[TRU Research] Research/data projects

[Jim Walseth]

Katie *et al*,
The 'Employees' column is conspicuously empty. This seems important for
calculating things, but need not be precise to get in the ball park. Not
sure how to get that info, but we could divide this list among the Research
Team to go get some numbers.
Jim

On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 2:28 PM Katie Wilson <katie at transitriders.org>
wrote:

> Thanks Jim, this looks great. Even though we can’t 100% trust this list
> (according to the person who gave it to me) at least it gives us an idea of
> some employers that may be affected. I’m going to share this with our
> organizers and ask them if some version of this list would be helpful for
> them as they plan their outreach.
>
> I have added Isaac and Bryn to this list, believing that they expressed an
> interest in being part of our volunteer research/data team. Isaac and Bryn,
> if this is mistaken, please let me know, and otherwise welcome to our email
> group!
>
> - Katie
>
> On Feb 14, 2020, at 8:03 PM, Jim Walseth <jim.walseth at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi y'all.
>
> I started 'reducing' the spreadsheet manually then realized at 1100 lines
> I was not up for that. So I wrote a script to collapse multiple businesses.
> Now 337 rows.
>
> The 'Legal name' is the one associated with the first line in a group.
> Perhaps of little value.
>
>
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1qg5u6Tkphu-jRS8vhRgAXGeN7vDI8zEc/view?usp=sharing
>
> Jim
>
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 8:06 PM Jim Walseth <jim.walseth at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Yes this seems fine to me, I've started on this. Cheers, Jim
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 5:41 PM Katie Wilson <katie at transitriders.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> And by “occupations” in that first bullet point I meant “locations”.
>>>
>>> On Feb 7, 2020, at 5:35 PM, Katie Wilson <katie at transitriders.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I think what we’re going for here is a list *only* including employers
>>> we believe will be affected by our legislation— so that means 500+
>>> employees worldwide and not already doing full transit benefits for
>>> everyone.
>>>
>>> The spreadsheet I attached contains food and retail industry employers
>>> that probably qualify, in general. So maybe it makes sense to start by
>>> stripping down that spreadsheet so that:
>>>
>>>
>>>    - Businesses with multiple occupations occupy only one row, putting
>>>    the number of locations (previously the number of rows) in the locations
>>>    column
>>>    - Same for franchises, but add a note in the notes column that it’s
>>>    a franchise
>>>    - Remove the address columns and the NAICS code column, but maybe
>>>    retain the NAICS description column since that may be useful for us to know
>>>    for businesses whose names we don’t recognize.
>>>
>>>
>>> After that, I think it may be best to add other employers we think will
>>> be affected one by one, rather than trying to merge any of our other
>>> spreadsheets—  otherwise we’re going to be adding tons of smaller employers
>>> and ones who may already be doing full transit benefits.
>>>
>>> Does that make sense? Totally open to other approaches to cleaning up
>>> the data if we can get to the desired outcome.
>>>
>>> Katie
>>>
>>> On Feb 7, 2020, at 5:09 PM, Jim Walseth <jim.walseth at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I have merged our old spread sheet with the new. The schemas are very
>>> different as we say in the data business so it is kind of a hot mess right
>>> now. Also there are many franchises (7 Eleven e.g.). Etc. I'm happy to
>>> process this more as needed.
>>>
>>> Merged list:
>>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ETvJ_YpXIUek9_1ZfKBlaobrzf6f4LnJl-LfijGJUi4/edit?usp=sharing
>>>
>>> Jim
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 4:33 PM Jim Walseth <jim.walseth at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Katie,
>>>>
>>>> I volunteered to do the Employer data spreadsheet. I just copied the
>>>> data from our previous spreadsheet in there and and added the 'Locations'
>>>> column. I'll merge in the data from the list you just sent as well.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1XgvT6L3EF_6029xExDFA7CbK2cMYfliKJiSd_ys3ZMY/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>
>>>> Jim
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 8:57 AM Katie Wilson <katie at transitriders.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi folks,
>>>>>
>>>>> We a had a good meeting last Thursday. My apologies for the slow
>>>>> follow-up, things have been busy! In my recollection — I’m having trouble
>>>>> finding my notes right now — we settled on two main projects:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Compiling a spreadsheet of employers that could be affected by our
>>>>> legislation, and (if possible) an estimate of the number of employees they
>>>>> have in Seattle who could be affected. I’m attaching a spreadsheet from my
>>>>> friend at Working Washington, listing employers they thought would be
>>>>> covered by the secure scheduling legisation that passed in 2018. He says:
>>>>> "Wouldn’t trust this very far but here you go. Note it also will include
>>>>> franchisees with <500 employees provided the franchise system employs 500+
>>>>> b/c that’s how coverage works on this.” For our spreadsheet, I think we
>>>>> decided to keep it simple with a column for employer name, another for
>>>>> estimated number of employees, and another for notes. Looking at the WW
>>>>> spreadsheet, I think we should add another column for estimated number of
>>>>> locations. So, a first step would be to create our spreadsheet by
>>>>> condensing the info in this spreadsheet. I can’t remember who volunteered
>>>>> to start this project (Jim maybe?) so if it was you, speak up!
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. Thinking of informative data-containing graphics that we could
>>>>> create and spread through social media etc. to help propel the campaign
>>>>> forward. One I remember was to translate an individual’s monthly transit
>>>>> costs into other necessary goods, to show what they could be doing with
>>>>> that money instead. We had some other ideas that hopefully I wrote down in
>>>>> my notes, which I will keep looking for. If we can come up with concepts &
>>>>> numbers, we have a few people in our membership & networks who can probably
>>>>> create the graphics and make ‘em look cool. If you have ideas, just share
>>>>> them with the group by email & we can start that way.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, has anyone been keeping tabs on our spreadsheet of form entries
>>>>> from the O4A website
>>>>> <https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/14HbO7S-KLxjt57Mi_lmlKOVMOHd0OH6bPwkmC25balw/edit?usp=sharing>?
>>>>> Looks like we have some more people telling us what transit benefits their
>>>>> employers offer. Stephen, can you take a look and move the relevant info
>>>>> over to the master spreadsheet so that Jim can update the chart?
>>>>>
>>>>> If I’m forgetting anything from our meeting, please chime in!
>>>>>
>>>>> Katie
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Katie Wilson
>>>>> General Secretary
>>>>> Transit Riders Union
>>>>> https://transitriders.org
>>>>> 206-781-7204
>>>>>
>>>>> *The Transit Riders Union is a democratic organization of working and
>>>>> poor **people, including students, seniors, and people with
>>>>> disabilities, taking control over our own lives, and building up the power
>>>>> we **need to change society for the good of humanity and of the
>>>>> planet. We will **fight to preserve, expand, and improve the public
>>>>> transportation system in **Seattle and beyond, so that every human
>>>>> being has access to safe, **affordable, and reliable public transit.*
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.transitriders.org/pipermail/research/attachments/20200217/1d0a4c81/attachment.html>