown that some workers prefer non-traditional job benefits such as housing assistance and help with commuting costs over things like extra vacation time. Additionally, companies are getting creative with their benefits packages so that can help both the business and the employees, such as matched contributions to help pay off student loans in place of retirement benefits and adoption assistance, said John Newcome, vice president and senior consultant at the benefits administration firm Kelly Benefits.

"Employees want a holistic approach to benefits that address their overall well-being, including work-life balance, mental health support, and financial guidance," Newcome told Business Insider. "Standard benefits, like medical, dental, or vision care, are typically included in most employee benefits plans. However, many employees now seek more specific benefits."

The most direct form of housing assistance can be in the form of rental or down payment assistance, which Newcome said more companies are starting to implement, especially among public entities, such as major universities, public school districts, and even the US federal government. However, there are other more creative ways to help with home ownership, he added.

For example, a company can guarantee a loan to help secure a lower interest rate for an employee or even share ownership of a house with the worker, which they can buy out over time.

Walmart is one example of a company offering housing assistance to employees. When qualified workers buy a new home or refinance a house, Walmart will help with the process and pay part of the closing costs.

Elon Musk's tunneling company, Boring, announced plans in 2023 to build a 110-home subdivision for employees near the Austin suburb of Bastrop. The homes are expected to be offered as lease to own, with prices below market rate and close to facilities for Boring and other Musk-led businesses, Tesla and SpaceX.

Non-traditional perks can be chosen to help with more immediate needs

Other non-traditional perks on the rise include some voluntary benefits that can lower or eliminate living expenses, said Newcome. These include family planning benefits, such as help with fertility procedures or adoption costs, along with supplements to basic health insurance, including mental health support and even pet insurance.

Student loan repayment assistance is another benefit growing in popularity, said Newcome. In some cases, workers can choose this benefit and pause other benefits such as retirement contributions.

"With workers of all ages repaying student debt, student loan assistance should be a key consideration in the enhancement of employee benefit programs," Newcome said.

One way companies are offering student loan assistance is similar to a 401(k), in which the company makes matching contributions to the student loan each month based on how much the employee pays.

In cases where employees can choose between student loan help and retirement contributions, it can help keep the company and the workers from having to take on additional benefits costs.

To be sure, there can be downsides to accepting these perks. Many Americans are facing a retirement crisis without enough saved up for their post-work lives. Postponing retirement savings in favor of more immediate needs could just be trading one problem in and creating a bigger one later.

In addition, some of these perks, such as supplements to health insurance, might be offered as optional with an added cost. If taken, the employee faces potentially lower after-tax, take-home pay.

Non-traditional benefits could also convince workers to rethink remote work

Rethinking employee benefits could also be the key to enticing remote workers back to the office.

In a survey of 1,020 employers and workers about office perks, performed by the bonding and insurance company JW Surety Bonds and published in January, 47% of respondents said they would be willing to return to the office if housing benefits were offered. Additionally, 69% said they would be willing to change their job or career for employer-based housing benefits.

Additionally, 43% said they would take less vacation time in exchange for help with housing costs, and 30% said they would prefer housing assistance over a pay raise.

Similarly, providing employees with commuting assistance could be key to luring more workers back to the office in a post-pandemic world, according to a survey of 1,038 US adults and remote employees performed in February by the cloud communications company Ringover.

When asked which perks would convince them to give up remote work, the top response was "paid commute," with 83.2% of respondents picking that as an important incentive.

As the landscape of employee benefits evolves to meet the changing needs of the workforce, companies are becoming more innovative.

from All Content from Business Insider https://ift.tt/ZY9yCq5
via IFTTT

• Steve Dalton and Sydney Sauber left California for a lower cost of living in Massachusetts.
• Dalton and Sauber appreciate Worcester's cultural diversity and intellectual opportunities.
• They estimate their $560,000 Worcester home would sell for over $2 million in the Bay Area.

Steve Dalton, 56, and his partner Sydney Sauber, 58, were ready to leave the Bay Area of California after nearly two decades.

Sauber was homesick for the Northeast, where she lived for much of her life, though Dalton had never lived anywhere outside the Bay Area. After deliberating staying on the West Coast, they settled on a historic home in Worcester, Massachusetts, the state's second-most-populous city.

The cost of living in Worcester is lower than in the Bay Area, and they've found the city accessible for Dalton's mobility challenges. Worcester also has the intellectual and artistic opportunities both were looking for, and they valued its cultural diversity. Dalton said they "still pinch ourselves over how lucky we are."

"It was really important to us to live in a neighborhood that you could walk in and that physically you would be able to easily go across the street with your bare feet and talk to your neighbor," Sauber said. "People walk their dogs and just hang out in their yards without super loud cars rushing by you."

According to the Census Bureau's most recent tabulation of American Community Survey data, 818,000 people left California between 2021 and 2022, compared to 475,800 who moved in. About 18,500 moved from California to Massachusetts during this period. A Business Insider analysis reveals the typical mover leaving California makes $53,500 and is a millennial or Gen Zer, with many stating they're moving for lower living costs, slower paces of life, or political reasons.

Leaving California for Massachusetts

Dalton, an IT professional for a university, was born and raised in the Bay Area. He grew up in Marin County, directly north of San Francisco, before moving to Contra Costa County further east.

Sauber, a cognitive scientist and learning style specialist, was born in Puerto Rico, then moved around the country to New York, Texas, and Florida. She eventually settled in New England, spending time in Northampton and Salem, Massachusetts, as well as Dover, New Hampshire.

Sauber then moved to California to work on a book, living on a fishing boat in the East Bay. While there, she met Dalton, and they moved into a condo in San Pablo two years later in 2010.

They enjoyed living near San Francisco and Oakland, though both knew the condo was temporary. Sauber said San Pablo didn't have the academic and artistic community she sought, and it was unsustainable for her to have a home office at the condo.

As they reached retirement age, the couple wanted to purchase a house, though they knew that would be implausible in the Bay Area with their budget. As a couple with a single income of just over $100,000, they would need to look quite far from the Bay to purchase their dream home. Zillow estimates the average home price in San Pablo is $605,000.

