WEBVTT - Inflation, Consumer Sentiment, And Labor 0:00:00.800 --> 0:00:04.040 Welcome to the Bloomberg Markets Podcast. I'm Paul Sweeney. Alongside 0:00:04.040 --> 0:00:06.920 my co host Matt Miller. Every business day we bring 0:00:06.960 --> 0:00:11.520 you interviews from CEOs, market pros, and Bloomberg experts, along 0:00:11.560 --> 0:00:15.600 with essential market moving news. Find the Bloomberg Markets Podcast 0:00:15.600 --> 0:00:18.479 on Apple Podcasts or wherever you listen to podcasts, and 0:00:18.480 --> 0:00:22.280 at Bloomberg dot com slash podcast. All Right, Adam Gold, 0:00:22.320 --> 0:00:26.200 founder and chief investment officer at catam LLLC, joins us. Adam, 0:00:26.239 --> 0:00:28.760 I'm looking at a market the SMP. Let's call it 0:00:28.760 --> 0:00:31.920 a correction off at or about ten percent, yet nastack 0:00:31.960 --> 0:00:35.680 off at or about If I'm gonna buy the dipper? 0:00:36.159 --> 0:00:39.319 Is this my time to buy? Good morning, guys, Thanks 0:00:39.360 --> 0:00:42.520 for having me. Um, that's always the trillion dollar question, 0:00:42.600 --> 0:00:44.239 and the answer is you just never know where the 0:00:44.240 --> 0:00:48.000 bottom is. Um, there's the pendulum is certainly swung wearing 0:00:48.080 --> 0:00:51.520 choppy waters right now. There's there's a lot of issues here. 0:00:51.640 --> 0:00:54.120 Every other guest talks about it. In the long term, 0:00:54.360 --> 0:00:56.360 I think this is an incredible opportunity to be buying 0:00:56.400 --> 0:00:59.639 great companies that are off significantly. But you know, when 0:00:59.640 --> 0:01:02.040 we were went from a correction of a bear market 0:01:02.040 --> 0:01:04.760 in the Nasdack. If you look back to November where 0:01:05.160 --> 0:01:08.080 November twenty two, the market fell three from the highest 0:01:08.120 --> 0:01:10.720 the lows that day, and that's why really sort of 0:01:10.760 --> 0:01:13.840 started this downwards. So now we're almost on the nastac 0:01:14.240 --> 0:01:15.840 We don't know where the low can be, but if 0:01:15.840 --> 0:01:17.679 you look out over time, we think this is a 0:01:17.680 --> 0:01:21.640 great opportunity. So UM a great opportunity though for for 0:01:21.680 --> 0:01:23.720 what is the question? How do you screen for the 0:01:23.720 --> 0:01:25.480 companies that you want to buy? How do you make 0:01:25.520 --> 0:01:31.280 those decisions? Absolutely, fundamentals matter significantly, especially in when you're 0:01:31.280 --> 0:01:35.200 in sort of down markets, and balance sheets get looked at. UM. 0:01:35.240 --> 0:01:37.880 One of my old bosses said in bullmarkets, it's all 0:01:37.920 --> 0:01:41.280 about the income statement revenue, right, you've the sales multiples, 0:01:41.280 --> 0:01:44.280 et cetera. And profits are insignificant when you come on 0:01:44.319 --> 0:01:47.039 the way down. Of course, balance sheets matter, cash positions, 0:01:47.120 --> 0:01:49.440 real profits, and we've seen that. So we think what 0:01:49.480 --> 0:01:51.680 we've done for clients the last few months has moved 0:01:51.720 --> 0:01:54.440 out of which has been very helpful, moving out of 0:01:54.520 --> 0:01:57.480 unprofitable companies. UH. And that's you've seen a lot of 0:01:57.920 --> 0:02:00.440 other guests talk about the Cathy Wood type names, the 0:02:00.560 --> 0:02:04.680 ARC universe, selling profitable positions, the companies like apples the world, 0:02:04.760 --> 0:02:06.920 the mega cap texts that are profitable that can buy 0:02:06.920 --> 0:02:10.040 back stock to buy unprofitable companies, and that's been a 0:02:10.160 --> 0:02:13.560 very bad uh direction the last few months. So we 0:02:13.600 --> 0:02:16.080 think we've we've screened out a lot of those companies. 