WEBVTT - International Women's Day Part One 0:00:01.280 --> 0:00:05.640 This is Bloomberg business Week Inside from the reporters and 0:00:05.840 --> 0:00:09.400 editors who bring you America's most trusted business magazine, plus 0:00:09.480 --> 0:00:13.640 global business finance and tech news. The Bloomberg Business Week 0:00:13.680 --> 0:00:18.640 Podcast with Carol Masser and Tim Stenebec from Bloomberg Radio. 0:00:19.800 --> 0:00:21.360 All right, as you know, we just talked with our 0:00:21.360 --> 0:00:24.040 TV colleagues, Mike and myself day too. Have fed Chair J. 0:00:24.160 --> 0:00:26.280 Powell up on Capitol Hill what we got today, par 0:00:26.440 --> 0:00:30.080 for the course, Powell stressing the policymakers had not made 0:00:30.120 --> 0:00:31.880 up their minds on the size of their interest rate 0:00:31.880 --> 0:00:34.280 increase later this month and said it would hinge on 0:00:34.400 --> 0:00:36.600 incoming data on jobs and inflation. Mike, it sounds like 0:00:36.640 --> 0:00:40.120 data dependent to me. It really doesn't. What's fascinating is 0:00:40.360 --> 0:00:43.200 that's as honest as they can be about the situation, right, 0:00:43.280 --> 0:00:46.000 and they repeat it over and over again. Transparency with 0:00:46.040 --> 0:00:49.599 a capital tea. Yeah, but the market just wants that 0:00:50.240 --> 0:00:53.160 sort of certainty of where they are going to stop 0:00:53.240 --> 0:00:56.080 raising rates, and they just can't tell you right now. 0:00:56.160 --> 0:00:58.400 And I think, you know, if the story the market 0:00:58.400 --> 0:01:00.960 over the last year is not up down sideways, you know, 0:01:01.000 --> 0:01:03.400 you look at the recent PAS average over the last 0:01:03.440 --> 0:01:06.679 year it's it's basically where we are now. So all 0:01:06.720 --> 0:01:08.760 this file tell you all these up down days and 0:01:08.880 --> 0:01:11.600 dawns days, we market really hasn't going anywhere. All right, 0:01:11.640 --> 0:01:15.640 Let's see what are a former Bloomberg colleague, Lena Shlechiva, 0:01:15.880 --> 0:01:18.600 senior US economist at BNP Pariba, has to say about 0:01:18.640 --> 0:01:20.400 all of this. She joins us via zoom in New 0:01:20.480 --> 0:01:22.360 York City. Lena, it's so good to have you here 0:01:22.400 --> 0:01:24.919 with Mike and myself. All right, so we got Jay Powell. 0:01:25.000 --> 0:01:27.199 Day two, you got the Beige Book, you get another 0:01:27.400 --> 0:01:29.880 strong bunch of data points when it comes to the 0:01:29.959 --> 0:01:33.119 labor market. What was front and center for you today? 0:01:34.480 --> 0:01:38.120 I think you highlighted it. Carolin is so nice to 0:01:38.160 --> 0:01:42.400 be back with you guys. So you highlight it very clearly, 0:01:42.520 --> 0:01:46.080 you know, the fattest data dependent. But you know, Powell 0:01:46.319 --> 0:01:51.160 saw the market reaction to his testimony yesterday and he 0:01:51.360 --> 0:01:56.240 decided to repeat the same exact hawkish message today. And 0:01:56.680 --> 0:02:00.200 you know he qualified it a little bit that, well, yeah, 0:02:00.240 --> 0:02:03.440 it's data dependent. He wanted to stress that point. That 0:02:03.680 --> 0:02:07.280 was the only kind of caveat in today's remarks. But 0:02:07.400 --> 0:02:10.880 still the tone of the speech today was the same 0:02:11.000 --> 0:02:15.720 hawkish type of comments that he delivered yesterday, and I 0:02:15.760 --> 0:02:18.440 think it would be very difficult for the FIT to 0:02:19.240 --> 0:02:23.400 walk back from away from that hawkish message. It would 0:02:23.400 --> 0:02:28.560 take a really weak economic data for them to under 0:02:28.600 --> 0:02:33.520 deliver on what he seemed to have hinted in his 0:02:33.919 --> 0:02:37.160 prepared remarks. You know, and Yelena, obviously we're all biting 0:02:37.160 --> 0:02:40.160 our nails waiting for that main event of economic data 0:02:40.200 --> 0:02:44.680 on Friday, the jobs report ADPs Jobs report today, two 0:02:44.760 --> 0:02:49.000 hundred and forty two thousand private sector jobs. That Jolt's 0:02:49.080 --> 0:02:51.919 job openings was a little bit higher than expected ten 0:02:52.040 --> 0:02:56.480 point eight million openings. Are you bracing for another hot 0:02:56.560 --> 0:03:04.320 jobs number? So totality, in Powell's words, of employment data 0:03:04.480 --> 0:03:08.000 is telling us that the labor market remains extremely tight. 