"As it was, homes we were considering in the North Bay at the time would have required us to spend our entire savings and equity on a down payment and still carry a pretty high mortgage," Dalton said.

Sauber also thought she would have a larger client base as an educational consultant in a New England city than in California. Both also felt moving out of California would mean they would be less affected by the climate crisis, as they worried wildfires or infrastructure failures would damage their future retirement home.

"We lived four miles away from the Chevron oil refinery, and we learned several times, over and over again, that San Pablo is a sacrifice zone," Sauber said, referring to an area permanently changed by environmental damage. "We knew that it was not going to be one of the places that people are going to run to service if something big happens near or in it."

As Dalton is a paraplegic from a spinal cord injury, he wanted a larger space that would allow him to live more comfortably — and would have enough room for a live-in caregiver as he ages.

Settling on Worcester, Massachusetts

They made two "reconnaissance trips" to Worcester, a city of slightly over 200,000 residents. One of their concerns was adjusting to the snow, and one of their trips was during a 10-inch snowstorm. Still, they calculated there would only be a few house-bound days in Massachusetts due to the snow, compared to roughly 25 days a year in San Pablo due to poor air quality.

The couple bought their home in Worcester in May 2022, spending $560,000 on the 100-year-old 2,000-square-foot home — they sold their California home for $480,000. Their neighborhood mostly comprises single-family homes built 75 to 125 years ago. The four-bedroom house is walking distance from parks and grocery stores, and it's a short drive from downtown and many high-quality medical facilities.

"We're able to use some of the money we had in savings to make other investments in the home, make it more accessible for me, and also do some future-proofing, like with solar panels," Dalton said.

He estimates a similar home in the Bay Area would cost over $2 million. They pay less than $2,000 a month for their mortgage, and they had extra money from savings to install a new roof. They also installed an elevator, and their solar panel system will zero out their electricity bill for the next three decades.

Dalton said he's been comforted by the city's healthcare resources. They live close to a few hospitals and specialized care facilities that are not as crowded and rushed as in California.

Dalton said despite his disability, he enjoys taking advantage of nature. He misses the whitewater rafting and adaptive rock climbing of California, though his part of Massachusetts has plenty of parks and nature trails.

As a city with 10 colleges and universities, Worcester is "lively with a rich intellectual life," Dalton said. The couple said Worcester has shocked them with how creative and community-focused the city has become. They've appreciated the city's public gardens, poetry associations, and art projects that have made the city feel inviting.

"Worcester is a city that is doing a lot to progress as a city," Dalton said. "In the not-too-distant past, they had the Red Sox minor league team make their home here, and they have a very nice stadium for that. They're building a lot of nightlife and cultural stuff around that. They also have revitalized their theater and performing arts district."

They've also found the people warm and open, despite stereotypes they heard about New Englanders being standoffish. The community is ethnically and socioeconomically diverse as well. They acknowledged that some longtime residents have noted an opioid crisis has rocked the city or have been concerned about gentrification, though Dalton and Sauber said Worcester is maybe the best place they've lived.

"I didn't want to live in a super expensive, posh neighborhood; I wanted a place that felt safe but also had opportunities to get to know other people from other cultures and backgrounds and at the same time be of service to each other," Sauber said.

Have you recently moved to a new state or left the United States for a new country? Reach out to this reporter at nsheidlower@businessinsider.com.

from All Content from Business Insider https://ift.tt/iaLHS06
via IFTTT

• Manhattan prosecutors say Trump has violated his gag order at least 10 times.
• Trump may be found in contempt Tuesday morning for his posts on Michael Cohen and Stormy Daniels.
• He faces fines of $1,000 per violation and even jail, though experts say the latter is less likely.

Donald Trump faces a contempt-of-court finding and thousands of dollars in fines if the judge in his New York hush-money trial finds him in contempt of court for repeatedly violating his gag order.

A contempt hearing is set for 9:30 a.m. Tuesday, the second day of testimony.

Openings were Monday. Prosecutors told a seven-man, five-woman jury that Trump conspired to falsify business documents to hide a $130,000 hush money payment that silenced porn star Stormy Daniels on the eve of the 2016 election.

Trump's attorneys countered that the hush money was a legal expression of democracy.

Since the gag order took effect on April 1, Trump has persisted in attacking jurors and two key witnesses, Michael Cohen and Stormy Daniels, prosecutors complained in seeking the GOP frontrunner be fined.

Under New York law, Trump faces a maximum of $1,000 per violation.

The judge could also pose any amount of jail time as a punishment and deterrent against future violations. But prosecutors have not asked that Trump be jailed.

Experts said a warning of jail is far more likely than even a brief stint behind bars.

Manhattan defense lawyer Murray Richman says he's had plenty of experience with gag orders in his 60 years in practice — during which he has repped organized crime figures "from every one of the Five Families," he told Business Insider.

"There is almost always a gag order to protect the parties, the witnesses, the case," he said.

The judge will not order Trump jailed even if he does find he repeatedly violated the gag, Richman predicted.

"It's like he's challenging the judge to do something," Richman said.

"But the reality is, if the judge incarcerates him, he becomes a hero. If he puts him in for five days, three days, one day — they'll publish that picture around the world. And then he becomes president."

Still, last week, prosecutors asked that the judge, New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan, warn Trump that future violations could get him thrown behind bars.

"We're asking the court to remind the defendant that further violations of the court's order could result in jail time," a prosecutor, Christopher Conroy, told the judge last Monday.

Trump's gag order bans Trump from making public statements about jurors and witnesses that could interfere with the trial.

Despite the gag, at least 10 attacks have been posted to Trump's Truth Social account and his official campaign website this month,

Most of the posts cited by prosecutors target Cohen, calling him a "serial perjurer."

One of Trump's gag-violating Truth Social posts went live shortly after 9 a.m. on April 15, the first day of jury selection, Conroy complained to the judge last week.