0:02:16.440 --> 0:02:18.320 We don't know where the lows. Maybe we say that 0:02:18.360 --> 0:02:21.160 again near term where we think long term as a 0:02:21.200 --> 0:02:23.480 secular investor, what are the big trends that are going 0:02:23.560 --> 0:02:25.920 to happen over the next five or ten years. I 0:02:25.960 --> 0:02:28.480 think that the markets gives us our our job is 0:02:28.520 --> 0:02:32.120 that markets are very sort of near term, almost cyclical obsessed, 0:02:32.400 --> 0:02:35.040 and we think that's the real opportunity here. So um, 0:02:35.480 --> 0:02:38.480 we think there's incredible companies and technology. That's the sector 0:02:38.520 --> 0:02:41.240 we've focused on for our entire career twenty plus years. 0:02:41.560 --> 0:02:43.120 It's proven to be a great place to be. We 0:02:43.160 --> 0:02:44.639 think that will be a better place to be in 0:02:44.680 --> 0:02:47.280 the next twenty years than than it is today. There's 0:02:47.320 --> 0:02:49.840 just periods here where certain sectors fall out of favor. 0:02:50.440 --> 0:02:52.359 So on the tech side, you know, when you've got 0:02:52.360 --> 0:02:54.519 a name like Facebook, which has been such a strong 0:02:54.600 --> 0:02:58.360 performer for so many investors, but it's down year to date, 0:02:58.440 --> 0:03:01.079 off about over the trailing twelve months. So when you 0:03:01.120 --> 0:03:03.480 look at a name like that, what do you what 0:03:03.480 --> 0:03:07.799 do you think? Yeah, there's a couple of big issues there. Um, 0:03:07.919 --> 0:03:10.440 we we've been a long term shareholder since the I 0:03:10.520 --> 0:03:12.280 p O. We'll never forget the day that the I 0:03:12.360 --> 0:03:15.400 p O shares locked up UM at the six month mark. 0:03:15.440 --> 0:03:18.880 Peter Deal famously sold every single share. He had about 0:03:18.880 --> 0:03:21.880 a billion dollars worth around eighteen so he caused himself 0:03:21.880 --> 0:03:25.120 ten billion dollars by being somewhat shortsighted there, and he's 0:03:25.120 --> 0:03:27.760 actually just left the board. But um, you know, over time, 0:03:27.760 --> 0:03:30.680 they've done an incredible job growing their business. They're very profitable, 0:03:31.080 --> 0:03:33.520 but they're making a major pivot, and that pivot is 0:03:34.040 --> 0:03:37.280 a couple of areas. One is they're investing UM into 0:03:37.320 --> 0:03:40.480 new products which don't have as much AD units behind them, 0:03:40.520 --> 0:03:43.240 which is something like a TikTok type reels product. So 0:03:43.240 --> 0:03:45.400 they're having a change. They're sort of sort of trying 0:03:45.400 --> 0:03:48.400 to change the engine midflight here, which is always very challenging. 0:03:48.400 --> 0:03:51.160 They're trying to change their AD products on their core business, 0:03:51.760 --> 0:03:54.600 which faces some competition from other apps and time spent, 0:03:55.000 --> 0:03:56.960 and then they're actually literally changed the name of their 0:03:56.960 --> 0:03:59.600 company to focus on the future hardware business, which is 0:03:59.600 --> 0:04:01.280 where they want to go from two D screens to 0:04:01.440 --> 0:04:04.120 three D screens. And they spend ten billion dollars and 0:04:04.160 --> 0:04:06.160 lost a lot of money there, and they finally split 0:04:06.200 --> 0:04:10.000 out that segment, which is their their hardware AI initiatives 0:04:10.040 --> 0:04:12.920 as well as um Oculus, v R, A R and 0:04:12.920 --> 0:04:14.760 And that's a long time away. So you've got a 0:04:14.800 --> 0:04:18.680 really tough combination of slowing growth and rising expenses, and 0:04:18.720 --> 0:04:20.960 that's why you know, the stock has fallen so significantly 0:04:20.960 --> 0:04:23.520 because that's a bad combination for investors. Don't they