0:03:08.080 --> 0:03:11.760 And there's no question about it, whether you look at 0:03:11.800 --> 0:03:15.639 like some movements some near to movements in job openings 0:03:15.800 --> 0:03:20.680 or claims or anything else ADP, so all of it 0:03:20.720 --> 0:03:23.639 is telling us the same exact story. The labor market 0:03:23.680 --> 0:03:27.320 remains tight, and that is ahead of the Pyrol's report 0:03:27.360 --> 0:03:30.920 on Friday, so we are expecting another solid reading. We're 0:03:30.919 --> 0:03:35.920 slightly above consensus here at two forty, so we think 0:03:36.000 --> 0:03:41.360 we will see some reversal of weather related distortions that 0:03:41.440 --> 0:03:46.880 were very prominent in the January report. We estimate something 0:03:46.920 --> 0:03:51.080 like thirty percent of the number was driven by weather 0:03:51.120 --> 0:03:54.880 related distortions. But still, you know, February was still warm. 0:03:55.040 --> 0:03:59.200 I was like not wearing my warm clothes. Crazy, right, 0:03:59.360 --> 0:04:04.040 the Burgess game when the plants are coming up, right, 0:04:06.000 --> 0:04:08.360 can I ask you something? It's totality. Now the new 0:04:08.400 --> 0:04:11.720 transitory that we're going to parse over exactly what this 0:04:11.920 --> 0:04:16.039 new tea word means? And now the tea word right, 0:04:16.800 --> 0:04:20.520 So it does seem like that they keep repeating that sentence, 0:04:20.560 --> 0:04:22.640 but that's what it is. So they look at a 0:04:22.680 --> 0:04:27.320 whole bunch of different indicators, including wage growth. So that's 0:04:27.360 --> 0:04:31.480 another key story in the upcoming Perils report. On Friday, 0:04:31.680 --> 0:04:35.080 we will we are looking for some re acceleration of 0:04:35.720 --> 0:04:40.039 wage growth in the Perils Report in February. So if 0:04:40.080 --> 0:04:44.520 that comes to fruition, we may um. You know, that 0:04:44.920 --> 0:04:47.000 is going to be a very interesting story for the 0:04:47.040 --> 0:04:52.480 FED because Chair Powell specifically mentioned wages and wage growth 0:04:53.200 --> 0:04:57.200 in his testimony. It was right in the first few 0:04:57.240 --> 0:05:01.480 paragraphs that wage wage growth is it's great for workers. 0:05:01.560 --> 0:05:05.320 But when you know you look at it in terms 0:05:05.320 --> 0:05:08.560 of inflation and nominal wages, that's a different that could 0:05:08.560 --> 0:05:11.520 be a different story. So we don't want a significant 0:05:11.600 --> 0:05:16.160 re acceleration in nominal wages. And this is something that 0:05:16.279 --> 0:05:20.360 we may see on Friday. So that's gonna that If 0:05:20.440 --> 0:05:23.120 it is true, that would be another piece of a 0:05:23.160 --> 0:05:27.400 puzzle to persuade the Fed that they need to potentially 0:05:27.480 --> 0:05:32.720 go faster and stay in the restrictive territory for longer. 0:05:33.360 --> 0:05:36.080 You know, Yelena, I think one of the big sort 0:05:36.080 --> 0:05:39.320 of underappreciated issues for the market this year is everyone 0:05:39.400 --> 0:05:43.640 talks about, well, how high will the Fed increase interest rates? 0:05:44.080 --> 0:05:47.479 But the markets previously we're pricing in sort of a 0:05:47.640 --> 0:05:51.800 short term peak and that the Fed would probably be 0:05:52.200 --> 0:05:56.320 cutting rates this year. Now it seems like everyone's rethinking 0:05:56.360 --> 0:05:59.040 that and that, yeah, we might hit that peak rate, 0:05:59.080 --> 0:06:01.680 whether it's five and a half percent, six percent for 0:06:01.800 --> 0:06:05.880 Fed funds interest rate, but it's going to stay there 0:06:06.000 --> 0:06:09.960 longer than what the market had anticipated before. Where do 0:06:10.000 --> 0:06:12.320 you stand on that? How long will we sit at 0:06:12.320 --> 0:06:17.520 that peak rate? Do you think our newly released