Appointments and Executive Changes

More stories

  • 125 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Starbucks Executive, Prominent in Push Against Union Drive, Will Leave

    by

    Starbucks said Friday that an executive who played a key role in the company’s response to a growing union campaign would leave by the end of the month.In a letter to employees, whom Starbucks calls “partners,” the company’s chief operating officer said that Rossann Williams, the president of retail for North America, would be leaving after 17 years at the company. The letter said the decision was “preceded by discussion about a next opportunity for Rossann within the company, which she declined.”John Culver, the chief operating officer, added in the letter that Ms. Williams “has not only been a fierce advocate for our partners, but she has been a champion of our mission, our culture and operational excellence.”Since December, when a store in Buffalo became the only one of Starbucks roughly 9,000 corporate-owned stores with a union, the campaign has spread rapidly across the country.The union has won over 80 percent of the more than 175 elections in which the National Labor Relations Board has declared a winner, and workers have formally sought elections at more than 275 stores in all.After workers at three Buffalo-area stores filed for union elections in August, Ms. Williams went to the city and spent much of the fall there leading the company’s response to the campaign. She spent many hours in stores, asking employees about concerns they had at their workplaces and even pitching in on tasks like throwing out garbage.But some workers said the presence of such a high-ranking official in their stores was intimidating and even “surreal.”Labor experts also raised concerns that Ms. Williams and other Starbucks officials deployed to the stores could be violating labor laws by intimidating workers and effectively offering to improve working conditions if employees voted against unionizing.The National Labor Relations Board later issued a complaint against the company along these lines, after investigating and finding merit to the accusations.The company denied that it had violated the law and has long said that it is seeking to address operational issues like understaffing and inadequate training, efforts it said had preceded the organizing campaign.In response to a question about whether she or the company might be undermining the conditions for a fair union election, Ms. Williams said in an interview in October that she had no choice but to intervene.“If I went to a market and saw the condition some of these stores are in, and I didn’t do anything about it, it would be so against my job,” she said at the time. “There’s no way I could come here and say I’m not going to do anything.”Mr. Culver’s letter said that Ms. Williams would be replaced by Sara Trilling, who most recently oversaw the company’s operations in the Asia-Pacific region. More

  • 125 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Jerome Powell Confirmed for a Second Term as Fed Chair

    by

    Jerome Powell, whom the Senate confirmed to a second term on Thursday, said allowing rapid inflation to persist would be more painful.Jerome H. Powell, the Federal Reserve chair, said in an interview on Thursday that lowering inflation is likely to be painful but that allowing price gains to persist would be the bigger problem — squaring off with the major challenge facing his central bank as he officially starts his second term at its helm.Mr. Powell, whom Senators confirmed to a second four-year term at the head of the central bank in an 80-19 vote on Thursday, holds one of most consequential jobs in the United States and the world economy at a moment of rapid inflation and deep uncertainty.Consumer prices climbed 8.3 percent in April from the previous year, according to data reported on Wednesday. And while inflation eased slightly on an annual basis, it remained near the fastest pace in 40 years, and the details of the release suggested that price pressures continue to run hot.The Fed has already begun raising interest rates to try and cool the economy, making its largest increase since 2000 when it lifted borrowing costs by half a percentage point this month. Mr. Powell and his colleagues have signaled that they will continue to push rates higher as they try to restrain spending and hiring, hoping to bring demand and supply into balance and drive inflation lower.Mr. Powell suggested Thursday in an interview with Marketplace that an even bigger 0.75 percentage point interest rate increase, though not under consideration at the moment, could be appropriate if economic data come in worse than officials expect.“The process of getting inflation down to 2 percent will also include some pain, but ultimately the most painful thing would be if we were to fail to deal with it and inflation were to get entrenched in the economy at high levels,” Mr. Powell also said. “That’s just people losing the value of their paycheck to high inflation and, ultimately, we’d have to go through a much deeper downturn.”Mr. Powell, who was chosen as a Fed governor by former President Barack Obama and then elevated to chair by former President Donald J. Trump, was renominated by President Biden late last year.Understand Inflation and How It Impacts YouInflation 101: What is inflation, why is it up and whom does it hurt? Our guide explains it all.Inflation Calculator: How you experience inflation can vary greatly depending on your spending habits. Answer these seven questions to estimate your personal inflation rate.Interest Rates: As it seeks to curb inflation, the Federal Reserve began raising interest rates for the first time since 2018. Here is what the increases mean for consumers.State Intervention: As inflation stays high, lawmakers across the country are turning to tax cuts to ease the pain, but the measures could make things worse. How Americans Feel: We asked 2,200 people where they’ve noticed inflation. Many mentioned basic necessities, like food and gas.Though he has been popular among lawmakers for much of his tenure, several Republicans and Democrats voted against the nomination. Senator Robert Menendez, Democrat from New Jersey, cited the central bank’s failure to promote Latino leaders. Senator Richard Shelby, Republican of Alabama, cited high inflation in opposing Mr. Powell, posting on Twitter that “we should not reward failure.”Inflation is likely to be the defining challenge of Mr. Powell’s second term. As Mr. Shelby’s comments suggest, the Fed has been criticized for responding too slowly to rapid price gains last year. Mr. Powell has emphasized that policymakers did the best they could with the data in hand.“If you had perfect hindsight, you’d go back and it probably would have been better for us to have raised rates a little sooner,” Mr. Powell said in his interview with Marketplace. “I’m not sure how much difference it would have made, but we have to make decisions in real time, based on what we know then, and we did the best we could.”With Mr. Powell’s confirmation, Mr. Biden has now appointed four of the Fed’s seven governors in Washington, putting his imprimatur on the central bank at a crucial moment.The Senate last month confirmed Lael Brainard, formerly a Fed governor, as Mr. Biden’s choice for the Fed’s vice chair, an influential position within the central bank.This week, the Senate confirmed two other new Fed governors — Lisa D. Cook and Philip N. Jefferson. Mr. Biden has also nominated Michael S. Barr as the new vice chair for supervision, and his confirmation hearing before the Senate Banking Committee is scheduled for next week.Ms. Brainard and Mr. Powell have long been aligned on policy, and the Fed’s newest governors — Ms. Cook and Mr. Jefferson — indicated during their confirmation hearings that they, too, are focused on fighting inflation. Fed officials view stable prices as a crucial building block for sustainable economic growth.Inflation F.A.Q.Card 1 of 5What is inflation? More

