Security Specialist, Abolitionist, Anabaptist
2821 stories
·
52 followers

WeWork Will No Longer Let Employees Expense Any Kind of Meat

2 Shares
Comments

(Bloomberg) — Co-working giant WeWork Cos. thinks it can save the environment quicker than Elon Musk.

The startup has told its 6,000 global staff that they will no longer be able to expense meals including meat, and that it won’t pay for any red meat, poultry or pork at WeWork events. In an email to employees this week outlining the new policy, co-founder Miguel McKelvey said the firm’s upcoming internal “Summer Camp” retreat would offer no meat options for attendees.

“New research indicates that avoiding meat is one of the biggest things an individual can do to reduce their personal environmental impact,” said McKelvey in the memo, “even more than switching to a hybrid car.”

Individuals requiring “medical or religious” allowances are being referred to the company’s policy team to discuss options. A WeWork spokeswoman confirmed the contents of the memo.

Although the anti-meat stance is significant for the New York-based company, it’s far from the first startup to promote alternatives to animals.

Just Inc., formerly known as Hampton Creek, created a vegan-friendly alternative to mayonnaise and has said it plans to have what it calls clean meat on the market by year-end. Purple Carrot, the vegan meal-kit company, recently won backing from Fresh Del Monte Produce Inc, while Wild Earth Inc., a startup based in Berkeley, California, is creating pet food with lab-created proteins.

American Airlines Group Inc. and Starbucks Corp. recently joined the chorus of companies pledging to phase out plastic straws and drink stirrers. And Southwest Airlines Co., in a bid to reduce allergy risk, said this week peanuts will no longer be available on flights starting Aug. 1.

WeWork’s decision follows the company’s recent internal drives to reducing plastic usage, and redistribute waste food from its events to good causes.

Founded in 2010, WeWork was most recently valued at about $20 billion, though an executive from SoftBank Group Corp., a major WeWork investor, said at a conference in London in June that the startup was looking to raise funds at a $35 billion valuation.

In his email, McKelvey advised employees that the meat-free move would affect the company’s travel and expense policy, as well as WeWork’s “Honesty Market,” a self-serve food and drink kiosk system present in some of its 400 co-working buildings.


Comments
Read the whole story
toddgrotenhuis
8 hours ago
reply
Indianapolis
fxer
3 days ago
reply
Bend, Oregon
Share this story
Delete

Part 1 (of 15): Introduction — What’s Up With Jordan Peterson?

1 Share

An Evaluation of Jordan Peterson’s “12 Rules for Life” by Greg Boyd

Over the last two years I have, with increasing frequency, been asked what I thought of the views of this maverick Canadian thinker named Jordan Peterson. Sometimes the question was asked by admirers, if not devotees, of his writings and (more commonly) of his online lectures. To these people Peterson is a courageous and brilliant prophet of truth who dares to take on those post-modernist ideologues that are deconstructing the Judeo-Christian values of western culture and transforming our Universities into training camps for left-wing political activism. More often, however, the question has been asked by people who view Peterson as a dangerous academic defender of the patriarchal, bigoted, anti-LGBTQ right, which they of course despise.

The polarization surrounding Peterson has only intensified over the last year since he publicly challenged a recently passed Canadian law requiring Canadians to refer to transgender people with neutral pronounces (e.g. “they,” “ze,” “zir”) on the grounds that refusing to do so constitutes sexual discrimination (link). His bold action, which could have (and still may) cost him his teaching position at the University of Toronto (he is a Professor of Psychology), has landed him smack dab in the middle of the ever-intensifying culture wars that are currently raging throughout western society (especially in America, where this war is most intense).

It was a concerned wife in the church I pastor who finally got me to read Peterson’s book, 12 Rules for Life. As a progressive Christian, she was very concerned that her husband had joined a men’s group that was studying this book. She informed me that her husband, together with the other men in this group, were being captivated by Peterson’s ideas, and she feared this might adversely affect her husband and his peers. “This guy is huge, and he’s dangerous,” she said, “and as a pastor you should really know what he is about!” So, I took this concerned woman’s advice and read the book (it didn’t hurt that she had already bought me a copy).

Having finished the book, I now understand why Peterson is such a polarizing figure. He fearlessly weighs in on all the “hot” topics, and almost always ends up defending the conservative position. As I had heard rumored, Peterson is indeed rabidly opposed to the influence that post-modernism, and especially deconstructionism*, is having in academic circles. Indeed, he believes that Marxism and post-modernism are strongly aligned with one another, and he goes so far as to argue that State funding should be cut off from any academic institution that allows professors to advocate these ideas. Peterson also continually insists on the importance of holding fast to tradition and to religion and thus argues against those who clamor for rapid social change, if not for social revolution. In keeping with this, Peterson affirms the legitimacy of social hierarchies, rails against the imposition of “equal work, equal pay,” argues strongly against identity politics, and continually calls on people to stop blaming society for their problems and to instead take responsibility for their own lives. And, to give one more example, Peterson argues strongly against the common claims that gender differences are largely social constructs and that the world would be a better place if boys were raised more like girls, with all aggression being frowned upon.

