Child Care Facility Roster Form: Fill & Download for Free

‘Mall cried out’ - how to save America’s malls from the retail apocalypseThere was no more potent emblem of the American Century than the Great American Mall. In the decades following the second world war, thousands of malls were built across the United States, and these ‘pyramids to the boom years’, as the writer Joan Didion called them, seemed to epitomize the optimism of the American Dream.And there is no greater symbol of the decline of Middle America than the images of rotting, abandoned malls which now litter the landscape of many states across the rust belt and the mid-West. The eerie pictures of caved in ceilings and snow-covered escalators create a dystopian landscape, which contrasts with the pictures of a happy, consumerist past.The retail apocalypse which has swept across the United States since 2015, carrying with it over fifty major retail chains, such as Toys “R” Us, Sports Authority and American Apparel, as well as thousands of department stores, has decimated many malls. These stores acted as ‘anchors’ for the malls, and without them, the they are emptying out and slowly but surely going bust.There is even a website, called DeadMalls.com which is tracking this slow-motion train wreck – it lists over 450 malls which are either already closed or in the process of doing so. This is over a third of all the enclosed malls in the United States.These malls used to be focal points for people to come together not just for shopping, but also for socializing, family eating out and even exercising, as senior citizens formed ‘Mall-Walker’ clubs. Their decline is creating a void at the heart of many communities.What can be done to turn around this negative trend – how can malls compete with the seemingly inexorable rise in online shopping? The answer lies in focusing on the things that they can do better than the online world. E-commerce may be superior in terms of cost and convenience; but malls are more capable of creating immersive experiences which can only be delivered in the physical world.For larger malls, the best way forward may be to increase the proportion of their space devoted to entertainment. The aim would be to provide a stand out experience for visitors, making liberal use of virtual reality and augmented reality. Examples of this type of mall would include Dubai Mall in the United Arab Emirates, the world’s largest, which features a vast aquarium, an indoor ice-skating rink and spectacular dancing fountains, as well as access to the world’s tallest building – the Burj Khalifa. The Mall of America in Minneapolis, the biggest mall in the United States, which is the size of five Yankee stadiums, is another example. It has at various times featured non-retail activities such as a nightclub, an amusement park, an aquarium, a wedding chapel, a community college, a clinic, a bowling lanes and surfing simulators.For small-medium sized malls, there may not be this option, due to restricted space. Another approach would be for them to specialize in one particular area. For example they could reposition themselves as organic/cruelty-free malls, where all the products could be natural, fair trade and vegetarian, and the mall itself could be built from sustainable materials and powered by solar energy. Or they could be themed for a specific ethnic positioning – for example, concentrating on all things Italian - restaurants, foods, fashion, art and music – or showcasing the local area, featuring exclusively regional products, foods and artists. A third type of mall could be built around residential developments aimed at specific demographics, with a range of products and services to match. For example, a mall aimed at seniors could have a wider range of medical facilities, while one that targeted young parents with children could have more child-care facilities, play centres and toy shops.The other thing that malls can do is to cater for the vast number of new online start-ups, who wish to open pop-up shops in order to recruit customers. They know little of how to build and run standard retailing operations, so the malls should make their spaces ‘plug and play’, offering units, already equipped with the latest in-store technology such as facial recognition software, interactive screens and till-less check out. They should make them relatively compact as most of the brands will fulfil stock directly from their internet operations, and offer flexible short leases, as the brands will want to harvest all the potential leads corresponding to their target demographic quickly and then move on. Lastly they could handle the recruitment and management of the staff for the brands. Encouraging a varied roster of new brands will make malls more exciting to visit.Thus, by innovating and offering immersive experiences that cannot be matched online, there is hope that malls can relaunch themselves, and maintain their important role in creating a sense of community in their areas.