projections 0:06:17.560 --> 0:06:22.480 We just released a new global outlook just recently, so 0:06:22.920 --> 0:06:26.760 we don't see any cuts until next year. So it's 0:06:26.839 --> 0:06:31.640 really was the message from the Fed that they're very 0:06:31.680 --> 0:06:34.560 serious about staying there for longer. Is just that the 0:06:34.640 --> 0:06:38.080 market is adjusting to that as as you mentioned, So, 0:06:38.560 --> 0:06:41.680 I think it would really depend on the pace of 0:06:41.839 --> 0:06:46.880 inflation deceleration. So it's really easy to get to something 0:06:46.960 --> 0:06:50.240 like three to four percent in terms of inflation growth, 0:06:50.360 --> 0:06:54.840 but the trajector of disinflation from there and to the 0:06:54.839 --> 0:06:58.120 two percent inflation target is going to be very difficult 0:06:58.160 --> 0:07:01.160 to achieve and it might take some time. And that's 0:07:01.200 --> 0:07:04.160 why the FIT is clearly telling us we're going to 0:07:04.240 --> 0:07:07.480 stay there until the job is done. We're going to 0:07:07.600 --> 0:07:10.760 stay at it and keep at it and do whatever 0:07:10.800 --> 0:07:16.400 it takes to conquer inflation, which may need to for that, 0:07:16.440 --> 0:07:19.880 we may need to see rates higher for longer. So 0:07:20.120 --> 0:07:23.640 all right, so if that that could possibly happen. And 0:07:23.680 --> 0:07:25.880 then Yelena, looking at what's going on between the twos 0:07:25.920 --> 0:07:29.360 and tents right now, right above the spread more than 0:07:29.400 --> 0:07:33.680 a hundred basis points, does that mean yes, definitely recession. 0:07:34.120 --> 0:07:40.160 Does that also potentially mean recession deeper and longer? Well, 0:07:40.920 --> 0:07:44.560 recession has been the front and center of our outlook. 0:07:45.000 --> 0:07:49.520 We are sticking with our call unfortunately for a recession, 0:07:49.960 --> 0:07:55.000 and that we think is a necessary condition for inflation 0:07:55.120 --> 0:07:58.440 to come back at where it needs to be. So 0:07:58.560 --> 0:08:02.640 the path to so called soft blending is so narrow 0:08:02.800 --> 0:08:06.440 that it would be a miracle if that realizes. We 0:08:06.520 --> 0:08:09.800 all want that, but the reality is it may take 0:08:10.400 --> 0:08:13.280 us through a downturn to in order to achieve that. 0:08:13.480 --> 0:08:16.080 But what kind of a downturn? That's what I'm curious about. 0:08:16.680 --> 0:08:21.520 Is it deeper, is it wider? Yeah, potentially, yeah, something 0:08:21.560 --> 0:08:28.560 akin to the nineties recession. Probably not see recession. Yeah, 0:08:28.600 --> 0:08:33.640 well I remember the financial crisis recession. Probably not as 0:08:33.679 --> 0:08:37.360 severe as that, but still, you know, severe enough for 0:08:37.679 --> 0:08:41.400 a lot of Americans to feel the pain. But unfortunately, 0:08:41.480 --> 0:08:45.960 maybe a necessary condition for us to go back into balance. 0:08:46.760 --> 0:08:49.079 I wonder if that means grunge music will come back, Carol, 0:08:49.080 --> 0:08:53.080 if we're ready for that. But it gets possible, Elena. Obviously, 0:08:53.160 --> 0:08:56.640 the other big number on tap next week's CPI. I'm 0:08:56.640 --> 0:09:00.880 looking at the consensus estimate here for it to come 0:09:00.880 --> 0:09:03.800 down from six point four percent to six percent, core 0:09:03.920 --> 0:09:06.240 to come down from five point six to five point four. 0:09:06.440 --> 0:09:08.360 Where do you stand on that? What's your marker for 0:09:08.480 --> 0:09:14.079 next week's CPI report, So we think, you know, payrolls 0:09:14.120 --> 0:09:18.480 would be more crucial in terms of defining what the 0:09:18.520 --> 0:09:22.520 FAT does next. So CPI will probably decelerate. What we'll 0:09:22.559 --> 0:09:27.440 be looking at where services inflation is going. If that 0:09:27.880 --> 0:09:32.800 super core services inflation is sticking where it is, and 0:09:32.840 --> 0:09:36.200 we call it stick inflation. For that to go down, 0:09:36.280 --> 0:09:39.720 we need to see wages to decelerate. If that is 0:09:39.760 --> 0:09:46.040 still significant, that