also, 0:04:23.560 --> 0:04:25.719 I mean, at least in the metaverse, aren't they going 0:04:25.760 --> 0:04:30.640 to have significant competition from companies that haven't happened to 0:04:30.720 --> 0:04:34.680 change their names to meta platforms? Sure well, we we will. 0:04:34.720 --> 0:04:37.039 We own the Video, we own Microsoft, We own a 0:04:37.040 --> 0:04:38.320 lot of the companies that we think are going to 0:04:38.440 --> 0:04:41.480 benefit from a move away from screens. And Apple as well. 0:04:41.520 --> 0:04:43.880 I mean, they're the biggest um They're they're the unknown 0:04:43.880 --> 0:04:46.160 at the moment, but they have the largest one of 0:04:46.320 --> 0:04:48.240 you know, the best, Google, the largest user based and 0:04:48.279 --> 0:04:51.359 mobile devices apples second. But in terms of higher value 0:04:51.400 --> 0:04:54.760 customers and profits, Apples the clear leader. Those two companies 0:04:54.800 --> 0:04:57.680 will make um, you know, potentially incredible moves there and 0:04:57.720 --> 0:04:59.960 given their size and scales, so yes, it's an absolutely 0:05:00.200 --> 0:05:03.359 uh you know, competitive landscape, but an omniverse. So the 0:05:03.360 --> 0:05:05.640 meta versus a concept is a connection of you know, 0:05:05.720 --> 0:05:08.159 a lot of different worlds together um, where people are 0:05:08.200 --> 0:05:11.280 gonna spend more time you know, beyond their screens potentially, 0:05:11.320 --> 0:05:13.240 so and we think there's room for all of them 0:05:13.279 --> 0:05:16.279 to intermix um. But yes, it's definitely they have no 0:05:16.680 --> 0:05:20.400 you know, Zuckerberg has done incredible job growing against with 0:05:20.600 --> 0:05:22.599 you know, without having control of his platforms. And he 0:05:22.600 --> 0:05:24.279 tried to launch a phone a few years ago, did 0:05:24.400 --> 0:05:27.159 not work. Basis did as well, also failed. But he 0:05:27.200 --> 0:05:29.680 wants to control his hardware and his software. That's something 0:05:29.720 --> 0:05:32.600 that Apple has famously done with the software, hardware and 0:05:32.640 --> 0:05:35.400 services connection. Uh, And so he's trying to do that. 0:05:35.440 --> 0:05:37.599 He's making big bowld bets and so he really wanted 0:05:37.640 --> 0:05:39.920 to let us employees know this is the way we're 0:05:39.920 --> 0:05:41.880 going to be moving. So we think over the next 0:05:41.880 --> 0:05:44.360 you know, several years, as more of these products come out, 0:05:44.360 --> 0:05:46.600 we'll get his better sense of what, um, what they're doing. 0:05:46.640 --> 0:05:49.200 They're actually having an ai UH demo day today, so 0:05:49.240 --> 0:05:51.600 we'll see what we'll watch that after this. All right, Adam, 0:05:51.640 --> 0:05:54.120 thanks so much for taking the time out and chatting 0:05:54.160 --> 0:05:57.279 with us. Adam Gold, founder and chief investment officer for 0:05:57.320 --> 0:06:01.200 Catam LLC talking to us about these markets. Still likes 0:06:01.279 --> 0:06:04.440 the text story um as opposed to some of the 0:06:04.440 --> 0:06:06.960 cyclical names, the energies, the banks that have performed well 0:06:07.240 --> 0:06:10.120 on a reopening type of trade. He's sticking with technology 0:06:10.160 --> 0:06:17.560 at that firm. Let's continue that discussion on retail with 0:06:17.640 --> 0:06:21.960 Mary Sure, senior Equity Annals at Columbia Thread Needle. Maury, 0:06:22.360 --> 0:06:24.200 we've come through with most of the earnings here, a 0:06:24.200 --> 0:06:28.479 lot of the earnings. How is the consumer faring? I 0:06:28.560 --> 0:06:33.760 think overall the consumer is is faring much better than expected. 