11 ms·
Starbucks' new CEO will supercommute 1k miles from California to Seattle
- wkat4242 2y agohttps://www.starbucks.com/responsibility/planet/ https://www.starbucks.com/responsibility/planet/ Yeah right....
- Freak_NL 2y agoThis reminded me of Pascal Husting, a director of Greenpeace (!) who commuted from Luxembourg to Amsterdam by flying up and down several times a month. It completely soured my opinion of Greenpeace, and I've avoided donating ever since. I just looked up the aftermath, and it turns he stopped flying his commute in 2014, and switched to the train in response to the criticism. It's interesting that a poorly judged action could do quite a lot of long term reputational damage, caused in part — I suspect — by initially defending that choice.
- jajko 2y agoThats the thing with reputation - hard to gradually win, trivial to lose for good if you do something completely against the values you try to project as your core ones. Greenpeace specifically has little sympathies - they often fulfill the definition of eco-terrorists. Its like those idiots spraying beautiful old masters paintings worth tens of millions to 'send strong ecological message so people wake up'. Well, network protocol failed on that sending, you just painted yourself as arrogant aggressive a-holes I want to have absolutely nothing with, harming the cause significantly.
- pjc50 2y agoWhile I'm defending Greenpeace, I'm convinced that Extinction Rebellion are an 'op' run by UK security services because of how counterproductive they are. Especially after the revelations of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Lambert_(undercover_police_officer) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Lambert_(undercover_police...
- ben_w 2y agoMy gut says otherwise, given the apparent decentralised structure and international range, making them difficult for a secret hand to guide while also being more prone to any one local group having their own Leeroy Jenkins. That said, I've seen the inside of the American Green Party, and what I saw had vibes of someone deliberately following the CIA guide to organisational sabotage — though even then, also a lot of amateurs with no idea how small and irrelevant they are and thus obliviously attempting to directly change the whole world rather than focus on what they actually have the power to influence, and I suspect that was where the majority of their mistakes came from. (Also a few genuine experts who were busy trying to sort out the internal issues, but "busy" tends to also mean "quiet").
- SunlitCat 2y agoWhich makes you wonder, in what kind of world do those people live to not see the irony of being the Greenpeace CEO and traveling several times a month by using a airplane?
- wkat4242 2y agoYeah just like this here, except this guy will travel 3200km 3 times a week!
- stavros 2y agoWhat soured my opinion of Greenpeace is how they kept us burning fossil fuels for decades longer than we should have been, with their anti-nuclear propaganda. I don't know if that was paid for by fossil fuel companies, but it sure really suited them. Greenpeace did untold damage to the climate by campaigning against nuclear (and, implicitly, for fossil fuels, as there weren't other economically competitive eco-friendly choices back then).
- pjc50 2y agoGreenpeace anti-nuclear campaigning came from the "peace" in their name: the inextricable link of nuclear energy with nuclear weapons. Their campaign against nuclear weapons testing was met with considerable violence and carried out at significant personal risk, culminating in the French government carrying out a terrorist attack in New Zealand resulting in the death of a Greenpeace member. You cannot accuse them of being paid actors in that era. https://www.greenpeace.org/aotearoa/about/our-history/bombing-of-the-rainbow-warrior/ https://www.greenpeace.org/aotearoa/about/our-history/bombin... There was also a lot of campaigning against the practice of dumping nuclear waste at sea. I think we're long enough past Chernobyl to have forgotten the impact of that on Europe, but perhaps if a stray shell hits the Zaporizhzhia or Kursk nuclear reactor we'll be reminded of that again.
