Image: emilio labrador

Australian and Argentinian workers are most likely to be contemplating an exit

Image: Mercer

Young Italian workers are more than three times as happy with their employers as the average worker

Image: Mercer

Young French workers are more than three times as satisfied with their jobs as the average worker

Image: Mercer

Young workers in Singapore are more than twice as likely to recommend their employers to others than older colleagues are

Image: Mercer

Now if you're looking for a job that'll make you happier, you might want to try one of these places.

Microsoft

Image: Wikimedia Commons

Click to see the 25 best multinational companies to work for >

Image: @pwgavin

No one in Washington thinks Herman Cain is doing well quashing these rumors about old sexual harassment suits.

 

His story keeps changing. He lashed out at rivals. And his natural allies are questioning his competence.

So why are Cain and his campaign failing to put this to bed? His team knew about the Politico story for ten days, and Cain himself thought these allegations would be a campaign issue in 2003 when he ran a campaign in Georgia.

J.P Freire, Senior Communications Strategist at New Media Strategies explained it to us in an e-mail.

a.) They don't have all the information on hand because they no longer have access to the very specific facts (and nuances) of the situation.

b.) Their memory is foggy regarding certain aspects, and they fear misspeaking about the issue.

c.) Their staff is at war with each other over what narrative to put out there, with the attendant risks of each approach. Who will contradict what we say? Will someone else show up? Will this only encourage others to make fraudulent claims? What is the credibility of the accuser?

d.) Their staff isn't, uh, organized the way a traditional (read: real) campaign staff would be organized, and thus less accustomed to these kind of crises, leading to an even *greater* tug-of-war. (Read Shakespeare's histories.)

e.) They are in denial about their own behavior in general and don't fully disclose to anyone, let alone campaign managers and wives. Why would you think that would change when talking to the press?

Bottom line. Candidates have trouble facing the truth about themselves. And it is difficult to impose message discipline on such a small nimble campaign.

Get ready for a bumpy ride.

Image: AP

After weeks on the streets worldwide, the “Occupy” protesters – with their focus on corporate “greed” – may have achieved one thing so far.

 

In Britain, they likely pushed the Conservative prime minister to propose more women be placed on governing boards of financial firms as a way to reduce high salaries and bonuses.

Companies with more female directors, said David Cameron, would be less likely to practice “the usual sort of rotating list of men patting each other’s backs and increasing the level of remuneration.”

A corporation’s methods of setting executive pay, he told Parliament Wednesday, should not be done by a “closed circle of people.” Women would bring more diverse views and a wider discussion of what is excessive pay.

He’s just guessing, of course, based simply on gender stereotypes. Women executives, in general, do ask less often for pay raises than men. But whether female board members would spread profits more evenly to company stakeholders remains unproven.

Other ideas may work better. Mr. Cameron, like many others, suggests companies release information on pay levels and give shareholders more authority over pay. Similar structural reforms would shake up corporate practices that have led to high income inequality. And attracting more women to boards will require more of them to earn MBAs and enter the business of high finance.

The task of defining “excessive” pay is difficult, but since the near-meltdown of Wall Street in 2008, it’s become a controversial topic. It would be less difficult with more transparency and accountability about a company’s compensation decisions.

Given the long history of pay discrimination, women serving on boards would bring a needed perspective on fair pay. Europe is already moving toward more women in the boardroom. In 2003, Norway began the trend by setting a quota of 40 percent for female directors and has already achieved it. While such a forced method may satisfy some, based on one study, the results were not so satisfying.

A University of Michigan study this year found an average 20 percent drop in the stock prices of Norwegian companies that brought in relatively inexperienced women as board members. “The quota led to younger and less experienced boards, increases in leverage and acquisitions, and deterioration in operating performance, consistent with less capable boards,” the study found.

That negative experience may change over time as more experienced women join boards. Britain is avoiding a strict quota system in favor of voluntary targets. Last February, the government asked the boards of the top 100 companies to be 25 percent female by 2015. So far, progress has been slow, with only a slight rise to 14 percent from 12.5 percent last year.

“Everyone, whether they are in public life or in private enterprise – they have got to be able to justify the decisions they make about pay,” says Cameron.