The list is not exhaustive. I have listed out just the tangible benefits that I find most attractive. I am sure there are other good stuff that my colleagues have to say.Flexi-work hours: You can come in and leave anytime, as long as you finish your work. There is a strange sense of responsibility when you are given the power to do so.Work from home: The company allows you to work from home once a week, as a policy. However, should you require more days, you can take more too, provided your manager okays it.Sabbatical: You are eligible for sabbatical leave if you have been continuously employed at SAP for 5 years. If you have been an employee for more than 2 years, you can take a 2-year sabbatical leave for entrepreneurship/start up.Free food: Breakfast is subsidized. Lunch, evening snacks, and dinner is free.Office shuttle: Free office shuttle to almost all parts of Bangalore.Care for life fund: In case of the death of an employee, their family members are entitled to financial benefit. Employees can also request for financial help for very high medical expenses. All you need to do is volunteer to pay INR 250 per month that goes to a common corpus.Maternity policy: 6 months of paid leaves, followed by 6 months of leave without pay, or 3 months of 50% work and 50% pay (this is a special arrangement agreed upon with your manager). During pregnancy, the women employees can avail of the cab facility for 2 months anytime during the pregnancy period. Men get 3 weeks of Paternity leave.Child birth/child adoption gift: For each new born/adopted child, you can receive a voucher worth Rs. 5000 from stores such as, Mom & Me.Birthday Voucher: On your birthday, you will receive a voucher for Amazon India worth Rs. 2000. You may choose to donate this amount to the Care for life fund also.Wedding Gift: You also receive a voucher worth Rs. 5000 as a wedding gift. :)Flexible work schedule for employees with differently-abled children: If you are a parent of a differently-abled child who is less than 7 years, you can either choose to work from home for a maximum of 3 days a week or choose to work daily on a flexible schedule, wherein you work for a minimum of 4 hours per day in office and the remaining from home.Shift and weekend allowance: Employees who are required to be available in-office or on-call for coverage, for critical support during weekends / holidays and on a roster-basis can request the allowance.Car lease policy: One of the best car lease policies that I have come across. Available to employees if they have been working for 5 years or more.Mobile and smartphones: You can avail of a mobile/smart phone based on the business need (e.g. if you are required to be “on call” outside of working hours or to be accessible to external / internal customers due to a highly interactive nature of the job). I have one iPhone 6 myself and I can’t stop bragging about it! :)Creche: Highly subsidized creche called SAPlings.Interest groups: SAP has several interest groups, such as SAPtak - the music interest group, Literati - the book club, the runners club, the theatre group, the toastmasters club, and so on.Open culture: In general, SAP culture is very open with a flat hierarchy. The average age of employees here is 27 I think - so people are quite casual.Early talent programs: SAP is investing highly in early talents and there are numerous programs to attract and retain young talents.Long service leaves: If you have completed 10/15/20 years in the organization, you are eligible to a long service leave of 10 days.Office campus and apphaus: You cannot have a list of the benefits of SAP Labs India without mentioning its beautiful campus. This is impetus enough for everyone to continue working here. There is also an apphaus which is like a innovation hub for people to work on their ideas.Related: Mahuya Paul's answer to Are you getting a full salary during the lockdown period?