"It's entirely possible that it was done while in this courthouse," the prosecutor said.

Another of Trump's "Truths," from April 10, called Daniels and Cohen "two sleaze bags who have, with their lies and misrepresentations, cost our country dearly."

Other Truth Social posts cited by prosecutors attacked a former prosecutor on the case, and the jury pool in general.

On April 18, Trump quoted Fox News host Jesse Watters claiming that "Liberal Activists" were lying to the judge in order to infiltrate the jury.

"The defendant has demonstrated his willingness to flout the order," Conroy told the judge last week.

"He has attacked witnesses in the case in the past. He has attacked Grand Jurors and jurors," Conroy said.

Also last week, Merchan showed little patience for Trump lawyer Todd Blanche for claiming that Trump had to fight back against Cohen and Daniels.

"The two witnesses themselves have been talking about their testimony in this case, President Trump's ongoing reelection, and just generally disparaging threats constantly," Blanche complained.

"He's responding to salacious repeated attacks by these witnesses," the lawyer added.

Merchan did not sound sympathetic to Blanche's argument when he ordered the defense to respond in writing to the prosecution's claims.

"When you respond," the judge said, "direct me to any portion in the original gag order or the subsequent gag order that ways that there is an exception to the gag order if Mr. Trump feels he is being attacked."

The judge added, with some sarcasm, "I don't recall inserting that anywhere in either gag order."

from All Content from Business Insider https://ift.tt/lQSVo9Y
via IFTTT

• Employment is projected to increase for software developers, a high-paying job, from 2022 to 2032.
• BI looked at employment projections and median annual wages to create a ranking of similar jobs.
• Nurse practitioners ranked No. 5 on this list of high-paying and fast-growing jobs.

Spoiler alert: Software developers tops Business Insider's list of the top 20 high-paying and fast-growing jobs in the US.

To get the top 20 job titles, Business Insider looked at jobs projected to see employment increase between 2022 and 2032 and had median annual wages greater than the median annual wage for all jobs in the US, which was $48,060.

The annual wage estimates used were part of the release of May 2023 Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics estimates published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics earlier this month. Projection data also comes from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

We calculated the geometric mean for all the jobs that both pay above the overall median and were also projected to see employment climb. That means our list is ranked based on a combination of growth and pay. For example, while the median wage for the No. 2 job is a bit higher than for the No. 1 job, the projected growth in number of positions for the No. 1 job is so much more than No. 2 that it rose to the top spot in the ranking.

We only looked at jobs with specific annual wage estimates. We excluded titles that contained "All Other" in their occupation titles, such as "Computer Occupations, All Other," given that label doesn't specify one role.

While several tech-related jobs were among the top 20, some healthcare roles were highly ranked. Nurse practitioners ranked No. 5, for instance.

Below are the top 20. Pay estimates, employment projections, and the "typical education needed for entry" stated for each job below come from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

20. Software quality assurance analysts and testers

Median annual wage: $101,800

Projected employment increase: 40,800

Typical education needed for entry: Bachelor's degree

19. Personal financial advisors

Median annual wage: $99,580

Projected employment increase: 42,000

Typical education needed for entry: Bachelor's degree

18. Heavy and tractor-trailer truck drivers

Median annual wage: $54,320

Projected employment increase: 89,300

Typical education needed for entry: Postsecondary nondegree award

17. Physician assistants

Median annual wage: $130,020

Projected employment increase: 39,300

Typical education needed for entry: Master's degree

16. Postsecondary health specialties teachers

Median annual wage: $105,650

Projected employment increase: 50,200

Typical education needed for entry: Doctoral or professional degree

15. Computer systems analysts

Median annual wage: $103,800

Projected employment increase: 51,100

Typical education needed for entry: Bachelor's degree

14. Accountants and auditors

Median annual wage: $79,880

Projected employment increase: 67,400

Typical education needed for entry: Bachelor's degree

13. Project management specialists

Median annual wage: $98,580

Projected employment increase: 54,700

Typical education needed for entry: Bachelor's degree

12. Information security analysts

Median annual wage: $120,360

Projected employment increase: 53,200

Typical education needed for entry: Bachelor's degree

11. Data scientists

Median annual wage: $108,020

Projected employment increase: 59,400

Typical education needed for entry: Bachelor's degree

10. Market research analysts and marketing specialists

Median annual wage: $74,680

Projected employment increase: 116,600

Typical education needed for entry: Bachelor's degree

9. Lawyers

Median annual wage: $145,760

Projected employment increase: 62,400

Typical education needed for entry: Doctoral or professional degree

8. Management analysts

Median annual wage: $99,410

Projected employment increase: 95,700

Typical education needed for entry: Bachelor's degree

7. Computer and information systems managers

Median annual wage: $169,510

Projected employment increase: 86,000

Typical education needed for entry: Bachelor's degree

6. General and operations managers

Median annual wage: $101,280

Projected employment increase: 147,300

Typical education needed for entry: Bachelor's degree

5. Nurse practitioners

Median annual wage: $126,260

Projected employment increase: 118,600

Typical education needed for entry: Master's degree

4. Registered nurses

Median annual wage: $86,070

Projected employment increase: 177,400

Typical education needed for entry: Bachelor's degree

3. Medical and health services managers

Median annual wage: $110,680

Projected employment increase: 144,700

Typical education needed for entry: Bachelor's degree

2. Financial managers

Median annual wage: $156,100

Projected employment increase: 126,600

Typical education needed for entry: Bachelor's degree

1. Software developers

Median annual wage: $132,270

Projected employment increase: 410,400

Typical education needed for entry: Bachelor's degree

from All Content from Business Insider https://ift.tt/rC3Q0X7
via IFTTT

• Houston's basic-income program faces shutdown after Texas' attorney general labels it "unconstitutional."
• The program offers 18 monthly payments of $500 to low-income families for housing and groceries.
• Uplift Harris starts payments April 24, but its future remains uncertain amid GOP opposition.

