I'm not doing a whole lot of traveling at the moment, because I got a job working as a barista at a little cafe in the mall. I'm learning how to make all the fancy espresso drinks they serve at starbucks.
Lattes are a lot harder than they look. You have to know how long the shot should take to pour(the pull), or it will come out too bitter or burned. To control the pull, you have to grind the beans just right. Then you have to do the milk, which is an art in and of itself. You heat it by injecting steam into cold milk. If you do it right you get a nice thick foamy froth, do it wrong and you get warm milk with bubbles.
This is my aspiration:
Friday, October 31, 2008
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Remuera
I live in Remuera. Remuwera or Remu-wera is roughly translated as 'burnt hem of a garment' and reflecting the volcanic heritage of the area with the volcanic cone of the same name.Remuera is a residential suburban area within Auckland city, in the North Island of New Zealand. It is located four kilometres to the southeast of the city centre. According to the 2001 census, Remuera has a population of 6,324.
The suburb extends from Hobson Bay and the Orakei Basin (two arms of the Waitemata Harbour to the north and east, to the main thoroughfare of State Highway 1 in the southwest. It is surrounded by the suburbs of Newmarket, Greenlane and Meadowbank.
Traditionally occupied by the higher-income bracket, especially on its "Northern Slopes" (a term that refers to the part of Remuera north of Remuera Road) the suburb has become regarded as the stereotypical retreat of the rich in popular New Zealand thought, and is therefore used as a name to describe this income group - usually in disparaging tones. The term 'Remuera tractor', for example, is a common nickname for upmarket SUV vehicles. Remuera is home to many well known New Zealanders including Paul Holmes and the late Sir Edmund Hillary.
-a la Wikipedia.
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
Kevin Riley, Person 2 Person, and a rat.
The company that I have worked for for the past several weeks (Person 2 Person) declared bankruptcy this weekend. And they just informed us that they may not be able to pay us the wages and expenses that they owe us. As you can imagine, I'm a bit angry.
According the Person 2 Person's owner and director Kevin Riley, American Express suddenly decided to pull their contract because they weren't getting the results they required. This bankrupted the company and they have no assets. Of course it's an LLC, so Mr. Riley's personal wealth is not at stake. According to him, AmEx still owes him money on a number of received credit card applications so he claims he will eventually pay us if that comes through.
According to my slightly more reliable sources, AmEx has been threatening to cancel Person 2 Person's contract for months now. It's funny that we were never told anything until the last day of our most recent pay period. Essentially, we worked for the maximum amount of time possible before they would've been expected to pay us. It all seems a wee bit fishy to me. He's lost nothing except a business built on leases and credit, we've lost 2 weeks of productivity and a significant amount of money in travel expenses.
It's not so bad for me. New Zealand has a "holiday pay" law, where employers are required to save an additional 8% of their employee's salary which must be paid out upon termination of employment. Basically, if you have worked for a year, making $100,000 per year, when you are terminated at the end of the year you will receive $8,000. Furthermore, Person 2 person had a paid vacation time scheme. I've only worked there for a couple of weeks - I had no paid vacation time, and my holiday pay amounts to about $40. But there are people who have worked for Mr. Riley for over 2 years. They are out $6000 - $10,000. And that doesn't include unpaid commission. I'm out $100 in expenses plus about $550 in wages, and I'm livid. I can only imagine how my long-term coworkers must feel.
Anyways, we've filed a complaint with the labour department, so we have first dibs on any assets that are seized from Person 2 Person. And we talked to a labour union and they are looking into using "leverage" against Mr. Riley, whatever that means. I believe some people have already seized a few assets in advance. Frankly, I don't blame them...
On a brighter note, one of my friends may have found me a job at a little coffee stand in the mall. It looks like a fun job, I've always wanted to learn how to make a good latté.
According the Person 2 Person's owner and director Kevin Riley, American Express suddenly decided to pull their contract because they weren't getting the results they required. This bankrupted the company and they have no assets. Of course it's an LLC, so Mr. Riley's personal wealth is not at stake. According to him, AmEx still owes him money on a number of received credit card applications so he claims he will eventually pay us if that comes through.
According to my slightly more reliable sources, AmEx has been threatening to cancel Person 2 Person's contract for months now. It's funny that we were never told anything until the last day of our most recent pay period. Essentially, we worked for the maximum amount of time possible before they would've been expected to pay us. It all seems a wee bit fishy to me. He's lost nothing except a business built on leases and credit, we've lost 2 weeks of productivity and a significant amount of money in travel expenses.
It's not so bad for me. New Zealand has a "holiday pay" law, where employers are required to save an additional 8% of their employee's salary which must be paid out upon termination of employment. Basically, if you have worked for a year, making $100,000 per year, when you are terminated at the end of the year you will receive $8,000. Furthermore, Person 2 person had a paid vacation time scheme. I've only worked there for a couple of weeks - I had no paid vacation time, and my holiday pay amounts to about $40. But there are people who have worked for Mr. Riley for over 2 years. They are out $6000 - $10,000. And that doesn't include unpaid commission. I'm out $100 in expenses plus about $550 in wages, and I'm livid. I can only imagine how my long-term coworkers must feel.
Anyways, we've filed a complaint with the labour department, so we have first dibs on any assets that are seized from Person 2 Person. And we talked to a labour union and they are looking into using "leverage" against Mr. Riley, whatever that means. I believe some people have already seized a few assets in advance. Frankly, I don't blame them...
On a brighter note, one of my friends may have found me a job at a little coffee stand in the mall. It looks like a fun job, I've always wanted to learn how to make a good latté.
Does the guy have to pay?
I had a really interesting argument with someone today over a simple question - should the guy pay on the first date? I spent a couple of hours reading people's perspectives on the issue, and most people seem to believe that he should. A couple of girls, even said that they wouldn't go on a second date if he didn't. Maybe I'm friends with golddiggers, but it seems to be a pretty prevalent attitude.One alternate view holds that the person asking should pay. In our culture the man nearly always has to be the approacher, so in my opinion that view is moot.
So, now I'm really curious. Should the guy pay on the first date?
Pretend for a moment that I meet you on the street, we chat for a couple of minutes, I get your number and we agree to meet for dinner. Dinner comes, we have a great time, and then the CHECK arrives. I would suggest that we split it. Because...
I say no, for four reasons:
1. Paying puts me in a position of supplication. It makes me feel like I am sucking up to you to get your affection. I don't do that. I want someone who I respect, and I want to be respected. Successful relationships require mutual respect. Sucking up has never gained anyone respect. I don't want you to do it, and I won't do it to you.
2. I respect you. I am not going to try to manipulate you or buy your affection in any way. When you think about it, I would only be paying for you because I want something out of you, be it a second date, or simply your approval. Paying is bait, and I like you too much to pull that kind of crap on you.
3. I don't want to pressure you. I like you for you. I like spending time with you, because I enjoy your company. I would love to continue our relationship, but I'm not trying to get something out of you. Paying implies that I am paying for something... which I am not.
4. Finally, it is very important to me that are going out with me because you enjoy being with me. I don't want to waste your time, or my time. If you are not enjoying my company, then we shouldn't be together. If I pay, then how do I know you're not going out with me at least partially because there are freebies involved. I need to know that you simply enjoy being with me, I need to know that you like me for me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
