Starbucks' new CEO will supercommute 1,000 miles from California to Seattle office instead of relocating
Starbucks says Niccol can live in his home in Newport Beach, California and commute to Starbucks' head office 1,000 miles away on a corporate jet
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/08/20/starbucks-new-ceo-brian-niccol-will-supercommute-to-seattle-instead-of-relocating.htmlOpen linkView original on slrpnk.net737
Comments129
How do you boycott a company you already weren't buying anything from?
Oh I was gonna recommend arson. Maybe your plan is better
Well you gotta use up all their water first
Free water, arson, bricks, and bullhorns. With these four powers combined, I am.. Captain Protest!
Your plan is certainly quicker, which is an upside.
Insurance will cover it, so you’re just hurting everyone else who has to pay for insurance.
Also grab something on the way out and don't pay for it.
Use the bathroom and flush four times!
Bricks
Shoplift?
Cockroaches + Starbucks product + video
Bricks are cheap
Take their coffee grounds for compost?
You mean pickett?
Buy stuff and then return it, over and over? I couldn't do this with Starbucks because I wouldn't want to even smell it.
*private jet owners
Both?
…To shreds you say?
There are legitimate reasons for private jets to exist, though the list is admittedly small.
The ability to transport lifesaving medications and things like organs long distances as fast as possible comes to mind.
There isn't much reason for individuals to travel on private jets in non emergency scenarios though
Transporting organs doesn't happen on Private Jets, helicopters and courier craft typically do the job. It's also now well within the possibility for medium sized drones to be able to rapdily move something the size of an organ container reliably long distance, faster and more efficient than a jet can load, fuel, taxi, land and unload.
Private Jets are just luxury items of the rich, and are the carbon equivalent of burning down small forests or power a small town with coal burning. There is nothing they do that can't be done more efficiently by a drone or helicopter for a fraction of the emissions.
What helicopters and drones are flying over the ocean, across Europe, Africa and North America?
And what is a 'courier craft' do you mean a private airplane?
Private != Billionaire owned, it means a privately owned plane that flies general aviation (non FAR 121)
Transferring organs absolutely happens in private jets.
I think you might just not know what the term 'private jet' means.
I'm sure that private (meaning small) jets can have valid use cases, it's the abuse by the rich that is the problem.
"Private" doesn't mean "small". It means "privately owned", which means by a rich person.
Even if we are talking about specifically jets that are owned privately, they could have legit use cases. It's the abuse that is the issue. I agree with the whole "eat the rich" sentiment, but that's a separate issue. In the system where rich people exist, the problem is abuse.
I vote for we start destroying the private jets without reservation and if we encounter a legitimate use case we'll deal with it at that time.
Many could be refitted for worthy uses like fighting wildfires and transporting patients
But that won't solve anything. That's like treating diabetes by drinking diet soda.
That worked for me, that and sugar free Gatorade. Took me down from 8.3 to 4.5 without insuline. That being said, I'm an anomaly in that I don't eat much processed food or bread. Just a really bad pop addiction.
Yeah, maybe it was a bad example, because in some very specific scenario, it can work. My point was that treating a symptom won't cure the underlying disease. Just like as long as there are rich people, trying to take away their planes won't work.
Legit use cases… Make A Wish comes to mind, but maybe that’d be a corporate jet or not a traditionally-private jet.
Any exemptions for sports teams or anything? VIPs whose lives are at risk through no real fault of their own…
What you're describing are use cases for charter flights - renting an aircraft for a specific, temporary purpose, usually from a company specialising in such flights - they own or lease the aircraft and employ the flight crew and maintenance staff.
I'm sorry, if you aren't willing to relocate, you are not a good fit for the company.
I heard this in a job interview and the position was disclosed as remote.
That’s not how you write off a corporate jet from your taxes.
Next time Starbucks does a greenwashing campaign just think of this asshole drinking champagne while commuting on a private jet.
Isn’t Taylor Swift super green?
How could she possibly be? Carbon offsets are largely a scam.
Have you considered the culture ?? Hmmm????
Yeah the cubicle farm that smells like farts and microwaved fish is integral to a good days work!
Cubicles? You mean open plan office space for better collaboration!
A zoom call has the possibility of being recorded. I'm 90% sure at this point all these execs insist on in person meetings is so they can plan and discuss illegal and unethical shit without worry.
I'm only in middle management and I know I feel the difference in the way I talk about things on zoom calls VS in person.
You could also record an in person meeting.
Zoom tells participants if the are being recorded by the zoom app.
I think these people just get off on having their fiefdom and serfs in person before them to pander and be sycophants.
You can record a zoom meeting easily with obs. Same for teams. I know, I've done it.
