Kodak on twitter: "We're hiring to keep up with demand for 35mm film"

[Sirius Glass]

Typical job posting list more requirement than one person can normally have to collect a larger pool of applicants.

 

[cmacd123]

one thing I noticed is that the jobs described seem to match teh Jobs shown in the Video posted by "Smarter every day" perhaps the theory that they cooperated with that blogger in order to aid recruitment was correct.

 

[MattKing]

Is it possible that in the use of the English language , some nowadays use the phrase "I am in the process of interviewing " to indicate both the process of being the interviewer or interviewee?

Even 35 years ago when I last was involved in attending employment interviews with several potential employers, we referred to attending the interviews as "interviewing".
Admittedly, that was in the context of a formalized and regulated interview period where law firms went about the process of choosing among a large number of prospective articling students. I would guess that that process would be similar to what happens at many colleges/universities and job fairs.

 

[pentaxuser]

Thanks Matt. I am in the process of "courting" probably followed by sentencing but am I the judge or the prisoner in the dock?

pentaxuser

 

[Sirius Glass]

Thanks Matt. I am in the process of "courting" probably followed by sentencing but am I the judge or the prisoner in the dock?

pentaxuser

If the pay is high enough you are the judge who makes the calls. It the pay is to low, you are just one of the rowers in the galley.

 

[Agulliver]

If you can answer that, the governments in North America at least will be keen to get your advice!
Employers are having immense difficulty hiring people right now. Employees whose work life was totally disrupted by the pandemic are not re-engaging - at least not in the way they did before. Some had some government benefits that helped them tide things over when their jobs disappeared, but that has essentially ended, and they are apparently not willing to go back to the former status quo.
So many people are unwilling to continue where things left off.
Buildings that used to be full during work hours are nearly empty. Businesses that depend on foot traffic where people used to work are going under. Parking lots that used to be bursting are near empty.

Something similar happened in the UK too, especially with people who worked in catering - restaurants and similar that closed down for the best part of 18 months....there was the option of furlough but a lot of people who had worked antisocial hours in pubs decided to change jobs to essential work such as delivery drivers/riders, or work from home jobs. And many don't want to go back into the pub/catering sector because they've found they have a better work/life balance.

I am currently visiting Arkansas and Missouri, and I see *lots* of fast food places offering up to $500 hiring bonuses, even McDonalds and Taco Bell. People have had the opportunity to realise that their priorities have changed. I am unsure if this holds for the USA, but in the UK employment rates are at a long term high. People aren't generally needing or looking for work...so hiring can be tough because there is no longer a surplus of people needing work.

The last statistic I read was that US productivity has gone down. I wonder how much is due people working at home.

Highly unlikely. Most serious studies have shown that productivity increased with WFH. The energy lost during the drudgery of a commute to a soul-less office block shouldn't be over-estimated.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Something similar happened in the UK too, especially with people who worked in catering - restaurants and similar that closed down for the best part of 18 months....there was the option of furlough but a lot of people who had worked antisocial hours in pubs decided to change jobs to essential work such as delivery drivers/riders, or work from home jobs. And many don't want to go back into the pub/catering sector because they've found they have a better work/life balance.

I am currently visiting Arkansas and Missouri, and I see *lots* of fast food places offering up to $500 hiring bonuses, even McDonalds and Taco Bell. People have had the opportunity to realise that their priorities have changed. I am unsure if this holds for the USA, but in the UK employment rates are at a long term high. People aren't generally needing or looking for work...so hiring can be tough because there is no longer a surplus of people needing work.

It is the same in the US.

 

[Sirius Glass]

The last statistic I read was that US productivity has gone down. I wonder how much is due people working at home.

That is because you spend time with the wrong news sources, just as many told you in the Lounge before monitors were give the license to kill threads.

 

[cmacd123]

Statistics Canada indicates that productivity is equal or better when working from home. And they have the Data study Chops to say.. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/45-28-0001/2021001/article/00012-eng.htm

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Statistics Canada indicates that productivity is equal or better when working from home. And they have the Data study Chops to say.. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/45-28-0001/2021001/article/00012-eng.htm

The article is 1 1/2 years old from April 2021. It was published at a time when everyone thought working from home would be more productive. Many now understand that to be a fallacy in more cases than people want to admit.

Second, trusting employees as the survey does to guess if they're more productive or not is not scientific. In any case, even the article states workers are not productive across the board and it also depends on what they do.

 

[pentaxuser]

before monitors were give the license to kill threads.

Hereinafter such moderators to be referred to as "OO7s"?

pentaxuser

 

[Agulliver]

There have been numerous serious studies on productivity of office staff WFH....in the vast majority of cases, productivity increased when workers were able to WFH.