When Delwin Sutton learned he had been accepted into a guaranteed basic-income pilot in Houston, he signed a lease on a new apartment.

He spent almost all of his savings on his April rental fees and plans to spend his first $500 basic-income payment from Uplift Harris on rent for May: his new two-bedroom costs him $1,083 a month. He knows the GBI money will help him breathe a little easier.

The 51-year-old works in a warehouse in Harris County, which includes Houston. His hours vary, he said, and he doesn't always make enough to afford rent and groceries for himself and his wife. With GBI, Sutton hopes to become more financially secure and save money for the future.

"It's truly a blessing because people need to understand — when you live paycheck to paycheck, it's horrible," he told Business Insider. "It's almost debilitating."

The program randomly selected 1,928 eligible families out of 82,500 applicants — an acceptance rate lower than Harvard or Yale — for monthly payments, distributing $500 no-strings-attached to help them afford housing and groceries for 18 months.

Set to begin payments on April 24, the pilot is at risk of being shut down as Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton challenges the program for being "unconstitutional."

On April 9, the Texas Attorney General's office sued Harris County by calling Uplift Harris an "unlawful" program that "redistributes public money in a manner that violates the Texas Constitution." The filing noted that the state Constitution prohibits public funds from being given away "to benefit individuals." A district judge denied Paxton's request to pause the Houston-area program last Thursday.

Paxton appealed the case to the state Supreme Court last Friday. Uplift Harris' program will begin payments in the meantime, according to the office of Precinct 1 Commissioner Rodney Ellis.

For participants, there's a lot at stake.

If Sutton doesn't receive his payments, he worries he could lose his new apartment. The idea of the program being canceled sends him into "panic mode."

"I'm scared that if I don't get this money, I'm going to be homeless," he said.

Uplift Harris participants hope the program will make them more financially stable

Guaranteed basic income is an increasingly popular solution to combat poverty in US cities. The programs differ from traditional Social Services because participants receive cash to spend as they choose instead of on specific categories. GBI participants have previously told BI that they used the funds to secure housing and food, pay off debt, and afford school supplies for their children.

"We don't tell people that they have to spend the money on anything in particular, we don't put conditions on it," said Dustin Palmer, US country director at GiveDirectly, a nonprofit helping administer the Houston-area pilot. "We really trust people to do what they need, with the cash to get on their feet, or basic needs, whatever they would like to do."

Most applicants live in high-poverty ZIP codes with household incomes below 200% of the federal poverty line, which is $31,200 for a family of four. Like some other pilots nationwide, the program received $20.5 million in funding from the American Rescue Plan Act, which financially supported Americans during the pandemic.

"We've had folks who are in really unstable housing situations who want to use the money to get into stability," Palmer said. "We know from a lot of research that people use the money for rent and housing, as this is a major expense for folks, and those expenses have ballooned."

Jay Carter, 37, told BI he "can't wait" to start receiving his cash payments and plans to use the money to pay for his storage unit and PO box. He is also hoping he can pay for a haircut, his phone bill, and some basic cleaning supplies.

He isn't currently employed and is between apartments. Carter said basic income will help him find financial stability, and he hopes to help his mom pay bills while he temporarily stays with her and applies for housing.

"I can plan my life better," he said. "It's good to see your future 18 months from now — I want to accomplish everything that I need to do."

With the support he gets from Uplift Harris, Carter said he hopes to find secure employment, save money for the future, and work toward affording a car. He might even go back to school, he said.

Texas is a leader in GBI programs, but it still faces political opposition

Texas has been a key state for GBI pilots, with recent programs in Austin and San Antonio. Still, Republican lawmakers continue to challenge the programs, calling them "socialist" and worrying that the money could make low-income families too dependent on the government.

Paxton is opposing the Houston-area program because he said the Texas Constitution prohibits the state's counties and cities from granting public money to aid individuals, especially since the pilot does not limit what participants spend the money on.

Harris County Attorney Christian D. Menefee responded, "When corporations are given taxpayer dollars, Republican leaders in Austin call it 'economic development.' When governments use federal dollars to actually help people, Republican leaders in Austin call it socialism."

Paxton has not sued other municipalities in Texas that have launched basic-income pilots. The Austin Guaranteed Income Pilot distributed $1,000 monthly to 135 low-income families, many of whom allotted money to housing, food, and other daily costs. San Antonio's basic-income pilot, which reported similar results, gave participants $5,108 total over 25 months. El Paso County also committed to distributing $500 monthly cash payments to about 80 families.

However, Paxton's challenge to the Houston-area program mirrors GOP efforts to ban basic income in other states. The Arizona legislature is currently hearing a bill that could ban GBI, South Dakota Republicans are hoping to prohibit local governments from offering basic income, and Iowa lawmakers banned basic income programs across the state last week.

With the future of Uplift Harris' basic-income program unclear, Sutton said he worries about affording his rent and groceries. He wishes more people understood that — in his financial situation — a little bit of help goes a long way.

"Everybody that asks us for assistance doesn't want it for the rest of their lives like Mr. Paxton is trying to make it seem," Sutton said. "I want to work, I want to be better. If it's taking everything that I have just to survive, I will never be able to be better."

Have you benefited from a guaranteed basic income program? Are you willing to share how the money has impacted your life? Reach out to these reporters at allisonkelly@businessinsider.com and nsheidlower@businessinsider.com.

from All Content from Business Insider https://ift.tt/l5a9fKC
via IFTTT

Saudi Arabia's ambitious Vision 2030 transformation has already brought significant change and growth to the nation's economy and society, with technology, tourism, and sports gaining global attention. Now Saudi Arabia has set its intentions on advanced manufacturing, and one company, Alat (Arabic for "machine"), is taking the lead to make the country a new global center for advanced and sustainable industry.

Driven by a $100 billion investment from Saudi Arabia's Public Investment Fund (PIF), Alat was founded to become a world-class enterprise focused on developing electronics and advanced industrial production in Saudi Arabia, while pioneering industry 4.0 technology and the use of clean energy in manufacturing.