Perhaps reducing male “group think” in boardrooms about pay levels is one good start.

This post originally appeared on The Christian Science Monitor.

Image: Bloomberg TV

PIMCO's Mohamed El-Erian was on Bloomberg TV this morning talking Europe.

 

The most interesting part: Him saying that things are worse now than before last week's summit, since now credibility has been lost.

You can watch the video here.

The partial transcript was supplied to us by Bloomberg TV, and is below.

---------------

El-Erian on the situation in Europe and the G20 meeting in France:

" It is both disappointment and concern. It is striking that Ms. Merkel came out this morning and said they could not agree on the easy part, and the easy part was enhancing the IMF resources to help Europe. I am both worried and disappointed so far. Hopefully something will happen in the next day or so, but the signals are not good."

" We need four things. We need an agreement on Europe. We need to stabilize the European situation. Second, the world has to come together and agree on a growth and employment pact. Just like it did in April 2009 when there was a financial crisis, today we have an economic crisis and an employment crisis. We need to see different countries coming together with a common purpose. Third, let's not forget the hot spots in the world like North Africa. We need something there. Finally, there are longer term issues that are just as important, like climate change. That would have been an original agenda, but the G20 got hijacked by Europe."

On recently returning from Europe and his assessment from having been there:

" Unfortunately, it is a mess. There are three parties to a solution and all three are unraveling. There are the debtor countries and they are starting to have even bigger political issues. There are the official creditors and they cannot agree on providing support. And then there are the private creditors. It is not sure that they will get all of the banks to agree on the 50% reduction for Greece, which is the minimum Greece needs. So I'm afraid it's a bit of a mess out there."

On whether Europe is worse off now having gone through the agreement on Greek debt last week:

" We are [worse off now], because every time you get to an agreement and it unravels, the credibility of the process is undermined. Keep the image in your of the snowball rolling downhill. The problems get bigger and it becomes even more difficult to control the snowball. We cannot afford disappointment after disappointment. Europe needs to turn a corner and start building the basis for a solution."

On European leaders questioning whether or not they should belong in the euro:

" You are getting leaders saying strange things. It started with Mr. Sarkozy last Thursday saying Greece should not be in the euro zone. Now you have questioning left, right, and center. The leaders need to get on the same page. The narrative is important here. When there are difficulties that there is a conflict between regional priorities and national realities. That is what we're seeing in Italy. That is what we're seeing in Greece, countries like Germany and France as well. This is a very delicate period."

On today's jobs report:

" The good news is that the report in relative terms is better than expected mainly because of the revisions to August and September. The bad news is that we are still in this unemployment crisis, so no, it does not do enough to remove the risk of stall speed, which is growth but not fast enough growth. We need to see much higher employment creation to get over this issue."

On what it will take to achieve faster growth in the U.S.:

" We have fundamental structural problems in the labor market, housing market, credit market. We don't have enough infrastructure. These are a series of structural issues. We also have to reconcile medium-term fiscal reform with short-term stimulus. There are some big issues that are not as yet addressed sufficiently, certainly not addressed in a comprehensive manner."

On whether there is an increasing risk that the U.S. is losing control of its own economy because of the crisis in Europe:

" The reality is that we live in a globalized economy. Europe is a major economic area. It is an important trading partner. European banks are an important part of the financial situation. No country, whether it is the U.S. or China, is totally immune from what is happening in Europe. The important thing is to be able to navigate it and that depends on your internal dynamics. We are not immune from Europe. Nobody is in the world, but different countries are better or less able to navigate it."

On how central banks have been handling the situation so far:

" They have been doing heavy lifting. The Fed in particular has been the only policymaker really in play. The problem is they don't have enough instruments. You must always remember that central banks are monetary institutions. They can only be a bridge to somewhere. In order to be a bridge to somewhere good, you need other policymakers to also contribute. That is what has failed Europe and the U.S. so far."

On the October market rally and whether we won't see activity like that for a long time:

" This is an incredibly headline-driven market, a macro-driven market, as opposed to a bottoms up market. What we should expect is enormous volatility. We suggest to investors to play general defense and selective offense. I think it's important to be generally defensive because the world is very fluid, but there are values out there."