  • 125 Shares199 Views

    in Economy

    Senate Confirms Biden Fed Nominee, Lael Brainard, as Vice Chair

    by

    The Senate voted to confirm one of President Biden’s nominees to the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors, making Lael Brainard the central bank’s vice chair.Ms. Brainard, a Fed governor since 2014 who was originally nominated to the institution by President Barack Obama, was a key architect of the central bank’s response in 2020 as state and local lockdowns tied to the pandemic roiled markets and sent unemployment rocketing higher. She has been a close adviser to Jerome H. Powell, the Fed chair.Ms. Brainard received some bipartisan support, and passed the Senate in a 52-to-43 vote.The White House has also nominated Mr. Powell to another four-year term as chair. Mr. Powell, who was first appointed to the Fed by Mr. Obama, became chair in 2018 during the Trump administration. Mr. Biden has also nominated the economists Philip N. Jefferson and Lisa D. Cook to fill two open governor positions.Votes on those three nominees are expected soon.If all are confirmed, the four officials will make up a majority of the Fed’s seven-person Board of Governors in Washington, giving Mr. Biden a chance to leave his mark on the institution. Fed governors hold a constant vote on monetary policy, which they set alongside the central bank’s 12 regional reserve bank presidents, who vote on a rotating basis.But even as it gains new faces, the Fed is likely to stick to the course it has already begun to chart as it battles stubbornly rapid inflation. The central bank raised interest rates at its meeting in March and is expected to make an even bigger rate increase at its meeting next Tuesday and Wednesday. Policymakers have also signaled that they will soon begin to shrink their balance sheet of bond holdings in a bid to push up longer-term interest rates and further slow the economy.By making money more expensive to borrow, the Fed can slow down spending, which could allow inflation to moderate over time as supply catches up with demand. During their hearings, the nominees made it clear that they were committed to bringing down high inflation. Ms. Brainard and Mr. Powell regularly address that goal in public remarks.The central bank is hoping that it can calm the economy without pushing the unemployment rate higher and sending it into a recession.“I don’t think you’ll hear anyone at the Fed say that that’s going to be straightforward or easy,” Mr. Powell said at an event on Thursday. “It’s going to be very challenging. We’re going to do our very best to accomplish that.”The Senate has yet to start the process for voting on Mr. Biden’s fifth and most recent pick for the Fed Board: The White House this month nominated Michael S. Barr as the Fed’s vice chair for supervision. The White House’s initial nominee, Sarah Bloom Raskin, failed to secure enough support and was withdrawn from consideration for the job.Mr. Barr must appear before and then pass the Senate Banking Committee before advancing to a confirmation vote in the full Senate. More