AI and industry 4.0 technology presents an unprecedented opportunity for manufacturers to transform their operations. The market for industry 4.0 technology is expected to reach $327.8 billion by 2030, as manufacturing companies deploy AI, robotics, and other technologies for automation, increased efficiency, and other benefits. At the same time, manufacturers are looking to improve sustainability in their operations, and are looking for greater resilience and flexibility in their supply chains.

All of these factors require significant long-term investment, as well as expertise to unlock the most value from advanced technology, sustainability practices, and new supply chain strategies. Many companies are looking for partnerships that will bring investment capital and know-how around the future of industry.

Alat has already partnered with several global leaders in advanced manufacturing to work together on these challenges. By partnering with these world-leading companies, and R&D centers in Saudi Arabia, Alat is developing best-in-class manufacturing expertise that will benefit all its current and future partners. By fostering best practices around industry 4.0 and the use of the latest manufacturing technology, as well as introducing new approaches focused on sustainable operational and supply chain resilience, Alat and its partners are leading the way on the transformation of industry.

One of the first deals announced by Alat is a strategic partnership with SoftBank Group, the Japanese investment company, which will focus on the next generation of industrial robots. The partnership will build industrial robots based on intellectual property developed by SoftBank Group and its affiliates. These robots will be capable of performing a diverse range of tasks with only minimal additional programming. The robots are ideally suited to industrial assembly and similar applications in manufacturing and production environments.

Equally important as these robots is the facility where they will be produced. Alat and Softbank will create a "lighthouse factory" — a facility where industry 4.0 technology will realize substantial gains in production, agility, scalability, and efficiency, and which will be an example for the entire manufacturing sector. By deploying the latest technologies and developing operating procedures to maximize the returns from these technologies, Alat intends to raise the bar for next generation manufacturing, with lessons and solutions that can be applied across all its operations and businesses.

Alongside advanced technology, another critical element of Alat is the use of clean energy and sustainable practices to become a leader in sustainable manufacturing. Saudi Arabia has a long history of heavy industry around petrochemicals, but the advanced technology and electronics manufacturing spearheaded by Alat will benefit from being a greenfield industry, free of legacy infrastructure. Production facilities will be able to leverage Saudi Arabia's solar power potential to tap into clean energy sources — energy sources that are currently being developed through over $266 billion of investment in clean energy.

Alat will also implement sustainability best practices into every facet of its processes, which integrate the most up-to-date industry 4.0 thinking to enable sustainable manufacturing. This approach will be combined with next-generation innovations in the production phase to include remanufacturing, material substitution, recycling, and yield loss reduction.

Through the combination of advanced technology, best practices, and commitment to sustainability, Alat is reimagining manufacturing, for a better tomorrow.

ALAT: Transforming KSA through Sustainable Technology

This post was created by ALAT with Insider Studios

from All Content from Business Insider https://ift.tt/5gFxTQi
via IFTTT

• People are already losing interest in Apple's Vision Pro, according to Bloomberg.
• Apple's $3,500 virtual reality device is a niche device that has drawn mixed reviews. 
• Despite an initial sales surge, the device has been criticized for its impracticality.

Some tech devotees are already losing interest in Apple's Vision Pro just months after the futuristic headset hit the market.

The long-awaited virtual reality device prompted long lines at Apple stores and an initial surge in sales back in February, but the early buzz around the accessory has quickly waned, Bloomberg's Mark Gurman reported Sunday.

That's bad news for Apple, which spent eight years and billions of dollars creating the Vision Pro. The device boasts a hefty $3,500 price tag, making it a certified specialty item and keeping it out of reach for many of Apple's typical customers.

The Vision Pro is unlikely to make the company any real money for years still to come, according to Gurman. And the number of people seeking demos for the device has dipped since February, according to Gurman.

Apple did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.

The device sold 180,000 units alone during a January preorder weekend.

Apple has seemingly responded to the growing disinterest by boosting marketing around the device, evidenced by the Vision Pro's prime placement on the company's website.

Reddit forums dedicated to the device include frustrated users complaining the device is impractical in everyday life and uncomfortable to wear. The Vision Pro requires its wearer to attach a battery, start the device, and move through its interface each use.

Virtual reality devices in the past have faced similar struggles in keeping buyers interested and engaged after the novelty wears off, Gurman said.

Business Insider's Jordan Hart foresaw some of those issues back in February, writing that she was running out of reasons to wear the Vision Pro after just one week. Gurman shared a similar sentiment, saying he's gone from wearing it regularly to just once or twice a week because it's "too cumbersome to use on a daily basis."

The reported decreased interest in Apple's shiniest new toy comes as the company juggles a multitude of other setbacks and struggles, including faltering revenue sources and regulatory skepticism.

from All Content from Business Insider https://ift.tt/n8ipEIw
via IFTTT

Austin Whitt has seen a lot in his six years as a real-estate agent. He weathered the pandemic in Tennessee, slinging homes in the Nashville area and training new Realtors as they piled into the industry. But twice in the past month, Whitt has encountered a rare sight: a buyer without an agent. In his years of listing homes for sale, Whitt had come across this kind of rugged individualist only once before. Sure, the recent run-ins may have been a coincidence, a blip. But given the seismic changes underway in real estate, Whitt can't be certain.

Thanks to a series of multibillion-dollar class-action lawsuits, the real-estate industry is in the throes of its biggest upheaval in half a century. The National Association of Realtors, the powerful industry group that sets the ground rules for buying and selling homes in America, recently negotiated a $418 million settlement with aggrieved home sellers who sued the organization over the commissions they'd paid to real-estate agents. The deal could open the door for more consumers to bargain down those fees or nudge some people looking for a new home to forgo an agent. Given their revolutionary nature, the proposed rule changes — which still need approval from a federal judge — have also prompted a flood of questions about the future of homebuying.

"It's a very fluid situation," Whitt told me.