My thoughts? Mixed.I wish it was easy, or simple, or clear-cut. But like most things in life, it’s quite the opposite.Drawing firm conclusions is thus not so much evidence-based as philosophical, or perhaps ideologicalOur comprehension is governed as much by our willingness to set time aside to study it, as much as any adherence to an open mindAnd things are just not transparent enough to be simple and clear.[1]Which is to say the “answer”, if there can ever be one, is probably somewhere in-between those who say “yea” and those who say “nay”.And remember this is now Gonski 2.0 Mark 3. It’s another band-aid, another hand-out to private schools, irrespective of stripe or colour[2]And it includes a longer transition tail to ease the burden on arguably “over-funded” private schools, who are getting a long-overdue haircutLike how did we over-fund these super-rich schools in the first place?Both the non-aligned, independent Grattan Institute[3][3][3][3] and the NSW (Liberal) Government have said it’s an overspend, and misdirected. Others say it’s fair, and moves us forward.[4][4][4][4] To many of us it smells like a sweetener, an influencer, or a down-right bribe to oil a squeaky wheel. Morrison denies all of this, of course.[5][5][5][5]And then there is the confusion of detail. Of “low-fee” private schools, vs “full fee”. And a fairer means-based funding model (which arguably makes sense, but is just one aspect of the whole deal)To which you can throw in the possible red herring of a few super-rich public schools, too. According to the “unbiased” view of the CEO of Catholic Schools NSW, anyway. [6]Some of the logic on both sides is wonky, true, but the pro-private arguments are really out there, particularly when they try to make out ‘it saves taxpayers money’.Education is not like selling cars or refrigerators. It is a human right, and attendance is a mandated expectation of our Commonwealth, with immense individual and collective repercussions, socially and economicallyWhich is to say that it should be delivered to all in a fair and equitable manner, without discrimination or favour, and transparently soAs a rule of thumb, privatisation of essential utilities or services in Australia has not demonstrated clear savings, or a net public gainIn some cases, like telecommunications, banking, and electricity generation and distribution, we have seen regular complaints of unfair practices, undue cost increases, and reduced levels of service deliveryWhy would education be any different? Why would we take that risk?Indeed, if private schools were truly motivated to “save governments (and thus taxpayers) money”, they would be serving the needs of the widest possible range of students, irrespective of their socioeconomic status, location, appearance, attitude and declared faith.Irrespective of claims made, this is patently not the case today. People generally know this.Some of the current issues with private sector involvement in education delivery include (but are not limited to):Duplication of educational facilities within a catchment, thus increasing competition for resources, including land, teachers, external support and, of course, students. All of which drive up costs to the taxpayerA negative impact (increased traffic, for instance) and related increased spend on local infrastructure costs, especially road transport, but also general utilities within each catchment. Again funded by the taxpayerA reduction in scale, particularly evidenced in declining government education, which raises the cost per studentDemographic distortions, increasing costs and decreasing stability of planning in the government sector (lower demand resulting in empty classrooms, increased staffing cost and reduced rostering flexibility)And arguable deviation from the principles of secular education.Of course one pro-private argument is that current and past private students are paying for their own capital cost, which is partly true, and paying part of their own recurrent expenditure as well. Also partly true.Hypothetically this could avoid some expense for the taxpayer, however the richest private schools are arguably over-capitalised, certainly in excess of what may be allocated on an average public school, and yet still receive a subsidy of some kind, at taxpayer expenseAnd with increasing privatisation, public schools, their land, buildings and reputation have lost intrinsic value over time, as private schools jostle, market, lobby and compete between themselves for funding, locations, teachers and students. [7]So the public schools are losing both reputational and current land and built capital value, whilst private schools are increasing their land and built infrastructure value, often without any measurable return to the taxpayer.Private schools could realise their capital with significant gains, or leverage their improved position with lower cost loans, a benefit gifted by the taxpayer. Non-taxed institutions in particular could benefit enormouslyIs this a good investment for the taxpayer, or at least a neutral (no extra cost) one?Or are taxpayers losing overall?Additionally, the ability of a private education supplier to decline an enrollment relies upon the fall-back of taxpayer-funded education. This leads to a distortion in the distribution of students by demography, measurable ability, and outright need at the expense of government schools and their enrolled base. [8][8][8][8]Ultimately this results in increased inefficiencies in the delivery of public educationAnd increasingly higher costs per studentSimply put, it is unlikely that private schools “save taxpayers money”. At best it’s neutral, at worst it has