CNN Pundit Scorched For Condescending Dig About American Workers Not Wearing Ties
During a Tuesday night segment of 'NewsNight with Abby Phillip,' the panelists each shared their — mainly lighthearted — takes on something they wish they could bring back from 'extinction.' Media personality and attorney Rachel Lindsay said she'd want to see an abundance of Blockbuster Video stores, while CNN chief media analyst Brian Stelter said he'd want to resurrect the AOL Instant Messenger away message feature.
Jennings, for his part, opted to target American workers who have office jobs.
'America, I'm going to hold your hand while I say this,' he said as he looked directly at the camera. 'We're going back to the office five days a week, and we're going to wear business attire. We're no longer dressing like hobos, and we're no longer going to act like every job is a part-time job.'
'Go back to work, put on a tie, stop whining, let's get back to business,' he added.
'Start with Elon Musk,' panelist Ana Navarro-Cárdenas shot back, referencing President Donald Trump's billionaire adviser who's typically seen wearing a T-shirt and a 'Make America Great Again' cap at meetings at the White House.
Jennings' comments reflect some of the negative attitudes people have had about remote work since its rise in the U.S. after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. Trump and Musk have recently mandated that federal employees return to the office, and some companies have either ended remote working options or have switched to a hybrid work policy after going fully remote in 2020.
People on X, formerly Twitter, slammed Jennings for his remarks, with some saying he appeared to be centering male employees.
'I'm so sick of this notion that wearing a suit and being in a certain spot at certain times of the day is more of a priority than productivity and effectiveness in your job,' one X user wrote.
'Of course, it's always implied that work from home means 'don't do any work at all'. As if there aren't any mechanisms in place by employers to monitor if work is being done or not,' wrote another.
One X user quipped, 'Who can afford ties now?
While fully remote work may not, for several reasons, be suitable for every business or person, comments like Jennings' amplify negative stereotypes about people who work from home. But some research has linked remote work with increased overall productivity, while a 2023 Pew Research study found that a majority of people who can do their jobs remotely said that working from home helped them get work done and meet deadlines. Remote work has also helped make the workforce more inclusive for many people with disabilities.
Jennings' quip about people needing to wear a tie comes off as 'condescending,' said Hallie Kritsas, a licensed mental health counselor and therapist with Thriveworks.
Kritsas, who specializes in self-esteem, workplace issues and anxiety, told HuffPost that 'insinuating that someone who doesn't dress in a suit and tie is dressed like a 'hobo,' could come across as minimizing and condescending to many, positioning them as less worthy or capable due to what they wear.'
'It also devalues those in the workforce that are in a field that doesn't have a uniform, but definitely doesn't lend itself to a suit and tie,' she said, adding that his remarks send 'a message to people who may not be able to afford business attire that they do not belong in the workplace.'
Kritsas pointed out that wearing certain outfits 'might not be feasible for someone with a disability or sensory/touch issues.' She also referenced the fact that suits (which can be viewed as a symbol of status) and certain dress codes often carry higher price tags — and that that can be exclusionary to those who can't afford it.
'It also suggests that one's attire makes them better than those who cannot afford to wear the same things,' she said, which can make workers 'feel inadequate.'
She continued, 'Creating anxiety for workers around the topic of dress can actually have the opposite effect on productivity than leaders might hope for when pushing these blanket rules.'