  • 138 Shares149 Views

    in Economy

    Biden to Nominate Michael Barr as Fed Vice Chair for Supervision

    by

    The Biden administration said on Friday that it intended to nominate Michael S. Barr, a law professor and a former Obama administration official, to be the Federal Reserve’s vice chair for supervision.The position — one of America’s top financial regulatory spots — has proved to be a particularly thorny one to fill.The administration’s initial nominee, Sarah Bloom Raskin, failed to win Senate confirmation after Republicans took issue with her writing on climate-related financial oversight and seized on her limited answers about her private-sector work. Senator Joe Manchin III, Democrat of West Virginia, joined Republicans in deciding not to support her, ending her chances.Mr. Barr, the dean of the University of Michigan’s public policy school, could also face challenges in securing widespread support. He was a leading contender to be nominated as comptroller of the currency but ran into opposition from progressive Democrats.Some of the complaints centered on his work in government: As a Treasury Department official during the Obama administration, Mr. Barr played a major role in putting together the Dodd-Frank Act, which revamped financial regulation after the 2008 financial crisis. But some said he opposed some especially stringent measures for big banks.Other opponents when his name was floated for that post focused on his private-sector work with the financial technology and cryptocurrency industry.But President Biden described Mr. Barr as a qualified candidate who would bring years of experience to the job.“Barr has strong support from across the political spectrum,” the president said in a statement announcing the decision. He noted that Mr. Barr had been confirmed to his Treasury post “on a bipartisan basis.”Senator Sherrod Brown, the Ohio Democrat who chairs the Senate Banking Committee, said in a statement, “I will support this key nominee, and I strongly urge my Republican colleagues to abandon their old playbook of personal attacks and demagoguery.”Ian Katz, managing director at the research and advisory firm Capital Alpha, put Mr. Barr’s chance of confirmation at 60 percent. “Barr is seen by many as more moderate than Sarah Bloom Raskin,” Mr. Katz wrote in a note ahead of the announcement but after speculation that Mr. Barr might be chosen.Mr. Barr completes Mr. Biden’s slate of candidates for the central bank’s five open positions.The other picks — Jerome H. Powell for another term as Fed chair, Lael Brainard for vice chair, and Lisa D. Cook and Philip N. Jefferson for seats on the Board of Governors — await confirmation. Those nominations have gotten past the Senate Banking Committee, the first step toward confirmation, and a vote before the full Senate is expected in the coming weeks.Mr. Biden said he would work with the committee to get Mr. Barr through his first vote quickly, and he called for swift confirmation of the others. More

  • 138 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    Biden Withdraws Sarah Bloom Raskin as Nominee for Fed’s Top Bank Cop