- orwin 2y ago> perhaps if a stray shell hits the Zaporizhzhia or Kursk nuclear reactor we'll be reminded of that again. We don't use graphene reactors anymore, so at worst we will experience a Fukushima-level event. And by that I mean what was expected from Fukushima in the worst-case scenario which did not happen (still, people in the exclusion zone were forcibly moved out of their houses)
- wkat4242 2y agoThe pollution from Fukushima into the ocean was huge. It's not only about human death counts. And yes the same reactors as in Chernobyl are still in operation today: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RBMK#List_of_RBMK_reactors https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RBMK#List_of_RBMK_reactors . Including in Kursk where fighting between Russia and Ukraine is currently going on. This isn't an imaginary situation. They were mitigated to avoid this particular issue but I wouldn't consider them 'safe' without a containment building etc. And it's not graphene, it's graphite. Graphene is a nanomaterial that didn't exist for production during the envisioning of RBMK reactors. It was only theoretical and produced from 2004 onwards.
- shiroiushi 2y agoThe guy's clueless, but to be fair to him, I just looked up the travel time between Luxembourg and Amsterdam by train and it's around 7.5 hours, so I can see why he wouldn't want to travel that way when a plane is much faster. Even traveling that distance by car is faster! (~4.5h) Honestly, that kind of travel time by train is just shameful. Meanwhile, just over the border, traveling between various mid-size German cities by ICE train is very quick, and roughly 2x as fast as driving. Even between Brussels and Amsterdam is reasonably quick (~2h on Eurostar), so I guess the problem is just Luxembourg? If that guy needed to go to work in Amsterdam, the proper solution would have been to move.
- ionwake 2y agoCompare a graduate, wearing a suit, walking around streets in the summer, trying to get work at any company that will hire him for programming, then any cafe that will just let him serve drinks, and still not get hired. Compare this smart kid, who might have not got a perfect grade due to unforeseen circumstances, smart , intelligent, willing to do anything, for a job that pays $5 an hour in his field. Compare this 21 year old, to another man, who is CEO , of a company, that somehow exists solely to protect the planet, through humanitys good will. Now imagine that 21 year old, not moving to amsterdam, to live in a flat, to do his best for not just his peers, and respect to the company, but for the "good side" of every well meaning, often poor citizen willing to help improve the planet. Imagine this kid saying, nah I rather fly in a jet, that helps destroy the environment, and inconvenience my peers, and cost everyone involved with me and the company just so I can be closer to my garden. It doesn't come down to whether the CEO train timetable is slightly out of whack. Its literally everything. Some humans exist and grew on a plane of existence so different to the reality of the greater majority, that its often too hard for them to even comprehend it. I'm not bitter really, I retired young. But I could never bring myself to be that CEO, even now that I have money. This isn't a humble brag I'm just explaining how alien some peoples lives are, including most of you, with your 6 figure salaries compared to the "norm". Just a friendly reminder. /rant
- whywhywhywhy 2y agoI mean if you dig into any of these "non-profits"/NGOs the behavior seems entirely par for the course and it's more expected that they be filled with people like that.
- seydor 2y agoi bet he will ban plastic straws to compensate
- bArray 2y agoExactly. We're all expected to suffer the inconvenience of soggy straws to offset this guys near daily commute. And it's not just this. Near all elites have unsustainable lifestyles that we are expected to offset by changing our daily habits.
- alecco 2y agoTaylor Swift demands Jack Sweeney stop tracking her jet - The Washington Post - June 2, 2024 https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2024/02/06/taylor-swift-jet-tracking-legal-threat/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2024/02/06/taylor-...
- scarab92 2y agoPrivate jets should be required to burn biofuels or purchase carbon offsets. If you can afford a private jet, you can easily afford to make it carbon neutral.
- maxehmookau 2y agoTaxes on jet fuel for private usage should be 3x higher too. It's not real money to these folks; I doubt he'd even notice.
- harha 2y agoIf you consider the per seat cost compared to commercial, I don’t think making it a bit more expensive will move the needle.