0:06:34.160 --> 0:06:37.600 We d We did see in the retail sales numbers 0:06:37.600 --> 0:06:40.080 and here from the companies. At the very end of 0:06:40.120 --> 0:06:43.320 the holiday was a little bit weaker, but that was 0:06:43.360 --> 0:06:49.120 attributed to oh Macron related traffic pressure. And since the 0:06:49.160 --> 0:06:52.960 middle of January we have seen traffic and sales improve, 0:06:53.520 --> 0:06:57.240 which I think is very encouraging, especially given the very 0:06:57.320 --> 0:07:01.719 tough compares that so many company are up against. I 0:07:01.760 --> 0:07:05.520 think another really big takeaway is given the strong underlying 0:07:05.560 --> 0:07:10.320 health of the consumer, the companies are very confident in 0:07:10.360 --> 0:07:14.560 their ability to continue to take price despite the fact 0:07:14.800 --> 0:07:17.720 that inflation continues to build. Yeah, I was going to 0:07:17.800 --> 0:07:21.520 ask about what, if what effects has that had Mari um. 0:07:21.560 --> 0:07:25.760 The inflation numbers are eye popping. I don't know what, 0:07:26.040 --> 0:07:29.160 um what Paul paid for his Elton John tickets last night, 0:07:29.160 --> 0:07:30.720 but I'm gonna guess it was a lot more than 0:07:30.720 --> 0:07:33.080 he would have paid a couple of years ago. And 0:07:33.080 --> 0:07:36.480 the and the steak before keens at stake as well. Yeah, 0:07:36.680 --> 0:07:41.600 food inflation um as well as uh, you know, experiences 0:07:42.160 --> 0:07:44.640 and stuff. It just costs a lot more. How how 0:07:44.640 --> 0:07:50.320 are consumers dealing with that? Surprisingly well. Speaking to the companies, 0:07:50.400 --> 0:07:54.080 and these are companies with exposure to all different categories, 0:07:54.120 --> 0:07:58.600 everything from food to handbags, the companies are not seeing 0:07:58.680 --> 0:08:02.840 any real pushback to or pricing efforts, or any real 0:08:02.960 --> 0:08:06.440 evidence of trade down. But they are all saying that 0:08:06.560 --> 0:08:10.760 if this level inflation continues, then they would expect to 0:08:10.880 --> 0:08:15.760 see trade down and greater focus of spending on needs 0:08:15.800 --> 0:08:18.920 over wats, But right now we are not seeing that 0:08:19.080 --> 0:08:22.280 in the current sales trends. Mario What are the retailers 0:08:22.320 --> 0:08:24.320 saying about the supply chain? Are they able to get 0:08:24.400 --> 0:08:26.920 stuff on the shelves, do they expect it to get 0:08:26.960 --> 0:08:30.280 better or worse, or what are they saying. I think 0:08:30.320 --> 0:08:33.960 that oh, Macron delayed the normalization of the supply chain 0:08:34.000 --> 0:08:36.920 a little bit um but and and most of the 0:08:36.960 --> 0:08:39.640 companies I think are taking a more conservative view in 0:08:39.760 --> 0:08:45.040 expecting the freight cost pressure to continue through the full year. 0:08:45.679 --> 0:08:48.719 But that really reflects the fact that demand is so 0:08:48.840 --> 0:08:54.240 strong and they are having to um to chase sales 0:08:54.320 --> 0:08:58.200 and that is coming at a greater cost. But as 0:08:58.240 --> 0:09:01.800 it relates to inventory, day have all taken action to 0:09:02.600 --> 0:09:07.520 pull forward inventory receipts and so when it when it 0:09:07.559 --> 0:09:09.360 comes to the inventory that you might see on the 0:09:09.360 --> 0:09:11.880 shelves of the stores, you should see that in a 0:09:12.040 --> 0:09:15.320 very good condition. And I think it could even continue 0:09:15.320 --> 0:09:18.600 to improve further as we moved through the year. All right, Mary, 0:09:18.640 --> 0:09:20.880 thank you so much for joining us getting us an 0:09:20.920 --> 0:09:23.200 update here on all things retail and on the consumer. 