    by

    President Biden will withdraw his nomination of Sarah Bloom Raskin to serve as the Federal Reserve’s top bank regulator on Tuesday, after a Democratic senator said he would join Republicans in voting against her, most likely dooming her chances of confirmation.Ms. Raskin earlier on Tuesday sent a letter to the White House asking to withdraw her name from consideration to be the Fed’s vice chair for supervision, according to two people familiar with the decision. The New Yorker earlier reported the existence of the letter.“Sarah was subject to baseless attacks from industry and conservative interest groups,” Mr. Biden said in a statement released on Tuesday afternoon.While the end of Ms. Raskin’s candidacy will leave the Biden administration without the regulatory voice it was hoping for at the Fed Board, which oversees the nation’s largest banks, it could pave the way toward confirmation for the White House’s other Fed picks. Republicans had been stonewalling Ms. Raskin’s nomination, and in the process they were holding up the White House’s four other Fed nominees, including Jerome H. Powell, who is seeking confirmation to a second term as Fed chair.Besides Mr. Powell, Mr. Biden has nominated Lael Brainard to be the Fed’s vice chair and two academic economists — Philip N. Jefferson and Lisa D. Cook — to serve as governors.“I urge the Senate Banking Committee to move swiftly to confirm the four eminently qualified nominees for the Board of Governors,” Mr. Biden wrote in his statement.Ms. Raskin almost certainly lacked sufficient support to pass the Senate. Republicans opposed her nomination to be vice chair for bank supervision and Senator Joe Manchin III, Democrat of West Virginia, said on Monday that he would not vote to confirm her.In deciding to withhold support for Ms. Raskin, Mr. Manchin essentially doomed her chances in an evenly divided Senate. Democrats most likely needed all 50 lawmakers who caucus with their party to vote for Ms. Raskin, with Vice President Kamala Harris able to break ties.Republicans had shown little appetite for placing a supporter of tougher bank regulation into a powerful regulatory role at the Fed and had also boycotted her nomination over her work in the private sector. Lawmakers refused to show up to a key committee vote to advance her nomination to the full Senate.They had also seized on Ms. Raskin’s writings, saying her statements showed that she would be too aggressive in policing climate risks within the financial system and would overstep the unelected central bank’s boundaries.“President Biden was literally asking for senators to support a central banker who wanted to usurp the Senate’s policymaking power for herself,” Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the minority leader, said on Tuesday. He added: “It is past time the White House admit their mistake and send us someone suitable.”Senator Joe Manchin III, Democrat of West Virginia, cited Ms. Raskin’s past comments on the role that financial regulation should play in fighting climate change for his opposition.Jim Lo Scalzo/EPA, via ShutterstockMr. Manchin, who represents a coal state and has close ties to the fossil fuel industry, cited Ms. Raskin’s climate comments in explaining his opposition.Ms. Raskin had written an opinion piece in September 2021 arguing that “U.S. regulators can — and should — be looking at their existing powers and considering how they might be brought to bear on efforts to mitigate climate risk.”She did not argue that the Fed push beyond its legal boundaries, and the fierce backlash underlined that the issue of climate-related regulation is politically fraught territory in the United States.The White House “may want to take some time, lick their wounds, and make sure they carefully think about who to nominate next,” said Ian Katz, a managing director at Capital Alpha Partners. He noted that he would expect the White House to name a new nominee before the midterm elections in November. “They’re not having success with candidates who do not sit well with moderate Democrats.”Saule Omarova, a Cornell Law School professor whom critics painted as a communist after Mr. Biden picked her to lead the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, withdrew her candidacy late last year.Opponents to Ms. Raskin’s confirmation targeted more than just her climate views. They also took issue with work she did in the private sector — and the way she answered questions about that work.Republicans had specifically cited concerns about Ms. Raskin’s time on the board of directors of a financial technology firm. The company, Reserve Trust, secured a coveted account with the Fed — giving it access to services that it now prominently advertises — after Ms. Raskin reportedly called a central bank official to intervene on its behalf.It is unclear how much Ms. Raskin’s involvement actually helped. But the episode raised questions because she previously worked at the Fed and because she made about $1.5 million from the stock she earned for her Reserve Trust work. Democrats regularly denounce the revolving door between regulators and financial firms.Republicans had demanded that Ms. Raskin provide more details about what happened while she was on the company’s board, but she had largely said she could not remember. Senator Patrick J. Toomey of Pennsylvania, the top Republican on the committee, led his colleagues in refusing to show up to vote on Ms. Raskin and the other Fed nominees until she provided more answers.Mr. Toomey signaled on Monday that he would favor allowing the other Fed nominees to proceed.Sherrod Brown, Democrat from Ohio and the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, said in a statement on Tuesday that he would hold a markup for the other nominees, and later told reporters that he might move them as soon as this week.“Sadly, the American people will be denied a thoughtful, experienced public servant who was ready to fight inflation, stand up to Wall Street and corporate special interests, and protect our economy from foreign cyberattacks and climate change,” Mr. Brown said in his statement.Several more progressive Democrats expressed disappointment that Ms. Raskin would not be confirmed.“The lobbyists have power on Capitol Hill, and when they see their power threatened, they fight back hard — Sarah Bloom Raskin is just the latest casualty,” Senator Elizabeth Warren, Democrat of Massachusetts, said in response to the news.Michael D. Shear More