substantially increased inefficiency and cost. It would arguably be better for public schools to increase rather than decrease their student numbers, increasing scale and maximising returns on their capital and other investments.In business terms, what companies aim to reduce their market share, in order to lower their costs? Rather we are told they must grow their share to survive and prosperNor can it be a simple matter of providing “a choice”. Private schools are often specifically geo-located within carefully targeted markets. They are not providing “a choice” for everyone, and certainly not for every faith, or style of teachingRather they are cherry-picking land, resources and students.And the argument that governments already fund such things as private GPs and specialists, pharmacies, aged care, child care and transport services, and therefore should fund private schools, is a weak one.A minimum level of primary and secondary attendance is mandated, for example, whereas attendance at a medical centre or pharmacy is voluntary, and may occur for reasons completely independent of government insistence or subsidySimilar situations occur with transport and child care. It is complicated.Whilst comparison can be made, it should be recognised that these are different delivery models, too. Governments carefully target, scrutinise and manage the approval and distribution of pharmaceuticals under the PBS, and similar restrictions apply to the Medicare payment system.We should be mindful of the differences and the reasons and history behind each funding modelEqually, many people (ironically those wedded to conservative or right-wing principles, I would think) would like less government intervention and subsidy, and therefore less “market distortion”.So why do we see political intervention by a “small-government” Liberal/National Party coalition on behalf of private schools, boosting taxpayer funding of their supposed non-government operation? Ultimately complete privatisation would remove the inbuilt distortions here, for example. Is that the intent? One can only speculate, I guess.Most importantly, are we all keeping up? I doubt it.[9][9][9][9]Here’s a list of further dot-points, to illustrate my other thoughts (not necessarily my firm opinions):Funding non-government schools at all is risky, as it fuels a mixture of opposing or conflicting aims and motivations (including profit of any kind, and dissemination of non-secular belief at taxpayer cost) [10]It exposes government to claims and counter-claims, of corruption and misuse of funds, so managing the risk is becomes yet another costIndependent review and allocation based upon fairness and equity would make sense, but the political reality of intervention by distortion pervadesEstablishing a minimum funding level per student also makes some sense, and adding to that for “disadvantage” is also a great ideaBut mucking around with the formulas and applying what appear to be band-aids or an act of oiling a squeaky wheel, exposes us all to more risk.These and many other things need to be considered. When governments (rather than private interests) fund something that is ‘universal’ in nature, like health, transport or welfare, there is less risk, and arguably greater overall community engagement and benefit.However when sectional interests are specifically targeted for funding, the obvious questions of fairness, equity and need will inevitably arise. Why are we all funding these sectional interests? Are we not promoting their interests in doing so? Is that fair, or justifiable?[11][11][11][11]There’s a line here, a balance. We may have crossed that line, and the system is out of balance. Or perhaps we are slowly moving towards a better, fairer compromise.Pick one, or both.Footnotes[1] Yes, education funding has increased – but not everyone benefits[2] Gonski 2.0: Is this the school funding plan we have been looking for? Finally, yes[3] Grattan Institute - Wikipedia[3] Grattan Institute - Wikipedia[3] Grattan Institute - Wikipedia[3] Grattan Institute - Wikipedia[4] Explaining Australia's school funding debate: what's at stake[4] Explaining Australia's school funding debate: what's at stake[4] Explaining Australia's school funding debate: what's at stake[4] Explaining Australia's school funding debate: what's at stake[5] Morrison government giving Catholic schools 10 times what they need: analysis[5] Morrison government giving Catholic schools 10 times what they need: analysis[5] Morrison government giving Catholic schools 10 times what they need: analysis[5] Morrison government giving Catholic schools 10 times what they need: analysis[6] Funding Catholic schools adequately won't deprive public schools[7] How a Catholic school's fight over a toilet evolved into high-stakes political warfare[8] Public schools losing out in political power plays[8] Public schools losing out in political power plays[8] Public schools losing out in political power plays[8] Public schools losing out in political power plays[9] Prime Minister Scott Morrison announces $4.6 billion school funding fix[9] Prime Minister Scott Morrison announces $4.6 billion school funding fix[9] Prime Minister Scott Morrison announces $4.6 billion school funding fix[9] Prime Minister Scott Morrison announces $4.6 billion school funding fix[10] Australian Council For The Defense Of Government Schools[11] Private schools to gain billions under new parental-income funding model[11] Private schools to gain billions under new parental-income funding model[11] Private schools to gain billions under new parental-income funding model[11] Private schools to gain billions under new parental-income funding model