- maxehmookau 2y agoExactly. And the old story of "oh well the rich will take their money elsewhere" won't work. They need to stay in the US, that's the whole point. Maybe there will be a point where it works out cheaper to fly to another country to fuel up though. I'm sure some tax policy folks could figure this out better than I. Tax the ~~rich~~ ultra-wealthy, and their thoughtless damage to our environment. It's about as close to a victimless tax-rise as could ever exist.
- dauertewigkeit 2y agoOne wonders. If they did a search of the Seattle metropolitan area, how many candidates would they find that would have the chops to do, just as good, if not a better job than this one CEO? I understand why you cannot just pick a random person to be a CEO. But in theory, there are probably many people who have the leadership skills and industry insight to be really good CEOs of Starbucks, and probably for a much cheaper compensation package. It's just the bureaucracy of having to somehow justify the selection of a CEO to the board, forces the company to select from a tiny pool of CEOs many of them with a checkered record. One of the many ridiculous things that we do as a society.
- notimetorelax 2y agoDon’t discount the opportunity cost. Starbucks might have lost many times more if they delayed the CEO change. The new guy saved Chipotle so he’s a very good bet.
- I-M-S 2y agoCan you recommend a good writeup how he saved Chipotle?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- alephnerd 2y agoPushing and Enhancing the Loyalth Program: https://www.pwc.com/us/en/library/case-studies/chipotle.html https://www.pwc.com/us/en/library/case-studies/chipotle.html Revamping their Digital Marketing: https://www.pwc.com/us/en/library/case-studies/chipotle-digital-personalization-at-scale.html https://www.pwc.com/us/en/library/case-studies/chipotle-digi... Hard to find third party sources on how he revamped logistics after the Salmonella and E Coli scandals
- wkat4242 2y ago> One wonders. If they did a search of the Seattle metropolitan area, how many candidates would they find that would have the chops to do, just as good, if not a better job than this one CEO? The thing with CEOs is that you don't really buy performance. A lot of them are actually not very good at their job. But you buy their old boys network.
- thefz 2y agoIf only there was a way to communicate with persons not in the same room.
- greatgib 2y agoBut as a CEO, he should be in a good position to change the stupid hybrid remote policy of Starbucks if he wishes so, no?
- bdjsiqoocwk 2y agoNo, because then grunts would be slacking at home.
- nytesky 2y agoSo wait, is he considered remote/hybrid or he’s just a regular employee whose commuting by jet?
- Mistletoe 2y agoAlso who is paying for the three times a week personal jet flights? Edit: Nevermind the article says corporate jet. Silly me. Imagine Starbucks even paying the gas for a serf to commute to their job, much less the vehicle.
- fragmede 2y agothe article didn't go into numbers, but $20k each way, or $40k each day is a reasonable estimate of how much it'll cost to have that commute. 3x per week is $120k/wk; * 50 is $600k/ yr. assume his salary is the $1.6 + $3.6 million, or $5.2 million (from the article), or 11% of his salary. if you made $100k/yr, that would be like spending $11k/yr on gas driving to and from work, or $900/month. which is 6x as much as $150, which is very roughly what I spend on gas commuting per month.
- ExoticPearTree 2y agoHe also goes 3 days per week at the office. The fact that he has a plane for that is irrelevant. It is the same as blaming VPs for having drivers and they don't do their own driving to work. The higher you are on the corporate ladder, the better the perks. And if the board of Starbucks acquiesced to his demands, I don't see why everybody is up in arms about it. I'm happy that the people that I work for pay for my gas to come to work :)
- egormakarov 2y agothis "supercommute" word has some positive vibes to it, how about "will shittycommute" or something like that instead
- 6c696e7578 2y ago"super-pollute" As most things CEO's do it will be a flippant display that will last about as long as a lettuce out of the fridge. However, those below will be expected to show evidence the rules are followed because there's nothing quite like cascading punishment, because that's the fun part of being a shitty boss, watching people suffer because they say so. Look for teams that are flexible about remote work, those are the bosses you want to work for in this current day and age. Every time I read one of these "back on site to do work" style posts, yet we'll offshore at the drop of a hat, it infuriates me as I can't see sense in the logic.