CNN's Diehard Trump Fan Scott Jennings Makes Surprising Confession On Tariffs
Scott Jennings' Temper ERUPTS At Former Biden Official In Scary Outburst
'Really?': CNN Host Hits Back At House Republican's Eyebrow-Raising Trump Claim
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
18 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
No proof Hamas routinely stole UN aid, Israeli military officials say
Now, with hunger at crisis levels in the territory, Israel is coming under increased international pressure over its conduct of the war in Gaza and the humanitarian suffering it has brought. Doctors in the territory say that an increasing number of their patients are suffering from -- and dying of -- starvation. More than 100 aid agencies and rights groups warned this past week of 'mass starvation' and implored Israel to lift restrictions on humanitarian assistance. The European Union and at least 28 governments, including Israeli allies like Britain, France, and Canada, issued a joint statement condemning Israel's 'drip-feeding of aid' to Gaza's 2 million Palestinian residents. Advertisement Israel has largely brushed off the criticism. David Mencer, a government spokesperson, said this past week that there was 'no famine caused by Israel.' Instead, he blamed Hamas and poor coordination by the United Nations for any food shortages. Advertisement Israel moved in May toward replacing the UN-led aid system that had been in place for most of the 21-month war in Gaza, opting instead to back a private, American-run operation guarded by armed US contractors in areas controlled by Israeli military forces. Some aid still comes into Gaza through the United Nations and other organizations. The new system has proved to be much deadlier for Palestinians trying to obtain food handouts. According to the Gaza Health Ministry, almost 1,100 people have been killed by gunfire on their way to get food handouts under the new system, in many cases by Israeli soldiers who opened fire on hungry crowds. Israeli officials have said they fired shots in the air in some instances because the crowds came too close or endangered their forces. The military officials who spoke to The New York Times said that the original UN aid operation was relatively reliable and less vulnerable to Hamas interference than the operations of many of the other groups bringing aid into Gaza. That's largely because the United Nations managed its own supply chain and handled distribution directly inside Gaza. Hamas did steal from some of the smaller organizations that donated aid, as those groups were not always on the ground to oversee distribution, according to the senior Israeli officials and others involved in the matter. But, they say, there was no evidence that Hamas regularly stole from the United Nations, which provided the largest chunk of the aid. A Hamas representative did not immediately respond to requests for comment. An internal US government analysis came to a similar conclusion, Reuters reported Friday. It found no evidence of systematic Hamas theft of US-funded humanitarian supplies, the report said. Advertisement 'For months, we and other organizations were dragged through the mud by accusations that Hamas steals from us,' said Georgios Petropoulos, a former UN official in Gaza who oversaw aid coordination with Israel for nearly 13 months of war. The senior military officials and others interviewed by the Times spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly on behalf of the military or government. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office did not immediately respond to requests for comment. In a statement, the military said that it has been 'well documented' that Hamas has routinely 'exploited humanitarian aid to fund terrorist activities.' But the military did not dispute the assessment that there was no evidence that Hamas regularly stole aid from the United Nations. The Israeli government and military have often clashed over how to conduct the war in Gaza. Early last year, top commanders urged a cease-fire with Hamas to secure the release of hostages. Netanyahu's government instead expanded the ground operation in southern Gaza. Israel used the rationale that Hamas steals aid when it cut off all food and other supplies to Gaza between March and May. In March, after a cease-fire between Hamas and Israel collapsed, Netanyahu said: 'Hamas is currently taking control of all supplies and goods entering Gaza,' and he declared that Israel would prevent anything from entering the territory. That blockade, and problems with a new aid system that launched in May, brought hunger and starvation in Gaza to the current crisis levels. For most of the war, the UN was the largest single source of aid entering Gaza, according to data from the Israeli military unit that oversees policy in the territory. Advertisement Now, the new aid system is managed instead by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, a private American company led by a former CIA agent. It was intended to eventually replace international aid organizations and the UN role. But it has only a few distribution hubs, compared with hundreds under the former UN-run operation. The new system's rollout at the end of May was quickly followed by near-daily episodes of deadly violence near distribution sites. Desperate and hungry Palestinians must go to the few aid distribution sites located in areas controlled by Israeli forces. The hours of operation are limited and supplies run out, so crowds arrive early, with some walking for miles to get there. Since May 19, when Israel allowed emergency supplies to resume entering Gaza after its two-month blockade, half of the aid has been distributed by the United Nations and international organizations, with the other half coming through the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, the Israeli military says. Petropoulos welcomed the notion that some Israeli officials had recognized the UN-led aid system as effective during the war. But he said he wished that endorsement had come much sooner. 'If the UN had been taken at face value months ago, we wouldn't have wasted all this time and Gazans wouldn't be starving and being shot at trying to feed their families,' he said. This article originally appeared in