will reinforce the defense message. You know, 0:09:46.080 --> 0:09:49.600 what really struck us in the previous CPI report is 0:09:49.640 --> 0:09:54.160 the breadth of inflation gains. It was everywhere in the 0:09:54.160 --> 0:09:58.000 goods and the services you know categories, right, So I 0:09:58.040 --> 0:10:02.600 would personally be looking at the breadth oh for inflation games, Yelena, 0:10:02.679 --> 0:10:06.120 really fast twenty five seconds? Okay, hot labored market. What 0:10:06.160 --> 0:10:09.240 if we get a strong job's report but week CPI data, 0:10:09.440 --> 0:10:14.280 can the Fed be softer in their march move? Just quickly? 0:10:15.000 --> 0:10:20.880 What ten seconds is significant deceleration in wage precious, That's 0:10:20.920 --> 0:10:23.959 what we'll should be looking on at. That's that's what 0:10:24.400 --> 0:10:27.120 is important. Okay. Good to know, um always great to 0:10:27.160 --> 0:10:29.960 see you. We love you, Yelena Shaltiva, As we said, 0:10:29.960 --> 0:10:33.200 a former Bloomberg colleague, senior US economists at BNP Power. 0:10:33.280 --> 0:10:36.400 By joining us via zoom in New York City, you're 0:10:36.440 --> 0:10:40.040 listening to the Bloomberg Business Week Podcast. Catch us live 0:10:40.120 --> 0:10:43.480 week days from two to five pm Easter on Bloomberg Radio, 0:10:43.640 --> 0:10:46.560 The Bloomberg Business a Band you two. You can also 0:10:46.640 --> 0:10:49.960 listen live to our flagship New York station, Just Say 0:10:50.040 --> 0:10:56.600 Alexa Play Bloomberg eleven thirty. We have actually been talking 0:10:56.640 --> 0:10:59.880 with a lot of well known folks in the restaurant space, Ericape, 0:11:00.320 --> 0:11:04.640 Danielle Blue, John Tapper, Bar Rescue. One common denominator that 0:11:04.679 --> 0:11:07.480 they seem to all talk about and stress is the 0:11:07.520 --> 0:11:09.760 tight labor market and just having a hard time finding 0:11:09.840 --> 0:11:12.200 enough workers. Yeah. Absolutely, I mean a lot of competition 0:11:12.280 --> 0:11:15.680 for jobs out there, let's be honest, restaurant restaurants. Yeah, 0:11:15.760 --> 0:11:18.480 but they're not exactly known for their high wages and 0:11:18.520 --> 0:11:23.120 great benefits and stress free atmosphere. That is several good points, 0:11:23.120 --> 0:11:25.079 all right. So in keeping with that, and we did 0:11:25.120 --> 0:11:27.800 get a lot of laborer points, if you will, economic 0:11:27.880 --> 0:11:31.160 statistics today. This next story definitely jumps out at us. 0:11:31.200 --> 0:11:35.200 It's about how restaurants have come roaring back, pass post 0:11:35.520 --> 0:11:39.720 rolling back, post pandemic with everything they need, but staff. 0:11:39.760 --> 0:11:41.880 So let's get to it with Bloomberg News consumer reporter 0:11:41.960 --> 0:11:45.760 Leslie Patton. She joins us, she's on the phone from Chicago. Leslie, 0:11:45.760 --> 0:11:47.679 good to have you here with Mike and myself. So 0:11:47.800 --> 0:11:49.520 we do hear this a lot. Tell us what you 0:11:49.640 --> 0:11:54.240 found out in reporting your story. You know, it's interesting. 0:11:54.440 --> 0:11:57.840 We're seeing that demand is up. Everyone knows about. There's 0:11:57.880 --> 0:12:01.960 this Panus demand for dining happening. Chains are expanding quickly, 0:12:02.000 --> 0:12:04.880 looking to open new locations. But what kind of the 0:12:04.880 --> 0:12:07.920 problem is It's staff a lot of these people and 0:12:07.960 --> 0:12:09.760 you know what's different than in the past is that 0:12:09.800 --> 0:12:12.560 a lot of these food service employees have left the 0:12:12.640 --> 0:12:15.000 industry for good and did that over the course of 0:12:15.040 --> 0:12:18.800 its pandemic for a bunch of different reasons. Really, Leslie, 0:12:18.800 --> 0:12:22.080 I'm wondering, is it having an impact on their businesses? 