Self-preservation. If they stay at home for too long, they'll get sued for domestic violence.
Calling it "supercommute" is such a stupid thing. It should be called "stupidcommute" or maybe "commoronute".
I have to dry my clothes between 12am and 3pm and this m'fer gets to fly a jet to work. Private jets along with luxury yachts are things humanity shouldn't have.
There's no inherent polluting/ecological threat in either vehicle (in the far-flung hypothetical that they run on sustainable sources), i.e. you can conceive of a solar-jet or a fusion yacht. Why can't people have nice, private things? Because my utopia conception of an equitable, 1%-less future doesn't necessitate me crammed in 949 hyperplane with 1000 other people for efficiency.
Add a few more paragraphs and boom: you’ve got a copypasta
EDIT: Wait, parent comment is not sarcasm
You keep using the word "future".
That's sort of the point you're ironically appearing to miss.
No, I'm not missing that the unchecked usage of mass polluting luxury vehicles by the 1% is a not-insignificant contirbutor to global emissions.
But the statement wasn't those fuckos should stop, it was "humanity shouldn't have" those things. An unqualified, blanket(, likely hyperbolic) denial. Like saying 'humanity shouldn't have personal cars' because EVs hadn't taken off yet.
Go deeper.
We shouldn't have these things because the usage is abused by every aspect of modern society. Look into the history of electrical and hydrogen engines. You'll see what I mean.
Well fuck you and your co² farting anus, Brian Niccol!
I think the word they're looking for is 'travel'.
Once a month or something. Otherwise, he'll work from home obviously.
Except when he's flying around the country/world to other locations.
conveniently he will have a work meeting in nearby upscale restaurants from his california home mondays, wednesdays and fridays.
Don't think for a second it will last long, or if it will be enforced at all.
He will be expected to be there 3 days a week, not obligated.
Real "Meetings that could have been Emails" energy on this executive level decision.
Honestly, doing the big Star Wars Emperor hologram head would have made this guy look less evil.
Do we have the FAA registration number for the aforementioned jet yet?
Didn't they change the law so you can't track private flights anymore? Or was Melon Husk just trying to get that done? Or was that just me imagining things again? 🤔
As far as I know, you can still track Elon's flights. It's not illegal since it was all publicly available information to begin with.
It's also not something that you can really stop people from doing.
You might be able to stop people sharing the information freely, but, the transponders that people track and the protocols and standards for the communication are well known internationally. It doesn't take more than $50 in parts to set up your own receiver and connect it to a computer.
I'd consider any law prohibiting the observation of air traffic by the public to be impossible to enforce. How can you stop someone from listening by law?
Sharing the information, however, that's a bit different.
They can't prevent tracking because aircraft are required to broadcast their information when in flight.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_Dependent_Surveillance%E2%80%93Broadcast
The FAA reauthorization act slipped in that ownership of private jets could remain anonymous. So you can still track them, because all flight plans are public and need to be for safety reasons, but they no longer have to tell you who owns what tail number. A dedicated tracker can figure out what plane belongs to who, either by showing up at the airport, or by comparing flight logs with other information about celebrity locations.
I feel like that has a little bit to do with how journalists tracked down a bunch of FBI shell companies that operated spy planes over BLM(and other) protests.
Why use spy planes? Why not just use police helicopters? Police helicopters are a normal sight above any large scale demonstration
I have no clue, some claim its because they're illegally using Stingrays(cell interceptors)
Basically everything is encrypted, they won't be that useful. Maybe could perhaps identify who is there though? But depends
SMS(text messages) is not encrypted, and LTE phone calls have gaps
Just stop buying their coffee. You don't need it.
It's not even coffee. It's artificial sweeteners with a bit of sugar and some more sweeteners.
Mostly real sugar isn’t it? I always viewed Starbucks as kind of an adult breast milk. Sweet warm milk with a little stimulant to keep from crying on the way to work.
There's no need descend to such hyperbolic depths, there are plenty of factually accurate complaints against the company and their product.
Really? I wouldn't call it coffee either, in a sense that the coffee beans are not the most important ingredient of the drinks, in either taste or volume...
They sell that. They also sell tea and milkshakes, but you can go into any Starbucks and get a cup of drip coffee, or an espresso, or cold brew, or a mocha. But people like the sweet drinks and Starbucks is happy to oblige.
They roast their beans too dark because they care more about consistency than subtlety or complexity, their anti-union pushes are bad for workers, they displaced a load of small coffee shops (I have seen significant rebound, but that might just be my region), there's this new "supercommuter" nonsense.