Buying a home has never come with a handy road map. But one thing is clear: It's about to get a lot murkier. With that in mind, I've been asking experts how buyers can prepare for whatever world comes next. Their answers illuminated the potential pitfalls, of which there are many. They also highlighted new ways to come out ahead — and maybe save thousands of dollars along the way.

So, you're ready to turn your late-night Zillow scrolling into a proper home search. Before you begin the journey in earnest, you should ask yourself: Do I want to hire an agent? There's a good chance the answer is yes — buying a home is a complicated, emotional transaction that usually benefits from an experienced set of eyes. Last year, 89% of buyers enlisted the help of a licensed agent, according to the NAR. Even Steve Brobeck, a senior fellow at the Consumer Federation of America and an outspoken critic of the real-estate industry, told me he wouldn't buy a home without one.

But the conventional wisdom — that it doesn't cost a buyer anything to hire an agent and that you need one to secure your dream home — is crumbling. Sites such as Zillow and Redfin have democratized the home search, while the recent lawsuits have exposed the billions of dollars that US consumers pay their agents every year. Some critics argue that buyers could be better served (and save a lot of cash) by instead hiring a lawyer for a few hours to look over contracts and make sure everything is in order.

Most buyers probably don't have that kind of confidence, especially first-timers. If you fall into that camp, the next step is to figure out exactly which kinds of services you'll need. Maybe you feel certain that you can find and tour homes on your own but want someone to manage the transaction and make sure you don't skip over any crucial to-dos. Or maybe you want a more involved agent who can send you listings, guide you through homes, help you line up inspections and a mortgage, and haggle with the seller over every last detail — someone whose "whole job is to be nosy," as Sabrina Brown, a broker in North Carolina, told me. Those are two very different job descriptions, but they've traditionally commanded pretty much the same fee.

Discerning buyers could upend that status quo. Once you figure out what you want out of an agent, you'll have to figure out how much you're willing to pay for them. Prepare to have a frank conversation with prospective agents. For decades, homebuyers have coasted on the blissful assumption that using an agent is free. This illusion was maintained by the roundabout way in which money trades hands: The typical buyer never pays their agent directly; instead, the seller pays their own agent, who then uses part of that commission check to pay out the buyer's agent. Ultimately, the commission comes out of the money the buyer sent to the seller, but the transaction is hidden.

Sellers agreed to this method because they didn't want to risk having their homes passed over by buyers' agents who might "steer" their clients away from properties that didn't offer compensation to the other side or offered sums lower than standard commission rates, usually 5% to 6% of the total home price. And because buyers weren't paying their agents directly, they usually didn't see much reason to bargain down the fee. In fact, they might not even know their agent's rate until they're at the closing table, if they ever found out at all. This model has proved lucrative for agents. Buyers and sellers typically pay more than $100 billion a year to the real-estate industry, a massive wealth transfer that Brobeck estimated could be cut down by about $30 billion annually if commissions were in line with America's peers like the United Kingdom or Australia.

The recent lawsuits, which accused the NAR and some of the country's largest brokerages of conspiring to keep agents' commissions unfairly high, could signal the start of a new era. As part of its deal to settle the cases, the NAR agreed to prohibit sellers' agents from making offers of commission to buyers' agents on the multiple-listings services, the local databases where agents can browse homes and see how much they stand to collect on a deal. The organization also agreed to require its members to negotiate commissions with their buyer clients in writing before so much as showing them a home.

But even with these changes, the settlement, which is set to go into effect in July if approved, doesn't contain a single rule that would kill off the 6% commission on its own. A deal like this simply can't solve all the industry's problems in one fell swoop, Prentiss Cox, a law professor at the University of Minnesota, said recently in a public forum he convened to discuss the coming changes. In many instances, agents might proceed with business as usual, and consumers could still end up paying today's standard commission rates. In other words, it'll be up to savvy buyers to find ways to make this deal work in their favor.

The NAR has always argued that commissions are negotiable. That may be true in theory, but buyers rarely take advantage of that right. It's worth a shot, though — even if the seller is the one who pays out both agents after the deal closes, the money you bring to the table is ultimately footing the bill. If you negotiate a lower fee, you could get some money back from your agent in the form of a rebate after the sale closes. Alternatively, you might be able to bargain down the home price by tens of thousands of dollars if the seller knows they'll have to set aside less money for agent commissions.

Maybe you're the kind of buyer who wants someone to hold your hand through every step of the process, in which case the traditional 2.5% to 3% for your agent might be a good deal. But if you've found a home and just need help making sure the deal doesn't go off the rails, you stand a greater chance of scoring a lower fee from your agent. There are also various discount brokerages that charge lower commission rates, even flat fees, in exchange for a more bare-bones approach.

The Realtors keep saying, 'Oh, we deserve our 3% fee.' Well, maybe you do. Convince the buyer that you do.

Bear in mind that an agent isn't obligated to lower their commission in the same way that a lawyer doesn't have to cut down their hourly fee — even if you ask nicely. But they may be inclined to do so if they really want your business. And if not, well, there are many other agents out there who would probably love the chance to help you with your home purchase. Interview agents as if you were a boss hiring them for a job, which is exactly what you're doing. Don't shy away from the tough questions. Jack Ryan, a cofounder and the CEO of the discount brokerage Rex Real Estate, suggested one query: Ask your agent why they're worth 3% of the home's sale price — after all, that's equal to $15,000 on a $500,000 home. Some will have a great answer, others, not so much.

"The Realtors keep saying, 'Oh, we deserve our 3% fee,'" Ryan, whose company shuttered in the midst of a legal battle with the NAR and Zillow, told me. "Well, maybe you do. Convince the buyer that you do. And if you can add 3% of value, great. But why are you claiming you know what you're worth relative to what the market says you're worth?"

This brave new world of homebuying won't guarantee easy wins for consumers. The path to homeownership is still lined with plenty of hazards.