I assume one poster here owns an office building.

 

[cmacd123]

productivity increased when workers were able to WFH.
I assume one poster here owns an office building.

or has staff that they don't trust.....

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

There have been numerous serious studies on productivity of office staff WFH....in the vast majority of cases, productivity increased when workers were able to WFH.

I assume one poster here owns an office building.

That's not the case anymore. Many companies that liked WFH have changed their minds. They found their workers lost productivity. They've at least required employees to work some days in the office. Some have canceled all work at home.

I think a lot depends on what you do. If you're on the phone all day answering product complaints let's say, then working at home might not matter. But if you interact with other workers, a common area like an office expands creativity and productivity. You need a place to share ideas and learn from mentors.

 

[cmacd123]

But if you interact with other workers, a common area like an office expands creativity and productivity. You need a place to share ideas and learn from mentors.

does that perspective include the time lost to traveling to and from this magical office?

 

[Agulliver]

That's not the case anymore. Many companies that liked WFH have changed their minds. They found their workers lost productivity. They've at least required employees to work some days in the office. Some have canceled all work at home.

I think a lot depends on what you do. If you're on the phone all day answering product complaints let's say, then working at home might not matter. But if you interact with other workers, a common area like an office expands creativity and productivity. You need a place to share ideas and learn from mentors.

I look forward to links to studies demonstrating this. Some companies certainly have cancelled WFH, but this is seen more as a way to control and keep an eye on employees rather than actually for the benefit of productivity. It seems more that "many companies just wanted the worker bees back in the hive".

Though it does seem that for most sectors, the ideal is some sort of hybrid working, one or two days a week in the office. It does depend on the sector, almost none of my job could be accomplished at home. A programmer could WFH full time, and many now do. A finance officer could WFH 4 days a week.

does that perspective include the time lost to traveling to and from this magical office?

Tell me about it. I know my 85 minutes each way commute takes it's toll. But as I said, my work cannot be done remotely. One of the aspects that has lead to WFH increasing productivity is that employees are more happy because they can do such things as get their kids up in the morning, or put them to bed in the evening....work outside on a nice day, not schlep into the office in the rain or heat, cook themselves a nice lunch etc.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I'm not opposed to WFH. My last post explained that it sometimes works for certain occupations and for others, a combination works also. But for many jobs, working at home lowers productivity. A lot of people who thought it would be OK have found out differently.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

does that perspective include the time lost to traveling to and from this magical office?

If a job isn't productive at home, no commute time isn't going to improve that.

 

[Sal Santamaura]

does that perspective include the time lost to traveling to and from this magical office?

If a job isn't productive at home, no commute time isn't going to improve that.

Missed the point, Alan. Bottom line: reported "productivity" is measured by how much "output" an employer gets from an employee for each paid hour of employment. Employers don't pay for time traveling to and from the office or the cost of doing so. Employees do. Thus, from an employee's perspective, "productivity" is how much money they get minus the dollar + time cost of commuting. Working from home cannot help but radically increase productivity for the employee. And those employees' calculations are now manifesting in fewer of them willing to accept a "return to the office" dictate.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Missed the point, Alan. Bottom line: reported "productivity" is measured by how much "output" an employer gets from an employee for each paid hour of employment. Employers don't pay for time traveling to and from the office or the cost of doing so. Employees do. Thus, from an employee's perspective, "productivity" is how much money they get minus the dollar + time cost of commuting. Working from home cannot help but radically increase productivity for the employee. And those employees' calculations are now manifesting in fewer of them willing to accept a "return to the office" dictate.

Commute time is not included in the GDP or productivity figures nor can you take it off your taxes. When my commute driving time was less than thirty minutes, I use to enjoy it. I could turn on the music, enjoy my Dunkin' donut and chill out before getting to stress out at work. Same thing on the way home before facing the stress of family life.

Of course, when I spent 1 1/2 hours one way on NYC subway trains standing up in crowds, that did wear me down a lot. That's why I got a job where I could drive.

 

[BMbikerider]

I came into the game (this thread) late but if Kodak are actually going to pull their finger out all well and good, but will 300 extra employees make that much of a difference in the market considering there is a world wide shortage of colour negative film especially in 35mm. It is all very well employing extra people but have they got the manufacturing capacity to put them to good use?

120 availability is not too bad and I can generally get hold of Kodak Gold 120 when I want to, but because I do a lot of travelling by motorcycle, a 35mm slr and one very good zoom lens is far more convenient than my Bronica Outfit and weighs about 1/3rd of the Bronni outfit, 3 lenses, spare film back and a separate meter. Apart from the weight it is less bulky too. I have enough 35mm left to last me perhaps until next June, all well dated, (including some Fuji C200 dated 2024.) I was able to buy a 10 pack brick about 4 months ago! We will have to wait and see. Fingers crossed!