Pointing at a Frappuccino and saying "they don't even sell coffee!" has no negative impact on their brand or business, it's a transparently pointless claim to the general public, and it distracts from the very real problems Starbucks has. (I think it mostly sounds like "popular thing bad" with a sprinkling of "America bad" Eurosupremecy)
Well, I take their cold brew every once in a while (where I live is basically the only place that does it) and it's quite good. I take it with no sugar, only ice.
It's shit coffee
I think I got starbucks once in the past 6 months.
I think I got Starbucks once in my life
Same. It was one the worst espressos of my life. Considering that I live in Brazil, the world's largest producers of coffee, that disgusting liquid was like a slap in the face.
Replace all the Taylor Swift memes with this fucking guy.
We can do both, let's not forget that Taylor Swift is a garbage person too!
Eat the rich
I keep my cutlery sharp in preparation.
Bro should one way supercommute into the sun
I think there should be tax on flights, and the tax rate should double every time you fly in a year.
Nobody needs to be this cunty.
For private flights, correct?
Not if you actually want to fix the environment.
So everyone that was going to take the plane has to drive now because it's too expensive to take mass transport on a commercial plane?
Fuel rationing. You get a certain ammount of fuel per year with no extra taxes on it. If you use above that ammount, you're charged a marginal environment tax.
Can’t we just mandate bio or syn fuel? It also costs more (which is they don’t use it) so will have the same discouragement factor, plus the carbon emissions are at least from currently active carbon, rather than carbon that’s been sequestered hundreds of millions of years
That would require arable land, which would affect food production or require devastating wild areas to create new monoculture farms. Both options would come with horrible side-effects for society and/or environment.
Certainly there is a scaling problem. However there are prototype fuels from several crops, and marine plants. There’s also synfuel which may not require crops.
Then we have all that crop land currently dedicated to corn for ethanol. What will happen to tha land and those farmers as we transition to EVs? Maybe they could switch over to jet fuel
Anybody that flies that many times a year should be sacrificed to the sun god. If the sun god doesn't take us all before that.
They will likely just travel less.
All flights, proportional to the income of the passenger.
Taxes need to scale with income. Your plan will hurt regular people that have to fly to see family.
Fuckers like this CEO make too much money and they need to be taxed into oblivion.
Can i vote for you?
The fucker should fly business class with everybody else
Economy.
Steerage
Spirit/Frontier, he's not allowed to buy a single upgrade in advance, and the employees are required to harass him about the size of his personal item and upcharge him for a carry-on on every single flight.
We need to return to the office though.
Remember kids, climate change is your fault specifically, and only you can make things better by making your own life harder!
Gosh. Thinking about all the time I wasted on the damn bus today made this sting more than usual.
I stopped using plastic straws at Starbucks. If enough of you join me we can compensate for an entire weeks worth of the carbon footprint of this very important man.
Lucky him. Other corporations are designating hub cities and forcing remote employees to move or find a new job.
Be glad he's not hypercommuting
He could commute from 1 casino in Vegas to like down the street in Vegas
This is it, y'all! This is the one.
No political messaging, no debatable tech contribution, no societal contribution, the company will be fine because they change CEOs like I change my underwear.
I think everyone can agree, this is the one we eat. It's time to send a message and enjoy a damn fine meal.
Don't worry, he probably has some arrangement to only go like once. A month.
Per the article, he's required to be onsite 3 days a week
That's some ridiculous micro management of a CEO. Didn't expect to see that in a contract for someone at that level.
It seems more like he isn't an exception to the hybrid work policy that applies to everyone else. Although it notes "when not traveling for work", so chances are he'll be flying all over the place anyway for unnecessary meetings and schmoozing sessions. Or whatever else a CEO can't do remotely
Also what are the odds they're gonna be paying for all the flights.
100%, that's basically the entire point of a company jet.
A "remote office" in his backyard, no doubt.
No work from home! We're willing to fuel climate change for one person so everyone knows how serious we are! Not even the CEO is allowed to work remotely.
Burn the planet, make everyone's work life more miserable than it needs to be, and profit from all of it.
Corporate bullshit is going to kill off our species, and take the others with it because their greed is insatiable.
Try once a week! He will have to be in Seattle three days a week to conform to Starbucks’ remote/hybrid work policy.
The article says when he started at Chipotle they were headquartered in Denver but dickbag moved it to Newport Beach so it was closer. Guessing the same thing will happen to Starbucks. He will (randomly) decide that Newport Beach is a better location for a global coffee chain than Seattle.
Was this the tiny portions chipotle ceo?
Dude has two families
They got their CEO to-go
I'm tall and have great hair. Am I supposed to have thralls?
What an asshole.
Piece of shit, wow!
And here I was thinking naively that this was an opportunity for change.