  • 125 Shares119 Views

    in Economy

    Biden’s Fed Nominees Are Frozen as One Faces Republican Questions

    by

    Sarah Bloom Raskin, his choice for the Federal Reserve’s head of bank oversight, has faced staunch G.O.P. opposition over her climate views. Yet her private sector work is holding up her nomination.President Biden’s nominee for the top banking cop at the Federal Reserve was expected to face Republican backlash over her views on how finance should guard against climate change and her preference for tough regulation.She has. But it is Sarah Bloom Raskin’s tenure on the board of a financial technology company that has given Republicans a cudgel that they are trying to use to quash her nomination.Senate Republicans are preventing a vote on Ms. Raskin, a former Fed governor and Treasury official during the Obama administration, as they press for answers about whether she used her central bank connections to help the company, Reserve Trust, gain access to a lucrative Fed account in 2018. They have boycotted her nomination, refusing to show up to vote on it until she provides more details.By holding Ms. Raskin’s nomination hostage, Republicans on the Senate Banking Committee are also preventing Mr. Biden’s four other Fed nominees from advancing since Democrats have grouped the officials together. That includes the renomination of Jerome H. Powell, the Fed chair, who testified before lawmakers on Wednesday and was set to return on Thursday.Senator Sherrod Brown, Democrat of Ohio and the head of the committee, plans to try to hold another vote on Ms. Raskin and the other nominees as soon as possible, a spokesperson for the committee said Tuesday.“This is not the moment for political stunts,” Mr. Brown said on the Senate floor this week.Democrats have dismissed the opposition to Ms. Raskin as politically opportunistic and baseless, a crude attempt to tank a candidate whom bank-friendly Republicans dislike for her views on regulation. Senator Patrick J. Toomey, the Pennsylvania Republican who is leading the effort to kill her nomination, opposed Ms. Raskin from the outset because of her climate views.But interviews and nomination filings suggest that Ms. Raskin may not have been entirely forthcoming about what role she played in helping Reserve Trust secure its sought-after Fed account. She may have leveraged her connection to the Fed to try to help the company, whose board she sat on between 2017 and 2019.Ethics experts said that even if she had petitioned on the company’s behalf, that was likely neither illegal nor against ethics rules. But when questioned, Ms. Raskin has repeatedly said she does not remember what happened.Republicans have blasted Ms. Raskin’s lack of responsiveness and highlighted her payout from the firm, suggesting that she may have benefited financially from helping the company, taking part in the revolving door that many Democrats have denounced. She sold her stock for $1.5 million in 2020.The White House continues to support Ms. Raskin. Michael Gwin, an administration spokesman, said she had “earned widespread support in the face of an unprecedented, baseless campaign that seeks to tarnish her distinguished career in public service and her commitment to upholding the highest ethical standards any administration has ever put forward.”But the controversy surrounding her nomination could prove uncomfortable for Democrats, who are trying to prevent regulators from so frequently leaving the government to advise the sort of companies they once policed. “The Republicans do this all the time because they are seen as the party of business,” said Meredith McGehee, a longtime Washington ethics expert. “The vulnerability is that here you have a Democrat who’s in this position that’s in conflict with the rhetoric of the Democratic Party.”The issue centers on a wonky but increasingly important corner of finance.Ms. Raskin started on the board of Reserve Trust, a Colorado-based trust company that now calls itself a financial technology firm, shortly after leaving a top role at the Treasury Department in 2017. From 2010 to 2014, she served as a Fed governor.When she joined the board, the Kansas City Fed had recently rejected the firm’s first application for a so-called master account with the central bank. Such accounts allow firms to tap the Fed’s payment infrastructure, enabling them to carry out services for clients without relying on an external partner. They are hot commodities, and nonbank financial firms often strive but struggle to qualify for them.To qualify for the account, the firm changed its business model and reapplied in 2017.Dennis Gingold, a founder of Reserve Trust who was a longtime acquaintance of Ms. Raskin’s and who has donated to the political campaigns of her husband, Representative Jamie Raskin of Maryland, said in an interview that he had helped to bring Ms. Raskin to the company.Mr. Gingold said Ms. Raskin had called the Fed about the master account at his behest, because he was worried that the central bank was not giving the reapplication a fair consideration. From his Washington office, she phoned Esther George, the Kansas City Fed president. The call lasted two minutes and was “insignificant,” Mr. Gingold said, noting that Ms. Raskin simply “asked that the decision be made on the facts.”Mr. Gingold said he could not remember the date of the call. Mr. Toomey has said staff at the Kansas City Fed told his office that a call between Ms. Raskin and Ms. George happened in August 2017.Mr. Gingold does not know what led the Fed to approve the account, which he said it did in mid-2018, noting that it happened months later and after what he described as an opaque process.No evidence has suggested that Ms. Raskin’s intervention was the decisive factor in the approval, and the Kansas City Fed has issued a statement saying it followed its usual practices in approving the account in 2018.The account does appear to have been lucrative: Reserve Trust still prominently advertises its rare access.When another company took over the firm in 2020, it paid $7.50 per share for it — which was how Ms. Raskin made money from the company. Mr. Gingold said that Ms. Raskin had been given shares from his portfolio, and that he believed she acquired them in January 2018, which would have been after the reported call with Ms. George. She did not receive director’s compensation, as other board members did, he said.Nothing that happened obviously conflicted with ethics rules, experts said. The trouble for Democrats is that many of the details that have emerged either conflict with things Ms. Raskin has said or provide answers to questions that she did not respond to in her filings or confirmation hearing.In Ms. Raskin’s written responses to senators’ questions, she said that she could not recall who had recruited her to Reserve Trust’s board and that to the best of her recollection she had “received shares in Reserve Trust upon joining” the board. She did “not recall any communications I made to help Reserve Trust obtain a master account,” she said.“Based on what is in the public now, I think she complied with the relevant rules,” said Kedric Payne, senior director of ethics at the Campaign Legal Center. “The practical point is: Even if there’s no legal violation, the public wants to know if there is full transparency there.”Seats for Republican senators were empty last week on Capitol Hill during a scheduled vote on Ms. Raskin’s nomination.Sarahbeth Maney/The New York TimesRepublicans have pointed out that Ms. Raskin and her husband have also repeatedly failed to disclose her involvement with Reserve Trust on government filings.Ms. Raskin left her Reserve Trust service off her original questionnaire to the Senate Banking Committee, according to a Republican committee aide, though she did note her sale of Reserve Trust shares in her simultaneously filed financial disclosures to the Office of Government Ethics.Mr. Raskin failed to note the Reserve Trust shares on his financial filings in 2018 and 2019, and disclosed the 2020 share sale eight months late. He has attributed the late 2020 filing to a family tragedy — the Raskins’ son died by suicide on Dec. 31, 2020. The lawmaker’s office, when asked by email, did not explain why the shares were left off the earlier disclosures.If Ms. Raskin leveraged Fed connections, that would not have been unusual: People often profit from prior government positions. But the situation could look bad, as both the Biden administration and Senator Elizabeth Warren, a Massachusetts Democrat and one of Ms. Raskin’s champions on Capitol Hill, try to put a lock — or at least a temporary stopper — on the revolving door between Washington and Wall Street.Ms. Raskin has signed an ethics pledge that Ms. Warren asked all Fed nominees to sign, which would prevent her from working in financial services for four years after she left the Fed if confirmed to her new post.If Ms. Raskin’s nomination does come up for a vote, it “could be an issue,” said Ian Katz at Capital Alpha, a Washington research firm. “If it’s a close call and there are any questions of propriety, sure, it could sway a senator. We just don’t know that yet.” More