For instance, while listing agents — those who represent the seller — are set to be prohibited from offering commissions to buyers' agents via the MLS databases, they can still disclose commissions pretty much anywhere else: on their websites, on a phone call, or even in person at an open house. A seller just wants to get the best price for their home as quickly as possible, Rob Hahn, a longtime industry consultant, said during the University of Minnesota forum. To make sure their house is seen, the standard commission might be a necessary pill to swallow. On the other hand, sellers in hot markets might feel like they could save a lot of money by offering less to a buyer's agent — maybe 1% instead of the typical 2% or 3% — or even nothing at all. If people are falling over themselves to get into your home, why dangle money in front of buyers' agents just to get them through the door?

This is why buyers can no longer afford to remain in the dark about how their agents get paid and how much. If sellers aren't paying out commissions to buyers' agents, buyers themselves could end up on the hook. To avoid this kind of surprise and lay out the terms of their representation, buyers' agents will have to get their clients to sign what's known as a buyer-agency contract. Some states already require these contracts, but a lot of agents in other places never use them: Only 41% of buyers last year said they signed a buyer-agency agreement, according to the NAR. This might be a more prudent move than buyers even realize — most of the agreements floating around today were created by state Realtor associations and are therefore designed to protect the interests of the agent, Wendy Gilch, a consumer advocate, told me.

"Even if someone presents you with some printed form, that doesn't mean it's set in stone," Gilch, who focuses on transparency in real estate through her company, Selling Later, told me. "You can decline it and be like, 'No, I'm not going to sign that. Change this; change this."

Buyer-agency contracts don't have to be tilted in favor of Realtors. In fact, if used fairly, they can provide transparency and clarity for both buyers and their agents. Under the terms of the recent NAR settlement, these contracts would have to include a few things. First, a buyer and their agent would need to agree to the maximum amount of compensation that the buyer's agent can receive — this could be something like a certain percentage of the sale price, an hourly rate, or a flat fee if the agent is willing to accept that. If the buyer and their agent agree to, say, 2% of the sale price, the agent can't accept any more than that. The buyer's agent would also have to update the client, in writing, on how much commission they stand to receive from the house their client is pursuing. On the whole, these look like positive steps for consumers.

It's not the solution. It's the first step in attacking this problem. And it's been spectacularly successful in being the first step.

As always, though, the devil is in the details. For example, what happens if the seller isn't willing to pay the buyer's agent's commission? In many cases, the template forms provided by the state Realtor associations say the buyer is responsible for covering the difference between what the buyer's agent expects to receive and what the seller is offering to pay. This could leave buyers on the hook to pay thousands of dollars out of their own pockets. A report from the Consumer Federation of America pointed out other risks: Buyers might not have a good way to get out of the contract if they're unsatisfied with their agent, or they might unwittingly agree to pay "junk fees," such as an administrative fee, which can cost anywhere between several hundred dollars and nearly $1,000.

One more scenario to consider: What happens if a seller is offering 3% of the price to a buyer's agent, but you and your agent agreed to a max of 2%? In most states, the buyer's agent can technically just rebate that extra money to their client. These kinds of rebates may be rare these days, but they could become more common after this settlement. On the other hand, in a mind-boggling twist, nine states prohibit rebates entirely. That needs to change.

The most important thing for buyers entering this new market, experts told me, is to read the buyer-agency contract carefully or consider hiring a lawyer if you have concerns. Realtors may rely on templates handed down from their state associations, but the terms aren't ironclad.

If all this sounds intimidating, rest assured: Even the people who live and breathe this stuff are struggling to make sense of it. David Dworkin, the president and CEO of the National Housing Conference, called the settlement "the most opaque and complicated agreement I have ever encountered." Dworkin told me he feared the deal would favor higher-income buyers and sellers who might be able to claim larger discounts from agents who stand to make a bunch of money off them regardless. But the bigger issue is that nobody has any idea how buyers and sellers would react to these proposed changes.

Depending on how you look at it, that's either aggravating or exciting. Regardless, the lawsuits have undoubtedly exposed market corruption, said Cox, the University of Minnesota law professor. All this focus on commissions could hasten a new era of experimentation in real estate, in which buyers' agents offer varying levels of service or commission rates in a bid to win clients. The revolution is only beginning; recently, the Justice Department got clearance to reopen its investigation into the NAR's practices, meaning more changes could be on the horizon. In this sense, the mere fact that more people are talking about commissions is a win.

The advice I got from experts can be boiled down to a simple mantra: Get in on that conversation. Talk to your agent early on in the process about the services you want, and make sure you're on the same page about their commissions.

"It's not the solution. It's the first step in attacking this problem," Cox said of the recent settlement. "And it's been spectacularly successful in being the first step."

James Rodriguez is a senior reporter on Business Insider's Discourse team.

from All Content from Business Insider https://ift.tt/VO5cTyu
via IFTTT

• Steve Cadigan has led HR teams at top companies for over three decades.
• He has seen how performance-improvement plans (PIPs) often fracture relationships between managers and employees. 
• The better alternative to PIPs allows employees to mutually agree to separate from the company.

Over the past three decades, I've witnessed various approaches to performance-improvement plans (PIPs) as an HR executive across five different industries and three countries.

Often, the traditional approach to PIPs — slapping them on employees who are underperforming without offering sufficient support — can feel punitive rather than constructive to many employees, fostering an environment of fear and mistrust.

But PIPs often fail to achieve their intended outcomes for a variety of reasons — from inadequately prepared managers to breakdowns in communication between managers and employees to subjective judgments of performance.

In my experience, the primary reason for the failure of PIPs lies in the irreparable fracture they create in the relationship between the employee and manager. Once the PIP process begins, this fracture in trust is seldom repaired. The atmosphere becomes palpably tense, and trust begins to erode.

PIPs lead to an irreparable fracture in the relationship

Recent stories of employees feeling unfairly targeted and demoralized and complaints of mishandling of PIPs have illuminated the complexities and challenges inherent in performance management.

These stories serve as cautionary tales, highlighting the potential pitfalls of traditional PIPs and the need for organizations to rethink their approach to managing underperformance.

Even if an employee successfully meets the objectives outlined in the PIP, the underlying tension and strain on the relationship often persist, adversely impacting productivity and morale not only for the manager and the employee, but for the entire team.