0:09:23.200 --> 0:09:26.439 And as Marie was saying, consumer continues to be strong 0:09:26.480 --> 0:09:30.080 in this economy. Mary Shore, senior equity analyst at Columbia 0:09:30.280 --> 0:09:37.280 thread Needle Investments, giving us the latest tier Steve Kane, 0:09:37.360 --> 0:09:41.360 co ce io and general's portfolio manager at TCW Investment Management. 0:09:41.400 --> 0:09:43.720 He went to the University of Chicago, got his NBA there, Matt, 0:09:43.720 --> 0:09:47.640 which means he understands the booth duration, the booth school vexity. 0:09:48.160 --> 0:09:50.680 I'm an equity guy, Steve, so I don'tally don't. I 0:09:50.679 --> 0:09:53.240 didn't pay too much attention to that business school. But 0:09:53.280 --> 0:09:55.959 you're fixed income portfolio manager. What do you do here 0:09:55.960 --> 0:10:02.160 in a rising interest rate environment? Steve? Well, hopefully, uh 0:10:02.559 --> 0:10:05.520 you had your duration short going back a year or so, 0:10:05.760 --> 0:10:10.199 which we were fortunate to do. But I would say that, um, 0:10:10.600 --> 0:10:12.520 you know, things are getting a little bit more interesting 0:10:12.559 --> 0:10:15.800 in the fixed income world from a value perspective, and 0:10:16.320 --> 0:10:19.640 I think where we you know, along the rate environment, 0:10:19.679 --> 0:10:21.320 we uh, we think the front end of the curve 0:10:21.400 --> 0:10:23.600 is starting to look interesting. A one sixty two year 0:10:23.679 --> 0:10:27.360 that discounts eight fed tightenings over the next you know, 0:10:27.440 --> 0:10:30.319 fifteen months or so, it looks reasonable. Now when you 0:10:30.360 --> 0:10:33.080 look out the curve, we're not as excited. You know, 0:10:33.160 --> 0:10:37.160 a sub ten year and uh thirty year just beyond 0:10:37.559 --> 0:10:40.640 your you're just not getting much term premium or really 0:10:40.640 --> 0:10:43.480 getting paid for your risk out the curve. So in general, 0:10:43.520 --> 0:10:46.400 what we tell investors is keep your duration shut, keep 0:10:46.559 --> 0:10:48.720 keep your focus on the on the front end of 0:10:48.720 --> 0:10:55.200 the curve. So, um, if we get eight rate hikes 0:10:55.400 --> 0:10:59.160 or more, would that surprise you then? No, not at all. 0:10:59.280 --> 0:11:02.000 I mean the d is I mean, of course, it 0:11:02.000 --> 0:11:05.280 depends on what happens with inflation and with the economy 0:11:05.280 --> 0:11:07.480 and all that. But you know, our view is inflation 0:11:07.520 --> 0:11:09.679 is going to run hot, certainly for the balance of 0:11:09.720 --> 0:11:12.400 this year and maybe well into next year, given what 0:11:12.400 --> 0:11:15.199 we're seeing in the labor market and with wages. Uh, 0:11:15.320 --> 0:11:18.840 certainly energy prices feeding into that as well. Um. Yeah, No, 0:11:18.920 --> 0:11:21.760 the FED is uh, you know, almost regardless of what 0:11:21.800 --> 0:11:24.040 happens with the you know, Russian Ukraine or even the 0:11:24.080 --> 0:11:27.720 stock market, the fence locked into a tightening path here. Um, 0:11:27.760 --> 0:11:29.800 given the high level of inflation and the fact that 0:11:29.840 --> 0:11:33.200 they really need to begin to get to work to 0:11:33.280 --> 0:11:36.120 address that, Steve, what does history have to tell us 0:11:36.160 --> 0:11:39.640 about the ability of the FED to fight inflation? I 0:11:39.720 --> 0:11:41.760 kind of feel like inflation is just because there's a 0:11:41.800 --> 0:11:44.640 bunch of ships off the port of Long Beach and 0:11:44.960 --> 0:11:47.960 the portrait clogged, and there's nobody to move this stuff, 0:11:47.960 --> 0:11:50.520 and there's no truckers, and what can the FED really 0:11:50.559 --> 0:11:55.480 do there? The FED can do nothing, I think lined up, 0:11:55.600 --> 0:11:58.160 lined up outside of ports, there's there's absolutely nothing they 0:11:58.160 --> 0:12:01.040 can do that The FED can really just through monetary 0:12:01.080 --> 0:12:04.520 policy affect financial conditions and the demand side of the 0:12:04.520 --> 0:12:09.240 economy through through interest rate sensitive sectors of the economy, 0:12:09.320 --> 0:12:12.960 which means there they have a very bluntant instrument. UM 0:12:13.000 --> 0:12:15.960 as we all know in terms of dealing with inflation, 0:12:16.000 --> 0:12:19.160 and inflation works with the lag. So the sort of 0:12:19.240 --> 0:12:23.199 unfortunate thing from an inflation forecasting standpoint is, even though 0:12:23.240 --> 0:12:26.400 they are going to be hiking, the impact of those hikes, 0:12:26.640 --> 0:12:28.560 UM is going to affect the economy with a lag 0:12:28.600 --> 0:12:31.520 and then inflation with even a further lag. So UH, 0:12:31.520 --> 0:12:35.360 it's it's not gonna really have an immediate effect on 0:12:36.080 --> 0:12:38.360 on the supply side of the economy at all. How 0:12:38.400 --> 0:12:41.320 important is it to get the rest of UM the 0:12:41.480 --> 0:12:47.960 f O M c UH confirmed UM, I don't think 0:12:47.960 --> 0:12:50.480 it really matters all that much. I mean that you 0:12:50.559 --> 0:12:53.760 have your big three in place, Paul Brainerd and Williams, 0:12:53.840 --> 0:12:58.040 the UH president of the New York FT, and UH, 0:12:58.120 --> 0:13:03.000 I don't think they need a full slate of Fed 0:13:03.080 --> 0:13:07.080 governors and presidents don't necessarily make decisions, so I think, 0:13:07.160 --> 0:13:09.040 you know, yes, it would be nice, but I don't 0:13:09.040 --> 0:13:11.520 think it's gonna affect in any way there their policy 0:13:11.559 --> 0:13:14.760 making decisions. Steve, you know when the FED made this 0:13:14.800 --> 0:13:17.120 pivot to a more hawkers stance and were I think 0:13:17.120 --> 0:13:20.199 the market was talking about three rate increases now potentially 0:13:20.200 --> 0:13:22.680 as many as seven. How do you feel about that 0:13:22.720 --> 0:13:26.400 discussion point of is the Fed behind the market? Are 0:13:26.400 --> 0:13:28.400 they trying to play catch up? How do you think 0:13:28.440 --> 0:13:30.800 about that? Yeah? I think they are. And I think 0:13:30.800 --> 0:13:34.720 what happened is, you know, they they went with the 0:13:34.760 --> 0:13:38.160 transitory supply bottleneck view for a while, and I think 0:13:38.160 --> 0:13:40.160 what changed as they began to see tightness in the 0:13:40.240 --> 0:13:43.920 labor market and um, you know, unemployment at four percent 0:13:44.120 --> 0:13:47.880 and wages rising very quickly and sort of forward looking 0:13:47.920 --> 0:13:51.080 indicators like the quits rate at historical highs, people leaving 0:13:51.120 --> 0:13:54.920 their job voluntarily, all suggests that this is more than 0:13:54.960 --> 0:13:57.959 a temporary phenomenon, that it's you know, it's affected the 0:13:58.040 --> 0:14:00.400 labor market. And I think the Fed, you is behind 0:14:00.400 --> 0:14:04.720 the curve in fact, and because you know, wages uh 0:14:04.720 --> 0:14:07.480 in the employment market do not react quickly to change 0:14:07.520 --> 0:14:09.920 it an interest rates. So again, it's going to be 0:14:10.000 --> 0:14:12.800 some period of time and some amount of that tightening 0:14:12.800 --> 0:14:15.000 and slowing in the economy before you see an impact 0:14:15.040 --> 0:14:18.679 on the labor market. All right, Steve, thanks so much 0:14:18.679 --> 0:14:20.880 for joining us. To really appreciate it. I always love 0:14:20.960 --> 0:14:23.080 talking to the folks at t c W. Get this 0:14:23.320 --> 0:14:28.320 two billion dollars in fixed income assets. I mean, that 0:14:28.440 --> 0:14:30.240 is a meeting. When you go to l A to 0:14:30.320 --> 0:14:32.920 see clients, you gotta lockdown that tc W meeting first 0:14:32.960 --> 0:14:42.080 and foremost, I want to talk about the workplace here. 0:14:42.120 --> 0:14:44.600 We've we've talked a lot about the great resignation, four 0:14:44.640 --> 0:14:47.280 to five million folks leaving in the workforce. That's got 0:14:47.360 --> 0:14:50.160 to handle on what it means for women. Are they 0:14:50.200 --> 0:14:52.240 a part of that? Are are they representative of part 0:14:52.280 --> 0:14:54.720 of that great resignation? And will they come back to 0:14:54.760 --> 0:14:57.720 the workforce. Tara J. Frank, President and CEO of t 0:14:58.080 --> 0:15:00.800 f J Career Modeling Jo and just Tara, thanks so 0:15:00.880 --> 0:15:03.840 much for joining us talk to us about women in 0:15:03.880 --> 0:15:07.240 the labor force as we enter into year three this pandemic. 0:15:08.320 --> 0:15:11.160 Hi there, thanks for having me. First of all, Um, Yeah, 0:15:11.280 --> 0:15:14.320 very good question. When you ask about whether women are 0:15:14.440 --> 0:15:19.040 engaged in the Great resignation. They're actually leading the Great resignation. 0:15:19.160 --> 0:15:21.680 And to put a finer point on it, women of 0:15:21.720 --> 0:15:24.760 color are actually leading the Great resignation. And there are 0:15:24.760 --> 0:15:27.760 a lot of reasons for that. Um. I think one, 0:15:27.960 --> 0:15:30.200 when we think about the pandemic and the pressure that 0:15:30.240 --> 0:15:32.920 has put on so many people, it also kind of 0:15:33.040 --> 0:15:38.119 enabled especially women of color, to have virtual faith spaces 0:15:38.280 --> 0:15:40.800 right where they weren't necessarily having to deal with some 0:15:40.880 --> 0:15:43.960 of the things microaggressions, etcetera that they may have been 0:15:43.960 --> 0:15:47.280 dealing with in the workplace. Clearly, the last couple of 0:15:47.360 --> 0:15:50.040 years have given people a little bit more flexibility and 0:15:50.400 --> 0:15:54.520 the opportunity to combine work in life in ways that 0:15:54.600 --> 0:15:57.760 gave them a sense of harmony. So yeah, most definitely 0:15:57.880 --> 0:16:01.600 that would explain for sure how it's easier for women 0:16:01.640 --> 0:16:05.920 of color to work from home, um or how it's 0:16:06.280 --> 0:16:09.480 um you know, not as difficult when it comes to 0:16:09.520 --> 0:16:12.520 the kind of racism or sexism that they may face 0:16:12.560 --> 0:16:15.920 in the work place. But I wonder about those who 0:16:15.920 --> 0:16:19.600 have left the workforce. Have they left because you know, 0:16:19.640 --> 0:16:22.920 out of choice, because they wanted to because now you know, 0:16:23.080 --> 0:16:26.280 I don't know, retirement funds One up with the stock market, 0:16:26.440 --> 0:16:28.840 or they found a way to make it work on 0:16:29.320 --> 0:16:32.240 um less pay, or have they left because they had 0:16:32.320 --> 0:16:34.840 to Those who have left, have they left because they 0:16:34.920 --> 0:16:39.520 needed to take care of children, take care of their elders, etcetera. Well, 0:16:39.600 --> 0:16:43.479 some are leaving the workforce as we define it traditionally, 0:16:43.840 --> 0:16:47.240 but they're not necessarily leaving work, right, So I think 0:16:47.280 --> 0:16:49.400 we have a couple of different facets of this. Yes, 0:16:49.440 --> 0:16:52.160 some are leaving the workforce because they're having to manage 0:16:52.160 --> 0:16:56.400 so many more factors um, But others are leaving companies 0:16:56.440 --> 0:17:01.240 not necessarily the workforce or working in general. Right, they're 0:17:01.280 --> 0:17:05.919 creating new avenues of income in partnership with other people 0:17:06.480 --> 0:17:09.480 with their own kind of creativity