Boston Globe
18 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Pope Leo says migrants and refugees can bring light and aspiration from dark corners of the world
'In a world darkened by war and injustice, even when all seems lost, migrants and refugees stand as messengers of hope,' he said. 'Their courage and tenacity bear heroic testimony to a faith that sees beyond what our eyes can see and gives them the strength to defy death on the various contemporary migration routes.' Advertisement The remarks from Leo, who ascended to the papacy earlier this year to become the first American pope, come amid the Trump administration's crackdown on immigration. In recent months, Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids in Los Angeles and other cities have sparked protests across the country, and a surge in detentions has led to immigrants being held in overcrowded facilities with deteriorating conditions. Pope Leo showed a special interest in the well-being of immigrants during his work before the Vatican and has been described as the 'first modern immigrant pope.' In a May meeting, he emphasized this side of his past to diplomats, telling them, 'My own story is that of a citizen, the descendant of immigrants, who in turn chose to emigrate.' Advertisement 'All of us, in the course of our lives, can find ourselves healthy or sick, employed or unemployed, living in our native land or in a foreign country, yet our dignity always remains unchanged: It is the dignity of a creature willed and loved by God,' he said. Before his papacy, Leo served the poor in Peru for decades and was especially concerned about Venezuelan migrants who fled there, opening churches as soup kitchens and asking priests to convert free spaces into makeshift refuges while bishop of Chiclayo. That side of his work has resonated with other leaders in the church. The Rev. Russell Pollitt, a Jesuit priest at Holy Trinity Catholic Church near Johannesburg, said in May that Leo 'seems to have been someone who was on the side of migrants and refugees flocking to Peru from Venezuela.' 'I think that's important, that we don't lose that. Migrants and refugees are becoming a sort of scapegoat for politicians,' he said. In this past week's letter, Leo stressed that communities that welcome migrants and refugees can become living witnesses to hope. 'In this way, migrants and refugees are recognized as brothers and sisters, part of a family in which they can express their talents and participate fully in community life.' He wished for spiritual protection for 'all those who are on the journey, as well as those who are working to accompany them.'
The Hill
18 minutes ago
- The Hill
How much does it really cost to own a car in the US?
Driving is probably the most consistent way Americans get from point A to point B across the country. And while it's well known that buying a car is a significant investment, most of us don't typically factor in the day-to-day or annual costs associated with keeping our cars running and operational. Not to mention the cost of insurance for your vehicle, and for those who live in larger cities, the cost to park your car each and every day. Adding this all together, the average American pays roughly $12,828 a year to own a car, roughly $1,069 per month, says a new study from Way. The initial number probably seems eye-popping for sure, but when you break down the various payments on your vehicle, it slowly starts to add up. The first and largest is the depreciation of your car. While this isn't physically money that you're spending, it's money that you're losing every time you use your car. As with age and usage, the price of your car will continue to drop until the day you finally sell it or trade it in. On average, the value of your car drops about $4,600 a year, according to Way. Next is gas and insurance, which can vary depending on your location, but typically Americans spend about $2,200 on gas every year and $1,700 on car insurance. After that, there's the maintenance of your car that you end up doing every year. These include oil changes, tire rotations, brake pad replacements, new air filters, new windshield wipers and anything else that potentially goes wrong with your car in a given year. The prices on this can obviously vary drastically depending on what is going on with your car, but on average, a typical U.S. citizen will spend roughly $1,500 on car maintenance every year. Going a little more unnoticed is the various financing charges and taxes and fees that you end up paying each year on your car and probably don't even realize it. Combined, the two can add up to about $1,600 a year. Finally, there are parking costs, which probably only apply to people who live in larger cities. But on average, the typical American spends around $1,000 on parking. This can vary drastically obviously for someone who lives in the suburbs versus someone who lives in a major city in California or New York. Separately, all these payments may not seem too crazy, but when combined, it's a bit more than the normal person may expect to pay on a car year after year.