0:12:22.120 --> 0:12:24.560 You know, are they missing out on sales because of this, 0:12:24.720 --> 0:12:28.720 or they haven't closed locations anything like that. Yeah, that's 0:12:28.760 --> 0:12:31.760 been happening during the pandemic, but three years later, it's 0:12:31.760 --> 0:12:33.960 still happening. And a lot of these big chains they 0:12:34.000 --> 0:12:37.439 don't like to explicitly say we're missing sales, but you 0:12:37.520 --> 0:12:40.160 can read between the lines a lot of them. At 0:12:41.360 --> 0:12:44.240 the big chains, they're still operating on reduced hours, so 0:12:44.360 --> 0:12:47.559 they're not open as long as they used to be 0:12:47.760 --> 0:12:50.560 during the pandemic, So maybe they aren't running that night shift. 0:12:50.960 --> 0:12:53.920 Maybe the dining rooms closed during certain times of the day. 0:12:54.360 --> 0:12:57.439 Dominos has said they still can't find enough delivery drivers, 0:12:57.480 --> 0:13:00.800 so it's taking longer to get each pizza to people's doors. 0:13:00.880 --> 0:13:03.520 So yes, all of that affects sales. I mean, how 0:13:03.640 --> 0:13:05.920 bad is it is it? Mom and pop? It sounds 0:13:05.920 --> 0:13:07.760 like you're telling us about some well known names, So 0:13:07.880 --> 0:13:11.480 how bad is it across the industry. It's harder for 0:13:11.640 --> 0:13:14.520 mom and pops, I think, overall, for the independence to 0:13:14.640 --> 0:13:17.559 find and keep workers in a lot of cases. But 0:13:17.800 --> 0:13:20.200 but we're hearing it from big chains too. I mean, 0:13:20.360 --> 0:13:23.400 Jack in the Box, it's still doing reduced hours, they're 0:13:23.440 --> 0:13:26.040 not open as much as they used to be, and 0:13:26.200 --> 0:13:29.000 all of this is happening. One important thing to keep 0:13:29.040 --> 0:13:33.079 in mind despite pretty big gains for wages. You know, 0:13:33.080 --> 0:13:35.280 it's funny, I'm thinking back Leslie to my own days 0:13:35.320 --> 0:13:38.559 working at Denny's as a teenager. One thing I always 0:13:38.600 --> 0:13:40.800 looked for to is that's great, that's free meal. You 0:13:40.920 --> 0:13:45.120 got on your shift is a nice perk at a restaurant, 0:13:45.120 --> 0:13:47.080 But I'm wondering are there perks like that? I mean, 0:13:47.120 --> 0:13:49.559 obviously probably a free meal is not enough to bring 0:13:49.640 --> 0:13:52.240 anyone back. But are these companies doing anything? Is there 0:13:52.280 --> 0:13:56.760 any anything they can do or that they're trying to 0:13:56.840 --> 0:14:00.480 do to attract workers? Yeah, I mean I think I 0:14:00.559 --> 0:14:03.280 think pay benefits those are the big ones, and they 0:14:03.360 --> 0:14:06.439 all are offering higher pay than they used to and 0:14:06.760 --> 0:14:09.679 in a lot of cases more benefits. One interesting thing 0:14:09.720 --> 0:14:12.440 I found talking to a Burger King and q Doba 0:14:12.559 --> 0:14:16.280 franchise e. He's in West Virginia in Ohio. He said 0:14:16.320 --> 0:14:19.360 that he started doing an extra two dollars an hour 0:14:19.720 --> 0:14:22.800 attendance bonus just to get people to show up for 0:14:22.840 --> 0:14:25.440 their shifts because he was having so many call outs 0:14:25.480 --> 0:14:28.200 and no shows. It definitely has helped. So, I mean, 0:14:28.960 --> 0:14:32.360 when it comes down to it, it's the money, right, Well, 0:14:32.560 --> 0:14:35.360 can you remind us you know in Mike's day, you 0:14:35.440 --> 0:14:39.040 know he'd go work for a restaurant, right or a franchise. 0:14:39.080 --> 0:14:41.440 I have a sister who worked at McDonald's. Like growing up, 0:14:41.520 --> 0:14:44.720 like these were jobs teenagers you know definitely saw it out. 0:14:45.040 --> 0:14:49.120 What's the typical labor pool for restaurants that they typically 0:14:49.240 --> 0:14:53.560 pull from. It is still somewhat of an entry level job. 0:14:53.680 --> 0:14:58.359 But I think you're right that that idea as restaurants 0:14:58.400 --> 0:15:00.640 of your first job as you go to the local 0:15:00.760 --> 0:15:02.760 McDonald's down the street and you get a job when 0:15:02.760 --> 0:15:05.960 you're sixteen. I think that idea has has kind of 0:15:06.080 --> 0:15:10.000 dissipated in a lot of ways. Right, So we're not 0:15:10.200 --> 0:15:14.280 seeing as many younger teenage workers. Maybe they have internships, 0:15:14.440 --> 0:15:17.320 or they're doing more after school activities that sort of thing. 