On whether there's more value in the U.S. than in Europe right now:

" I see value where balance sheets are strong, where companies are exposed to growth in emerging markets and where they're relatively immune to erratic policymaking. That's where value is and it's all over the world."

Image: Calculated Risk

Image: Calculated Risk

China on Friday unveiled its three-step plan for phasing out energy-inefficient incandescent light bulbs in an attempt to promote energy conservation and emissions reduction.

Imports and sales of 100-watt-and-higher incandescent light bulbs will be banned as of Oct 1, 2012, Xie Ji, deputy director of the environmental protection department with the National Development and Reform Commission said at a conference.

This will be followed by a ban on imports and sales of 60-watt-and-above incandescent light bulbs starting October 1, 2014, he said.

You gotta admit, her bulbs are rather nice.

I know, I know. It’s a scary situation. For those of you who have been living under a rock for most of this year, you may not be familiar with this issue or why this has the potential of throwing an explosive, radioactive wrench into the bilateral diplomatic works. Allow me to explain.

The U.S. passed the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 during the Bush Administration, which included new energy efficiency standards for light bulbs.

The resulting political shitstorm has been dramatic:

The law, which sets standards to make the bulbs more efficient and reduce electricity use, has been derided by Reps. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., Joe Barton, R-Texas, and Rand Paul, R-Ky., and Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., as Exhibit A of the liberal assault on the free enterprise system.

This is a serious group that includes a Republican presidential hopeful. And they aren’t alone. Texas Governor Rick Perry, also running for president, signed a bill into law that purports to nullify the U.S. federal legislation. Sure, it’s unconstitutional, but the status quo was unacceptable to Texans. After all, nowhere in the Bible does it say that Jesus used a CFL bulb.

And that wasn’t the end of the story. Rep. Barton (R-Texaco) earlier this year also fought back:

In 2011 Rep. Joe Barton of Texas and 14 other Republicans joined to introduce the Better Use of Light Bulbs Act or BULB Act (H.R. 91), which would have repealed Subtitle B of Title III of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. Barton was opposed to regulation, while Rep. Michael Burgess pointed to jobs purportedly lost to China and voiced a fear of mercury problems resulting from CFL use. On July 12, 2011, H.R. 2417 failed to pass by the required two-thirds majority in the U.S. House.

But here’s the kicker. The House vote was 233 – 193 (voting “Yea” was another GOP presidential candidate, Ron Paul). In other words, although it failed to get a 2/3 majority, it was still passed with a majority of the House, meaning that most House members think Americans have a God-given right to buy incandescent light bulbs.

The media was also on their side. Well, at least Fox News and some blogs:

Let’s talk a little bit about something known as the Better Use Of Light Bulbs Act, B-U-L-B Act, later on today in the House of Representatives they’re going to bring this up. And what it is, is it’s — they’re going to try to repeal — you know, Congress passed that kooky law that said incandescent bulbs, like this, got to go away got to use those pigtail things that are made in China that have mercury in them, instead of the bulbs made by American workers. [Fox News, Fox & Friends, 7/11/11] (Media Matters)

So where does that leave the U.S.-China relationship? Well, according to www.fakechinahearsayrumor.com, after hearing about today’s NDRC announcement, Rep. Joe Barton, overheard in the men’s room at a D.C. Taco Bell, threatened retaliation:

Not only don’t those Godless Commies recognize Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior, but now they’re going after incandescent bulbs? I bet they’ll think twice about that when Congress blocks all Chinese student visas. While I’m at it, maybe I’ll cut off all corn and wheat exports and order the FBI to investigate Panda Express. Maybe I’ll even get the IRS to go after that artist guy for his U.S.-based income. Wait, I think somebody beat me to that one.

Look, next year is an election year. Obama is circling the political drain and the Republicans already control the House. It’s very possible that a pro-choice candidate (i.e., choice of incandescent or CFL) will get in with a Congress predisposed to do the bidding of the bulb lobby.

Once they get their own house in order, revising U.S. law, it stands to reason that China trade sanctions will follow, along with a possible naval blockade of ports used to export CFLs and/or drone strikes against CFL factories.

I don’t know about you, but I’m already winding up my business and looking to settle down in another hemisphere.