I've rarely seen managers more tense than when addressing a PIP. These conditions don't set the stage for a productive process. At their core, PIPs should reflect an organization's commitment to achieving high performance. They should identify areas for improvement, set clear expectations, and provide a roadmap for progress.

A better approach involves choice

From 1998 to 2004, I was an HR executive at Cisco Systems, where I encountered a novel approach to the traditional PIP process.

Prior to my arrival, Cisco had recognized that something was broken in the PIP process. The HR team conducted a thorough analysis of PIPs across the company and made a fascinating discovery: most individuals placed on a PIP left the company within a year, regardless of whether their performance improved.

They spoke with many of the employees who survived their PIP and improved their performance yet still chose to leave, and the story they heard had a similar refrain. The employees felt their managers did not really support them, they no longer felt they were in a safe work environment, and many felt humiliated and deeply hurt by the process.

Looking at the data and listening to employees, the HR team developed a new approach that involved choice. Employees who were not performing to an acceptable level were offered two options:

• Enter a PIP and try to improve, or

• Mutually agree to separate from the company and receive more severance than they would if they failed the PIP.

By presenting employees with this alternative path, Cisco empowered them to make decisions aligned with their personal circumstances. This approach also alleviated stress for managers, enabling them to focus on other priorities. The conversations became more constructive, and employees appreciated being given a choice rather than feeling cornered into a dead-end PIP.

Challenge conventional practices

In the years since leaving Cisco, I've introduced this alternative approach to other organizations, contributing to healthier cultures and more constructive environments.

Performance evaluation is inherently subjective, and no process can eliminate all conflicts or unexpected reactions. However, offering employees a choice rather than a one-way ticket to a PIP can lead to more positive outcomes and healthier work environments.

As HR professionals and organizational leaders, it's our responsibility to challenge conventional practices and explore innovative solutions. By rethinking performance management and embracing alternative approaches, we can create a culture of trust, transparency, and continuous improvement where both employees and organizations thrive.

Steve Cadigan is a talent advisor to leaders and organizations around the world. He specializes in helping firms build talent strategies for the modern workplace.

from All Content from Business Insider https://ift.tt/42tGAaZ
via IFTTT

• Samu Hällfors is the CEO of Framery, an office soundproofing business in Helsinki. 
• Hällfors mirrors how he runs his company in line with Finnish values like shared responsibility. 
• He said people in Finland are hard working and candid, with strong boundaries between work and home.

This as-told-to essay is based on a transcribed conversation with Samu Hällfors, the CEO of Framery in Helsinki. It has been edited for length and clarity.

In 2010, I worked at Logia Software Oy in an open office space. My friend and I were tired of constantly listening to our boss speak on his phone. It was impossible to focus on our work. When we brought it up, our boss responded: "Well, buy me a phone booth."

The only problem was that there wasn't one on the market. We gave up working for the software company that day, and Framery was born.

Framery is a 14-year-old company headquartered in my homeland of Finland that offers soundproof solutions for offices. Our office is in Helsinki.

As the CEO of a company in the world's happiest country, I mirrored my company's values and policies with many of the Finnish cultural aspects I admire. Here are some ways I'm running Framery in line with those values.

Mutual responsibility makes people feel safe

There are multiple parallels between Finnish society and how we've built culture at Framery, starting with psychological safety. A few years ago, Readers' Digest published a report about a social experiment where 12 wallets were intentionally "dropped" in various cities around the world.

In Finland, 11 of those 12 wallets were returned to their owners. In Finnish society, people feel a general level of safety because the culture is focused on the collective responsibility to care for and be honest with each other, regardless of the relationship or how well we know someone. We are a close-knit community.

I try to encourage this attitude at work. I never allow my employees to feel that mistakes or failures are their fault.

Mistakes still happen. When they do, it's usually followed up with a discussion on how to remediate for the future. As long as the root cause of the mistake is not laziness or negligence, then the responsibility is shared, and there is no place for blame.

I want my employees to feel safe exploring new ideas, taking risks, and making mistakes.

Work-life balance is a priority

The Finnish workday is usually eight hours, with a half-hour lunch break, so people have time for hobbies and leisure activities after work. In Finland, we believe there is a time to rest and work; regardless of what we are doing, we put our complete attention and concentration into it.

I make it a point to visibly leave the office toward the end of the working day and to enforce strict rules around maximum working hours so that employees can enjoy work-life balance.

Sometimes projects may require extra hours, but employees are encouraged to balance their workweek by taking time off or long weekends.

Extreme candor for the benefit of the group

The Finns are very honest and direct people. Though this may come across as naive in other cultures, we value communicating candidly, independent thinking, and bearing responsibility accordingly.

Large corporations usually have layers of bureaucracy that determine who gets access to what information. That leads to a loss of shared purpose, the idea that people within the organization are all aligned to the same mission.

At Framery, everyone gets to participate in our strategy deep dives. We share highly classified information with every employee so they have equal footing and more oversight on their day-to-day tasks. I always host the sessions, and there can be no more than 12 participants at once, so there's an opportunity to ask questions and debate.

There's the obvious risk of leaked information, but I trust my employees. I think there's a bigger risk in not telling people important information that will be helpful in their daily tasks. Plus, disclosing private employer information is illegal, and Finns understand their responsibilities toward their employer.

Celebrate independent hard work

Companies have recently become more stringent with return-to-office policies and employee tracking tools. I view this as micromanagement, which destroys the individual's sense of autonomy and purpose.

Finnish culture is deeply rooted in forward-thinking and preparation, stemming from their historical need to brace for harsh, protracted winters.

This ingrained mindset fostered a strong work ethic among the Finns, born from the understanding that diligent effort paves the way for long-term career success and longevity.

I think our employees know better than their CEO on how to structure their personal workday. Teams can decide when they want to come into the office and how they plan to execute their work. They are mandated by themselves, not by management.

from All Content from Business Insider https://ift.tt/4b0BKpl
via IFTTT