0:15:18.080 --> 0:15:22.000 It's really the kind of millennial gen X generation that's 0:15:22.400 --> 0:15:25.760 working in restaurants these days. Can I just to follow though? 0:15:25.840 --> 0:15:30.800 What about immigrants? You know, and you know that typically 0:15:30.880 --> 0:15:33.520 that's often an entry job for folks who come into 0:15:33.600 --> 0:15:36.800 this country. Is that part of the problem. Yeah, I 0:15:36.880 --> 0:15:39.320 think that's part of it. You know, we saw fewer 0:15:39.440 --> 0:15:42.240 immigrants over the you know, the past what was it 0:15:42.720 --> 0:15:45.240 four or five years or something. I mean, the meat 0:15:45.360 --> 0:15:48.040 industry has called that out too, because the meat industry, 0:15:48.800 --> 0:15:52.960 the packing and slaughtering houses, they employ so many immigrants 0:15:53.000 --> 0:15:56.160 and they're really struggling for staff. And we're during the 0:15:56.280 --> 0:16:00.200 pandemic and during kind of the Trump presidency and ask 0:16:00.280 --> 0:16:04.360 because of stricter border controls. You know, Leslie, I sometimes 0:16:04.400 --> 0:16:06.600 I feel like a broken record because I feel like 0:16:06.840 --> 0:16:11.120 every economic markets discussion always reverts back to the topic 0:16:11.200 --> 0:16:15.040 of inflation, and I'm wondering, you know, this all sounds 0:16:15.080 --> 0:16:18.880 to me like we should expect higher prices from restaurants 0:16:19.720 --> 0:16:21.880 going forward. Have you has there been a lot of 0:16:21.960 --> 0:16:23.960 price increases? I mean, I know there's been some, but 0:16:24.280 --> 0:16:26.680 what is sort of the vibe there as far as 0:16:26.720 --> 0:16:31.280 the outlook for higher prices at restaurants? Great question, so 0:16:31.440 --> 0:16:34.560 that there have been a lot of price increases for 0:16:34.760 --> 0:16:37.560 restaurants over the past year or so, But at the 0:16:37.640 --> 0:16:41.280 same time, I think we can probably expect more because 0:16:41.440 --> 0:16:44.800 wages are continuing to be pressured. There's still a shortage 0:16:44.800 --> 0:16:47.680 of staff, which mean wages needs to go up further, 0:16:48.120 --> 0:16:51.520 which means many prices are going up further. This really 0:16:51.600 --> 0:16:56.560 doesn't give too much hope for the Fed's emphasis on 0:16:56.720 --> 0:16:59.280 kind of stamming inflation in that service sector. I mean, 0:16:59.400 --> 0:17:01.360 maybe the rate is coming down a little bit, but 0:17:01.440 --> 0:17:04.760 it certainly isn't over. Yeah, it does feed into that 0:17:04.880 --> 0:17:08.600 wage inflation and makes it stickier. What do you folks 0:17:08.680 --> 0:17:11.320 in the restaurant industry typically make and what kind of 0:17:11.520 --> 0:17:15.040 you know, increases have they been getting. I think on average, 0:17:15.200 --> 0:17:17.600 you know, a fast food cook is maybe around twelve 0:17:17.760 --> 0:17:21.760 or thirteen dollars. But a lot of states have have 0:17:21.960 --> 0:17:24.440 this kind of you know, fifteen dollars minimum wage. A 0:17:24.480 --> 0:17:27.680 lot of municipalities have moved to that, so it really 0:17:27.880 --> 0:17:30.639 varies across the country. I mean, still we're at this 0:17:31.320 --> 0:17:35.920 federal minimum wage of around seven bucks. So there's huge, 0:17:36.080 --> 0:17:39.480 huge discrepancies across the country in terms of what people 0:17:39.520 --> 0:17:42.280 are making. You know, in here, I'm in Chicago, I've 0:17:42.280 --> 0:17:46.439 seen restaurants put signs up saying they're hiring people starting 0:17:46.520 --> 0:17:49.440 at twenty dollars an hour. But that's certainly not the 0:17:49.560 --> 0:17:52.679 case in some more rural areas well. Twenty an hour. 0:17:52.760 --> 0:17:55.840 That's where I'm some of my kids care over. It's 0:17:55.880 --> 0:17:58.680 not too shabby. You know. Let's say, I remember a 0:17:58.760 --> 0:18:03.280 few years ago to the pandemic, some restaurants started trying 0:18:03.359 --> 0:18:05.760 to automate as much as the process as possible, that 0:18:05.840 --> 0:18:09.040 you know, ordering