- redwood 2y agoIs the McDonald's of coffee. Why do people go there at all
- SkyPuncher 2y agoIf I’m local, I avoid it. On the road, I know it’s a consistent product. Also, in my area, it’s better than a lot of coffee shops. Definitely not the best, but better than probably 90% of them
- madeofpalk 2y agoLots of people go to McDonalds.
- grishka 2y agoThe good thing about these global chains is that you see the logo anywhere in the world and you know exactly what to expect inside. Other that that, yes, Starbucks (and Stars Coffee it became here in Russia) is just a massively overpriced coffee shop. There always are cheaper and better ones.
- Rastonbury 2y agoMcDonald's is probably the McDonald's of coffee
- schmookeeg 2y agoBecause the local organic free-range kenyan pour-over place that serves me coffee in a biodegradable urn along with a kale-based "eco brownie" and some indie hip-hop playing at volume 11 doesn't have a drive-thru, obvs :)
- wkat4242 2y agoIt's because of familiarity. It's why we have Starbucks in Spain at all, because of all the tourists. Because Starbucks coffee totally sucks compared to real Spanish coffee :) What Americans consider coffee is more like a milkshake containing some coffee flavour :') And that's very hard to find in Spain where the espresso/"cafe solo" rules (or cortado with a bit of milk) so tourists end up gravitating to Starbucks.
- diwank 2y agoNo mention of anything about the carbon offset Starbucks should make up for?
- PedroBatista 2y agoBoy, his Toyota Camry will be put to the test huh? Can't way for him to present the ESG section on the quarterly earnings call. It would be better than most comedy specials on Netflix.
- chakintosh 2y agoProbably more reliable than a jet
- cebert 2y agoNo remote work for thee, but remote work for me.
- alephnerd 2y agoStarbucks wanted/needed a new CEO because the previous one was mismanaging the company, and Niccols is the best Restaurant CEO in the industry, having lead Chipotle's turnaround. Niccols was in a position to make his own demands, and Starbucks had no choice but to comply. Niccols even became chairman of the Starbucks board (it's very rare for a CEO to also be the chairman of the board at this size of a company). Already he's paying off by jumping SBUX stock from $75 to $94 just based on the announcement alone. If you're truly indispensable and critical to the operation of a company, they will let you work however you want. Niccols also has to deliver, otherwise he'll be ousted like Laks was after barely a year.
- zoklet-enjoyer 2y agoI guess their stock price is doing well, but have you been to a Chipotle lately? The stores here are understaffed and food quality seems to have gone down from what I remember from a decade ago when I went there frequently.
- alephnerd 2y ago> I guess their stock price is doing well Yep. Went from $200 to a height of $3000 under Niccols before they initiated a stock split. That's the job of a CEO at this size of an organization. Starbucks and most other restaurant companies are majority owned by larger funds, and Elliot Investment Management is one of the major shareholders in SBUX now. I agree with you about the degradation of Chipotle's burritos, but for companies like this, the share is the product that matters, not the burrito or coffee. Most people go to fast food for convenience, not the experience, and the margins are so low that it's difficult to be cash-flow positive, making investor relations extremely critical.
- sam_lowry_ 2y ago
- zoklet-enjoyer 2y agoSeattle is a beautiful city. Why not just move there?
- ExoticPearTree 2y agoBecause some people prefer to live in other places that they like more :)
- abenga 2y agoThen take a job where you live?
- ExoticPearTree 2y agoIt doesn’t work like that. Where you live and where jobs are is not always the same place. Just like people working for FAANG (for example) commute one hour each way because where they live there are no jobs that they can take. Your rationale is that for example people living in NJ should not work in the city…
- zoklet-enjoyer 2y agoAn hour commute is quite different from flying from California to Washington every week.