  • 88 Shares159 Views

    in Economy

    A Top A.F.L.-C.I.O. Official Joins Greenpeace USA

    by

    The move by Tefere Gebre, the No. 3 official at the A.F.L.-C.I.O., highlights what many labor and environmental officials say is a need to cooperate.Signaling the growing importance of ties between labor and environmental organizers on climate change, the A.F.L.-C.I.O.’s third-ranking official has announced that he was leaving to join Greenpeace USA.The official, Tefere Gebre, the labor federation’s executive vice president, will become chief program officer for the environmental group on Tuesday. He will oversee all of Greenpeace USA’s campaigns, communications, direct action and organizing and report to the group’s co-executive directors.“I’m not leaving the workers’ movement — I’m bringing workers to the environmental movement,” Mr. Gebre said in an interview.Labor and environmental groups have forged alliances to reduce carbon emissions while providing a safety net for workers whose livelihoods are threatened by the shift and ensuring that green jobs will pay well. But these coalition-building efforts have occasionally hit snags that have hobbled climate legislation like President Biden’s Build Back Better bill, which is stalled in the Senate.Mr. Gebre will continue those efforts, while taking a leading role on other issues related to environmental justice, like elevating the focus on people of color affected by pollution.“I care about little kids in the 110 corridor in Los Angeles without a vote of their own, who wake up with asthma,” he said, referring to the area of South Los Angeles along Interstate 110. “They have nothing to do with polluting the environment, but they pay the price for it. We have to make it a movement for them.”An independent organization affiliated with the international Greenpeace network, Greenpeace USA employs about 150 people with an annual budget of $50 million to $60 million, largely from the organization’s three million members.Among the group’s prominent campaigns, said Annie Leonard, the co-executive director who helped recruit Mr. Gebre, are one focused on democracy, such as protecting the right to protest amid a flurry of bills that could threaten it, and another focused on protecting oceans. Mr. Gebre will oversee all of that work.At the A.F.L.-C.I.O., Mr. Gebre worked extensively on community and civil rights issues and was a key liaison to environmental groups, but he said he had often become frustrated by the lack of enthusiasm of powerful union presidents.Internally, he said, he argued that the looming migration of hundreds of millions of people because of climate change could lead to xenophobia, right-wing populism and increasing authoritarianism and that climate was therefore a top priority for the labor movement.“Our movement will never grow under authoritarianism,” he said, adding, “Everyone shook their head, but there was no action.”Mr. Gebre, who was born in Ethiopia, came to the United States as a teenager after escaping to a refugee camp in Sudan in 1983. He rose to become the executive director of the Orange County Labor Federation in California, and has been executive vice president of the A.F.L.-C.I.O. since 2013.As a top A.F.L.-C.I.O. official, he often clashed with members of the inner circle of Richard Trumka, the longtime president, who died in August. Mr. Gebre said he believed that the federation focused too much on electoral and legislative politics and not enough on movement-building and organizing, and that the labor movement was underinvesting in key industries like technology.Officials including Liz Shuler, the current president, have said that the choice between organizing versus political objectives like passing pro-labor legislation is a false one, and that the federation needs to succeed at both.“We are incredibly grateful for Tefere’s service and leadership as executive vice president,” Ms. Shuler said in a statement. “He understands that worker rights and climate justice can only be achieved together, and we will work closely with him in his new role.” More