with touchscreens, that sort of thing. You know, 0:18:09.080 --> 0:18:12.240 there's even talk about well maybe you know, the cooking 0:18:12.640 --> 0:18:15.800 and preparation of the food could be automated. Where do 0:18:15.880 --> 0:18:18.920 you see that going? Is there? Obviously there's a greater 0:18:19.040 --> 0:18:21.879 motivation to automate as much as possible now, but are 0:18:21.960 --> 0:18:23.680 we seeing that play out at all in real life? 0:18:24.880 --> 0:18:28.080 It's going, it's happening, but it's slow going. It's the 0:18:28.160 --> 0:18:31.920 important thing to remember. And another thing, I mean, we're 0:18:31.960 --> 0:18:36.400 not going to have robots necessarily cooking all of our 0:18:36.560 --> 0:18:38.880 food in the next few years. I mean these are 0:18:39.040 --> 0:18:44.879 still largely very much people labor jobs. I mean we 0:18:45.040 --> 0:18:48.240 see kiosks and restaurants and fast food places sometimes, but 0:18:48.640 --> 0:18:50.879 when you think about it, when you go in, do 0:18:51.000 --> 0:18:52.600 you go to the kiosk or do you go to 0:18:52.720 --> 0:18:55.720 the register if there's someone standing there? I think nine 0:18:55.760 --> 0:18:58.000 times out of ten people go to the person. They 0:18:58.040 --> 0:19:01.640 don't go to the kiosk. So so there's movements there, 0:19:01.720 --> 0:19:04.920 but it's slow and it's you know, incremental. At this point, 0:19:05.000 --> 0:19:06.760 I gotta say it a pan era, I have no 0:19:06.880 --> 0:19:08.919 problem with using my app and then just running by 0:19:08.960 --> 0:19:11.600 and picking up or going in and using their kiosk 0:19:11.960 --> 0:19:13.760 and then you just pick it up. So I do 0:19:13.960 --> 0:19:17.880 wonder if at some point Leslie, these you know, these 0:19:18.000 --> 0:19:20.639 restaurant chains are going to have to do more automation, 0:19:20.920 --> 0:19:24.560 especially if this trend doesn't change. I mean it's not easy. 0:19:24.640 --> 0:19:28.160 It's long hours sometimes not great hours, and not great conditions, 0:19:28.200 --> 0:19:32.400 many would argue, and just got about twenty seconds here. Yeah, sure. 0:19:32.480 --> 0:19:34.680 I mean with with the apps, I think yes, that's 0:19:34.680 --> 0:19:36.640 a way to kind of like for restaurants to skip 0:19:36.840 --> 0:19:40.800 over these kiosks, and the pandemic has hardest to be 0:19:40.960 --> 0:19:45.040 more okay with ordering you know grub Hub, that sort 0:19:45.080 --> 0:19:47.560 of thing on an app. So yeah, I think that's right, Carol. Right, 0:19:47.600 --> 0:19:49.360 you go to an airport, right, you just see it's 0:19:49.440 --> 0:19:52.119 it's an iPad. Yeah, and all of a sudden somebody 0:19:52.160 --> 0:19:54.680 like brings you food. I'm waiting for the chat cheap 0:19:54.720 --> 0:19:57.920 pt element, Carol, Can you have what should I eat? Yeah? 0:19:57.960 --> 0:20:01.359 We're give me a new recipe for we're you know something, 0:20:01.440 --> 0:20:03.879 get up before you get on the plane. Leslie Patton 0:20:04.119 --> 0:20:08.080 a great story and really relevant Leslie Patton. She's consumer 0:20:08.080 --> 0:20:10.880 reporter at Bloomberg News. Joining us on the phone from Chicago. 0:20:12.680 --> 0:20:17.000 This is Bloomberg Business Week inside from the reporters and 0:20:17.240 --> 0:20:20.720 editors who bring you America's most trusted business magazine, plus 0:20:20.880 --> 0:20:25.000 global business, finance and tech news. The Bloomberg Business Week 0:20:25.080 --> 0:20:29.960 podcast with Carol Messer and Tim Stenebec from Bloomberg Radio. 0:20:33.200 --> 0:20:35.199 It is International Women's Day and we thought it made 0:20:35.240 --> 0:20:37.640 a lot of sense to check out how the Impact 0:20:37.840 --> 0:20:42.640 Shares YMCA Women's Empowerment ETF was doing the ETF celebrate 0:20:42.680 --> 0:20:45.280 its three year anniversary mic that happened last August. It's 0:20:45.359 --> 0:20:48.879 up on average annually nearly fifteen percent over the past 0:20:48.960 --> 0:20:51.240 three years. Top holdings we're talking about names you know 0:20:51.400 --> 0:20:54.000 and Vidia, Amazon, Apple, Meta, J and J and Moore. 