- buzzert 2y agoSeattle is great, but have you been to Newport Beach? I wouldn’t want to leave either.
- NexusGS 2y agoI am sure that Starbucks will find a way to offset those emissions that the Jet will release to the planet, right? If they need him so badly (and I don't doubt about his skills or his ability to deliver) they can arrange a schedule with him that will get him a few continuous days per month in a hotel in Seattle, a few days per month travelling abroad (which is part of the JD) and a few days from home. But commuting with a jet is outrageous.
- scarab92 2y agoGiven it’s Starbucks, it’s almost certain that they will be using biofuels or have a carbon offset in place. Given that, is there a problem with using a jet in this way?
- pjc50 2y agoThat's a very big "given" with no evidence. ESG statements are the sort of thing that should be regarded with extreme skepticism, as are carbon offsets.
- NexusGS 2y agoPersonally, my biggest concerns are environmental impact and a waste of money that could have been used in many other ways (lower product prices, improve products, increase employee compensation etc). I have no reason to doubt that the new CEO deserves his compensation package but we don't deserve all those emissions in our environment. And I am sure many employees deserve a few extra dollars per hour for their hard work!
- zoklet-enjoyer 2y agoI doubt that any person needs a compensation package worth tens of millions of dollars per year.
- wkat4242 2y agoYes there is. Offset is not a sustainable method, it just shifts the blame to someone else, and fuels aren't the only CO2 emitted by an airplane (other points are the manufacture, maintenance, logistics etc). Also, you don't really get to choose what you fuel your private plane up with. Most places only provide plain Jet-A1. An airline has the regularity and scale to organise this themselves, a private operation surely doesn't. And most jets aren't certified for 100% biofuel.
- Ekaros 2y agoStarbucks should really work on making their stores remote. Maybe some sort of postal delivery system where prepared ingredients are delivered in customer homes and then they just make them at home. These could be produced by remote workers working from home and then batches shipped point-to-point even.
- ExoticPearTree 2y agoStarbucks mandates that everyone be in the office 3 days a week, so does the CEO. OK, he gets to fly into the office, but it is still a very long commute, probably 2-3 hours each way, so I wouldn't envy the guy that much.
- wkat4242 2y agoWhat bothers me more that he's burning so much fuel for no real reason, just to reinforce this stupid internal rule. That's really the worst reason to do it. Most of starbucks already works "in the office" 5 days a week because they work in a coffeeshop which can't be remote anyway.
- penguin_booze 2y ago> What bothers me more that he's burning so much fuel for no real reason So are we, only that are far less important; and we're aren't paid in millions. Everything can be done from home. But, no: we must commute and "collaborate" the shit out of each other.
- benhurmarcel 2y agoThey’ll also setup a new office near his current home just for him. > Starbucks also notes that it will set up a remote office for Niccol in Newport Beach
- hi-v-rocknroll 2y agoI'm wondering how many corporate campus HQs have (or are near to) runways and how many CEOs live in private aviation communities, e.g., able to fly door-to-door.
- zoklet-enjoyer 2y agoIs he actually flying back and forth 3 times a week? I assume he's flying to Seattle and staying at a company owned condo for 3 days, then back home. That's how the place I work for did it when our CEO lived in Chicago.
- DesiLurker 2y agoI'd bet He wont be beyond a month or so for appearance's sake. then it'll just be remote meeting and maybe a company leased house locally for a day or so to look 'in'. these type of stories do almost no followup.
- rsync 2y agoEnds disguised as means.
- lr1970 2y agoStarbucks commitment to sustainability is a total BS if their CEO commutes from home to work 1000 miles (almost) daily on a private jet. What is his carbon footprint anyway?
- alephnan 2y agoSeems like Chipotle provided private jets too https://www.reddit.com/r/Chipotle/comments/10w0dyg/comment/j7ls5of/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button https://www.reddit.com/r/Chipotle/comments/10w0dyg/comment/j...