  • 75 Shares149 Views

    in Economy

    Patrick Gelsinger is Intel's True Believer

    by

    Patrick Gelsinger was 18 years old and four months into an entry-level job at Intel when he heard a pivotal sermon at a Silicon Valley church in February 1980. There, a minister quoted Jesus from the Book of Revelation.“I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other!” the minister said. “So, because you are lukewarm — neither hot nor cold — I am about to spit you out of my mouth.”The words jolted Mr. Gelsinger, reshaping his philosophy. He realized he had been a lukewarm believer, one who practiced his faith just once a week. He vowed never to be neither hot nor cold again.Now, at age 60, Mr. Gelsinger is hot about one thing in particular: Revitalizing Intel, a Silicon Valley icon that lost its leading position in chip manufacturing.The 120,000-person company was a household name in the 1990s, celebrated as a fount of innovation as its microprocessors became the electronic brains in the vast majority of computers. But Intel failed to place its chips into smartphones, which became the device of choice for most people. Apple and Google instead grew into the trillion-dollar emblems of Silicon Valley.Rejuvenating Intel is partly about Mr. Gelsinger’s own ambitions. As a young engineer, he once wrote down a goal of leading Intel one day. But in 2009, after spending his entire career at the company, he was forced out. A year ago, he was wooed back for a surprise second chance.His mission is also about America’s place in the world. Mr. Gelsinger wants to return the United States to a leading role in semiconductor production, reducing the country’s dependence on manufacturers in Asia and easing a global chip shortage. Intel, he believes, can spearhead the charge. If he succeeds, the impact could extend far beyond computers to just about every device with an on-off switch.The quest faces many obstacles. Steering a $200 billion company while chasing a goal of raising U.S. chip production to 30 percent globally from about 12 percent today requires tens of billions of dollars, political maneuvering with governments and years of patience.“You’re going to have to spend a lot of money and you’re going to have to spend it for a long period of time,” said Simon Segars, who recently stepped down as chief executive of Arm, a British company whose chip designs power most smartphones. “Whether governments have the stomach for that over the long term remains to be seen.”In four interviews, Mr. Gelsinger acknowledged the difficulties. But the father of four and grandfather of eight has pursued the goals with intensity.In March, he unveiled a $20 billion project to add two chip factories to Intel’s complex near Phoenix. Last month, he joined President Biden to showcase a $20 billion investment in a new chip manufacturing site near Columbus, Ohio. On Tuesday, he announced a $5.4 billion deal to buy Tower Semiconductor, which operates chip production services from factories in four countries.To drum up government support for his investments, Mr. Gelsinger has attended three virtual White House gatherings, spoken with two dozen members of Congress and four governors. He became a key ally to President Biden over a $52 billion package that would provide grants to companies willing to set up new U.S. chip factories. And in Europe, Mr. Gelsinger met with President Emmanuel Macron of France, President Mario Draghi of Italy, their counterparts in other countries, and the pope.Mr. Gelsinger with President Emmanuel Macron of France last June.Pool photo by Stephane De SakutinIt has been a tough slog. Intel’s stock has dropped as Mr. Gelsinger committed huge sums to chip manufacturing. The $52 billion funding package stalled for months in the House of Representatives, finally passing this month as part of broader legislation that must now be reconciled with a Senate version. Criticism of the chief executive from Wall Street analysts has ramped up.“Every day the job is way bigger than me,” Mr. Gelsinger said. But “it’s OK,” he added, because he believes he has help. “God, I need you showing up with me today because this job is way more than I could possibly do myself.”Faith and WorkIf his father had managed to buy a farm, Mr. Gelsinger would almost certainly have inherited it and become a farmer. That was expected in Robesonia, a borough in Pennsylvania Dutch country where he was raised and worked on his uncles’ farms.But there was no farm to inherit. So at age 16, Mr. Gelsinger passed a scholarship exam that took him to the Lincoln Technical Institute, a for-profit vocational school, where he earned an associate degree.Mr. Gelsinger tells this and other stories self-deprecatingly in a 2003 book of advice that he wrote for Christians titled “Balancing Your Family, Faith & Work,” which was expanded in 2008 and titled, “The Juggling Act: Bringing Balance to Your Faith, Family, and Work.”In 1979, he was interviewed at the technical institute by a manager from Intel. Unlike most of the other students there, Mr. Gelsinger had heard of the company. He breezed through questions related to his studies and predicted he could earn bachelor’s, master’s and Ph.D. degrees while holding down a full-time job, said Ronald Smith, the former Intel executive who conducted the interview.