0:20:54.040 --> 0:20:56.959 So let's get to it with us. Is Jill O'Donovan, 0:20:57.000 --> 0:21:00.640 adviser to Impact Share. She joins us via zoom from Chicago. Jeel, 0:21:00.680 --> 0:21:02.399 good to have you here with Mike and myself. How 0:21:02.480 --> 0:21:05.200 are you. I'm good, Thank you for having me. Well, 0:21:05.240 --> 0:21:07.399 tell us a little bit about the investment theory this 0:21:07.600 --> 0:21:11.640 ETF what it specifically can invest in and it attracts 0:21:11.640 --> 0:21:15.399 it index correct it does? It does so. The actual 0:21:15.480 --> 0:21:18.880 gender equity research is done by Equality out of the Netherlands, 0:21:19.200 --> 0:21:21.520 and that information is taken and given a morning Star 0:21:21.720 --> 0:21:26.280 who creates the Women's Empowerment Index, and then the fund 0:21:27.640 --> 0:21:31.320 is developed based on that index and the work of 0:21:31.359 --> 0:21:34.640 the y to WCA, and relation to this is as 0:21:34.680 --> 0:21:38.200 the impact partner. The y to WCA, as many people 0:21:38.359 --> 0:21:40.919 tend to not know, has been around for over one 0:21:41.000 --> 0:21:44.760 hundred and sixty years empowering women and working to eliminate 0:21:44.880 --> 0:21:50.520 racism throughout the United States, and because our focus is 0:21:50.560 --> 0:21:53.879 women's empowerment, we thought this was a great partnership. We 0:21:54.080 --> 0:21:58.359 provide a lot of the advice about what things do 0:21:58.600 --> 0:22:02.200 empower women in the workforce and looking at specifically the 0:22:02.280 --> 0:22:08.840 equiligue criteria and the way that those specific things really 0:22:08.920 --> 0:22:11.240 align with the that we've been doing for all these years. 0:22:11.760 --> 0:22:14.119 So what are some of the things that are screened for. 0:22:14.359 --> 0:22:19.639 Is I'm assuming representation of women on boards and c suites, 0:22:19.720 --> 0:22:22.399 that that sort of thing. Joe, Yes, that's that's one 0:22:22.400 --> 0:22:24.920 of the first tiers that we look at. There's four 0:22:25.000 --> 0:22:28.560 broad categories of the nineteen criteria, the first being gender 0:22:28.600 --> 0:22:32.040 balance and leadership in the workforce. Then we also consider 0:22:32.320 --> 0:22:36.160 equal compensation and work life balance as a category, policies 0:22:36.200 --> 0:22:39.520 promoting gender equity, and then in general overall commitment to 0:22:39.600 --> 0:22:43.359 women's empowerment and the transparency of the company and accountability. 0:22:43.840 --> 0:22:45.800 Um So, within each of those four there are some 0:22:45.920 --> 0:22:49.800 subset sectors. Obviously women on boards, which is a big, 0:22:50.640 --> 0:22:53.680 big topic right now, and as well as women in 0:22:53.760 --> 0:22:55.920 the C suite. But we died a little bit deeper 0:22:56.080 --> 0:22:59.920 and also look at women in senior management, the overall workforce. 0:23:00.880 --> 0:23:04.080 We look at the promotion and career development opportunities by 0:23:04.640 --> 0:23:08.639 comparing the senior management and workforce, and look at what 0:23:08.800 --> 0:23:11.280 companies are doing in those areas to really be able 0:23:11.320 --> 0:23:14.720 to advance women throughout their company, not just at the 0:23:14.760 --> 0:23:16.720 top levels. Hey, Jill, do you feel like you really 0:23:16.760 --> 0:23:18.920 it's transparent in terms of I mean, some of those 0:23:18.920 --> 0:23:20.720 are pretty obvious, right You can look at a board 0:23:20.760 --> 0:23:22.600 and understand how many women are there. But when you 0:23:22.640 --> 0:23:25.720 start talking about career development policies and so on, how 0:23:25.760 --> 0:23:28.080 do you really get a good grasp of what's going 0:23:28.119 --> 0:23:30.119 on in a company. They can say they're doing one thing, 0:23:30.440 --> 0:23:33.399 but that doesn't necessarily mean they're doing it right. Right 0:23:33.520 --> 0:23:35.359 on a high level, we rely on the research that 0:23:35.440 --> 0:23:38.840 equally is doing. But then when the YDWCI gets involved, 0:23:38.960 --> 0:23:40.840