Having said that, I must also say that I thoroughly enjoyed reading 12 Rules For Life! In fact, while I strongly disagree with some fundamental aspects of Peterson’s perspective – I will later argue that his worldview is fundamentally anti-Christian — I must confess that 12 Rules For Life is one of the most unique, well-argued, thought-provoking, and over-all engaging books I have read in the last several years. To my surprise, I discovered that Peterson’s conservative stances are just the tip of the iceberg of his remarkably comprehensive and eclectically informed worldview. And I found that Peterson’s reasoning process as well as the particular conclusions he arrives at are were much more nuanced than they are usually presented by his detractors, and often, by his defenders. I have no difficulty understanding why some argue that he is the single most influential contemporary alive today.

Peterson is the kind of clear and rational thinker I enjoy, and benefit from, engaging with. And given his current fame and polarizing influence, I decided I wanted to do more than to merely add yet another general overview of his work in a single blog. Instead, I decided I wanted to do a blog series, of indefinite length, exploring and critically evaluating from a distinctly Christian perspective all the major aspects of his thought, at least as it is expressed in 12 Rules For Life. My goal is to help my readers, and especially those who are inclined toward the left, to appreciate the depth of Peterson’s insight, while also demonstrating the various ways Peterson’s outlook is fundamentally antithetical to the historic-orthodox Christian faith.

So, over each of the next several weeks I will post two or three essays on themes that run throughout Peterson’s 12 Rules of Life. I hope that readers of this blog series will find his thought as engaging, and at points as disturbing, as I do.

Stay tuned!

Greg

The post Part 1 (of 15): Introduction — What’s Up With Jordan Peterson? appeared first on Greg Boyd - ReKnew.

Syndicated from Greg Boyd – ReKnew



Read the whole story
toddgrotenhuis
8 hours ago
reply
Indianapolis
Share this story
Delete

Checking Your Religion at the Door

1 Share

Some highly respected investors were making this point on Twitter recently: when it comes to investing, you’d better check your religion at the door.

Why? Because, of course, if you allow your religion to interfere with your investment decisions, your returns likely will suffer.

They buttress their argument with data pertaining to returns on sin-stocks (alcohol, tobacco, gambling, etc.), which tend to outperform the market, and those on stocks of socially responsible companies.

It’s not an unusual position —  checking your religion at the door, that is. You hear the same thing in the business world — perhaps not out loud but certainly implicitly. All. The. Time.

What’s consistent is the belief that nothing should get in the way of making money. Not even your beliefs.

Which is fine. If that’s your thing. Yet I wonder, why bother in the first place? With the religion?

If your religion is something that can be checked at the door, then obviously it’s not core to whom you are and to what you believe. And if it’s not core, then why bother?

I suppose people bother because it provides a gloss of legitimacy. Or perhaps it provides a moral and ethical framework. Or a narrative that makes them feel good or helps counter feelings of insignificance and hopelessness.

Whatever the reason, religion serves a purpose even when it’s marginalized. Even when it’s something that you feel comfortable checking at the door.

But, again, why bother? Is the narrative that essential?

I don’t see it.

If money is the most important thing in my life, then I hope I don’t feel like I have to go through the charade of religion.

If religion is something that can be checked at the door, then I hope I don’t waste my time with the religious rituals and observances.

I get it that, if I take certain religious beliefs seriously (such as Christianity), then there are some jobs that will be off limits to me. Managing other people’s money may be one such job.

And there are some things I won’t be able to do. Or go along with.

Which means I may have less. Or earn lower returns. Or be ridiculed. Or ostracized. Or marginalized by a society that worships other things, like capitalism or status.

We can have it both ways, of course. We can proclaim the religious tenants while worshiping other things. It happens all the time. I’m sure I’ve done it myself.

But the older I get the more I wonder: Why bother?

If it’s something you feel can be checked at the door, then it’s not valuable. If it were truly valuable, then you wouldn’t dream of checking it at the door.

For anyone. For anything.



Read the whole story
toddgrotenhuis
9 hours ago
reply
Indianapolis
Share this story
Delete

Subaru seeing big demand for new super-sized SUV model

1 Share
The Indiana-made sport-utility vehicle—which has 19 cupholders—has proven to be Subaru's biggest product launch in more than two decades.

Read the whole story
toddgrotenhuis
10 hours ago
reply
Indianapolis
Share this story
Delete

Purdue tracking down 26K student applicants amid data breach

1 Share
Purdue said an employee with the school's Division of Financial Aid inadvertently sent one prospective student's parent a list of data on thousands of applicants, including names, birthdays, and Social Security numbers.
Read the whole story
toddgrotenhuis
10 hours ago
reply
Indianapolis
Share this story
Delete

Bird begins pulling scooters from streets as it awaits regulations

1 Share
Scooter rental service Bird has changed its mind about maintaining operations in Indianapolis while it waits for city officials to come up with an ordinance regulating such businesses.
Read the whole story
toddgrotenhuis
3 days ago
reply
Indianapolis
Share this story
Delete
Next Page of Stories