and ideas. But yeah, 0:17:09.480 --> 0:17:12.600 they're leaving the traditional workforce as we know it um 0:17:12.680 --> 0:17:16.480 and and really just trying to manage life. So what 0:17:16.520 --> 0:17:20.360 are we seeing in kind of the leadership positions terror 0:17:20.400 --> 0:17:22.879 Because I mean, I think whether it's gender diversity or 0:17:22.880 --> 0:17:26.600 other diverse other types of diversity, it really I kind 0:17:26.600 --> 0:17:30.320 of feel like at the lower levels there's pretty decent representation, 0:17:30.400 --> 0:17:32.119 but it is the higher you go, the more difficult 0:17:32.240 --> 0:17:35.840 it becomes. Again, real diversification, is there some solutions that 0:17:36.320 --> 0:17:38.720 the pay gap. If you if it's like for like 0:17:38.960 --> 0:17:41.280 you know, job for job, maybe that pay gap is 0:17:41.320 --> 0:17:44.320 shrinking a little bit. But I think Terra, your your 0:17:44.359 --> 0:17:48.960 point is that if you look at the unadjusted pay gap, 0:17:49.119 --> 0:17:53.920 it's still large because you don't see UM women, you 0:17:53.960 --> 0:17:57.920 don't see people of color in enough, in high enough 0:17:58.000 --> 0:18:02.040 numbers moving into the leadership higher positions. Yes, that is 0:18:02.119 --> 0:18:04.720 absolutely right. So what we're what we have here is 0:18:04.800 --> 0:18:09.560 essentially occupational segregation. Right, You have women in lower paying jobs, 0:18:09.640 --> 0:18:11.879 and you know, to your question about what can we 0:18:11.960 --> 0:18:14.480 do in in order to change that, I think one 0:18:14.480 --> 0:18:16.399 of the things we really need to do that leaders 0:18:16.400 --> 0:18:20.040 and companies need to do UM is certainly start capturing 0:18:20.400 --> 0:18:25.399 UH data at deeper levels UM, but also interspectional data, 0:18:25.520 --> 0:18:28.840 so not just data about women representation, but really looking 0:18:28.920 --> 0:18:32.240 kind of all across all those dimensions of difference. They 0:18:32.280 --> 0:18:34.360 also need to get a much better sense of what's 0:18:34.400 --> 0:18:38.159 happening inside their cultures experientially, because a lot of this 0:18:38.280 --> 0:18:41.480 bias that is keeping women from being able to move 0:18:41.640 --> 0:18:47.040 higher into those higher contributing positions were not necessarily conscious of. 0:18:47.240 --> 0:18:49.719 They have to do with things like women may not 0:18:49.800 --> 0:18:52.600 always get the same kind of coaching. Women may not 0:18:52.720 --> 0:18:56.480 always have the same degree of visibility. Women and especially 0:18:56.480 --> 0:18:59.119 women of color, may not be being sponsored at the 0:18:59.160 --> 0:19:02.720 same rate, and a lot of this is connected to affinity, bias, 0:19:02.840 --> 0:19:06.120 right proximity. When we have power, which is mostly white 0:19:06.119 --> 0:19:09.600 men in these organizations, everything that comes with the power 0:19:09.720 --> 0:19:12.000 flows to the people who are most like us, and 0:19:12.119 --> 0:19:14.720 women are not benefiting from that. Tara, thank you so 0:19:14.800 --> 0:19:18.359 much for joining us. Really fascinating discussion. Tara J. Frank, 0:19:18.800 --> 0:19:22.920 President and CEO of t f J Career Modeling. Thanks 0:19:22.960 --> 0:19:26.399 for listening to the Bloomberg Markets podcast. You can subscribe 0:19:26.440 --> 0:19:30.200 and listen to interviews with Apple Podcasts or whatever podcast 0:19:30.200 --> 0:19:33.760 platform you prefer. I'm Matt Miller. I'm on Twitter at 0:19:33.800 --> 0:19:37.600 Matt Miller. P on false Sweeney I'm on Twitter at 0:19:37.640 --> 0:19:40.480 pt Sweeney. Before the podcast, you can always catch us 0:19:40.520 --> 0:19:41.920 worldwide at Bloomberg Radio.