“He is very smart, very ambitious and arrogant,” Mr. Smith said he wrote in a summary of the conversation. “He’ll fit right in.”Mr. Gelsinger took his first plane ride to interview at Intel in California, where he started in October 1979 as a technician. He worked on improving the reliability of microprocessors while studying for a bachelor’s degree at Santa Clara University.He soon started hanging out with the engineers who designed the chips, coming up with ideas to test the chips more efficiently. In 1982, he became the fourth engineer on the team that introduced the groundbreaking 80386 microprocessor.During a 1985 presentation near the completion of the chip, Mr. Gelsinger chided Intel’s leaders Robert Noyce, Gordon Moore and Andy Grove about balky company computers that were slowing the process.A few days later, he got a surprise call from Mr. Grove. The Hungarian-born executive, then Intel’s president who later wrote the management book “Only the Paranoid Survive,” had built a culture where lower-level employees were encouraged to challenge superiors if they could back up their positions. Mr. Grove began mentoring Mr. Gelsinger, a relationship that lasted three decades.By 1986, Mr. Grove had convinced Mr. Gelsinger not to pursue a doctorate at Stanford University and instead made him, at age 24, the leader of a 100-person team designing Intel’s 80486 microprocessor. Mr. Gelsinger eventually earned eight patents, became Intel’s youngest vice president in 1992 and the first person with the title of chief technology officer in 2001.His climb up Intel’s ladder was shaped by another priority: his faith.Though raised in the mainstream United Church of Christ, Mr. Gelsinger said he didn’t really become a Christian until he attended the nondenominational church in Silicon Valley where he met Linda Fortune, who later became his wife. It was at that church in 1980 that he heard the minister quote Revelations.After Mr. Gelsinger became a born-again Christian, he wrestled privately with whether to join the clergy. In a 2019 oral history conducted by the Computer History Museum in Mountain View, Calif., he said he eventually decided to become a “workplace minister,” where “you really view yourself as working for God as your C.E.O., even though you’re working for Intel.”Intel SlipsIn the mid-2000s, Mr. Gelsinger’s footing within Intel shifted. Mr. Grove retired as board chairman in 2004. Another executive, Paul Otellini, was appointed chief executive in 2005. Mr. Gelsinger said he was a “dissonant voice” on Intel’s senior executive team.Mr. Otellini pushed him to leave, Mr. Gelsinger said. (Mr. Otellini died in 2017.) In 2009, Mr. Gelsinger accepted an offer to become president and chief operating officer of EMC, a maker of data storage gear.Departing Intel after 30 years as a company man hurt badly. “I was just so angry and emotional about the departure,” Mr. Gelsinger said.In 2012, he became chief executive of VMware, a software company that EMC controlled. He weathered challenges there, including an aborted effort to compete in cloud computing services with Amazon, but broadened the company’s business and nearly tripled revenues.During those years, Intel slipped. For decades, the company had led the industry in delivering regular factory advances that pack more processing power into chips. But delays in perfecting new production processes allowed rivals such as Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company and Samsung Electronics to grab the lead in manufacturing technology between 2015 and 2019.Mr. Gelsinger in 2006, when he was senior vice president of Intel’s digital enterprise group, with the company’s dual core next generation chip.Justin Sullivan/Getty ImagesToday, T.S.M.C. makes chips designed by hundreds of other companies. It supplies the world with more than 90 percent of the chips made with the most advanced production technology. Because it is headquartered in Taiwan, which China has laid territorial claim to, its location has made it a political and supply chain chokepoint should conflict erupt over the island nation.Intel was also suffering from its missteps in the mobile market, which consumes billions of processors compared with the hundreds of millions sold for computers.After convincing Apple to use its chips in Macintosh computers in 2005, Intel had a chance to win a place in the iPhone, which debuted in 2007. But Mr. Otellini said in a 2013 interview in The Atlantic that he turned down the opportunity because the price that Apple was willing to pay for chips was too low to make a profit.The decision, which Mr. Otellini said he regretted, led Apple to use rival Arm technology for smartphones and, later, tablets. So did Samsung and other companies that make devices using Google’s Android software. More recently, Apple started using Arm chips in many new Macs.Mr. Otellini and his successors prioritized Intel’s profit margins while failing to take risks to move into new markets and outflank rivals, former company insiders now acknowledge. If boiled down to a book, “it could be called ‘the insufficiently paranoid don’t survive,’” said Reed Hundt, a former Federal Communications Commission chairman who served on Intel’s board from 2001 to 2020, in a nod to Mr. Grove’s “Only the Paranoid Survive.”As questions swirled about Intel’s future, Mr. Gelsinger was viewed as a possible savior. But he insisted he was committed to VMware, a point he seemed to underscore by adding a temporary tattoo with the company’s name on his arm during a 2018 conference in Las Vegas.Then, just before Thanksgiving 2020, an Intel director asked Mr. Gelsinger to join the company’s board. Mr. Gelsinger asked for permission from Michael Dell, the founder of Dell Technologies, which then controlled VMware.“I knew Intel needed some help and Pat was somebody who could help a lot, so I said ‘sure,’” Mr. Dell said.Understand the Global Chip ShortageCard 1 of 7In short supply. More