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I came into the game (this thread) late but if Kodak are actually going to pull their finger out all well and good, but will 300 extra employees make that much of a difference in the market considering there is a world wide shortage of colour negative film especially in 35mm. It is all very well employing extra people but have they got the manufacturing capacity to put them to good use?

120 availability is not too bad and I can generally get hold of Kodak Gold 120 when I want to, but because I do a lot of travelling by motorcycle, a 35mm slr and one very good zoom lens is far more convenient than my Bronica Outfit and weighs about 1/3rd of the Bronni outfit, 3 lenses, spare film back and a separate meter. Apart from the weight it is less bulky too. I have enough 35mm left to last me perhaps until next June, all well dated, (including some Fuji C200 dated 2024.) I was able to buy a 10 pack brick about 4 months ago! We will have to wait and see. Fingers crossed!

Kodak executives are aware of supply chain issues. If they're hiring people to expand operations and production, I would think that bodes well that these issues are abating.

 

[BMbikerider]

Alan I think you may have missed my point. Hiring people to help is all well and good but we are talking about a global wide problem here. Have they got sufficient infrastructure to to radically increase the production of everything that is needed

It is not only film supply which is ultra critical, but the chemicals to process these films as well. There are 4 possibly 5 principal dealers in UK who supply the professional labs and non of them have had supplies of simple things like developer starter for Kodak RA4 for well over a year. There little, if any, Ektacolor RA4 developer available either in the smaller sizes which may mean the smaller labs going out of business which they may do anyway because of the lack of film which to print onto non existent rolls of RA4 paper either Kodak of Fuji. It has all been an imploding problem which they appear to have failed to realise was happening.

I checked last night and it appears that even boxes of cut sizes of Fuji paper may be getting low as well. I don't know if the recent price increases have been prompted by this. One pro outlet has 16x12 Fiji paper priced at £117 per box of 50 sheets while several others are still selling it around £76 per box.

As I believe the Kodak company that still exists here in UK has some sort of involvement with the original Kodak Pension Fund and they hold the financial key to restarting some sort of production (exactly what I am not sure about) and I have not heard any noises from them saying that they are doing anything about it. It really is dire!

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Alan I think you may have missed my point. Hiring people to help is all well and good but we are talking about a global wide problem here. Have they got sufficient infrastructure to to radically increase the production of everything that is needed

It is not only film supply which is ultra critical, but the chemicals to process these films as well. There are 4 possibly 5 principal dealers in UK who supply the professional labs and non of them have had supplies of simple things like developer starter for Kodak RA4 for well over a year. There little, if any, Ektacolor RA4 developer available either in the smaller sizes which may mean the smaller labs going out of business which they may do anyway because of the lack of film which to print onto non existent rolls of RA4 paper either Kodak of Fuji. It has all been an imploding problem which they appear to have failed to realise was happening.

I checked last night and it appears that even boxes of cut sizes of Fuji paper may be getting low as well. I don't know if the recent price increases have been prompted by this. One pro outlet has 16x12 Fiji paper priced at £117 per box of 50 sheets while several others are still selling it around £76 per box.

As I believe the Kodak company that still exists here in UK has some sort of involvement with the original Kodak Pension Fund and they hold the financial key to restarting some sort of production (exactly what I am not sure about) and I have not heard any noises from them saying that they are doing anything about it. It really is dire!

Regarding your first point, I have to assume Kodak has done their homework and they're aware of the issues before they hire 300 people. I assume they think that by the time these new people are hired and up to speed, supply constraints will be over. They may be taking a chance. But they have to consider that if demand is now going up considerably, they have to meet that demand or lose customers to other brands. So there may be some risk on their part. But what is the alternative?

Second, Kodak Alaris gets its film from Kodak in America as part of the Kodak bankruptcy. Alaris is limited then to one supplier. That is dire. Also, Kodak charges them of course for the film. How is that price regulated? Can Kodak charge Alaris anything they want? That also puts Alaris in a bad position as they have to pass along their costs to their customers and compete on price with other film manufacturers.

 

[MattKing]

Second, Kodak Alaris gets its film from Kodak in America as part of the Kodak bankruptcy. Alaris is limited then to one supplier. That is dire. Also, Kodak charges them of course for the film. How is that price regulated? Can Kodak charge Alaris anything they want? That also puts Alaris in a bad position as they have to pass along their costs to their customers and compete on price with other film manufacturers.

And of course, Eastman Kodak is limited to a single customer, so they too are in a similar position, because Kodak Alaris has the same control over what they will pay as any single customer does.
Their best interests are tied to each other.