THE UKIAH DAILY JOURNAL Life in the '90s THEDAILYDI Workers send, receive an average 190 messages each day Dm* ftlAS"»^iP i*s%asr*s%ti .11 «*«.. • > • . . . . . r ^^^ t& *^ By MAGGIE JACKSON AP Business Writer NEW YORK — Jannie Herchuk, a part-time accountant, likes being able to use computers and voice mail to communicate •with clients and co-workers. She does so even when she's home and — supposedly — not working. But to keep up with torrent of messages, she checks her voice mail daily before 7 a.m., and both her voice mail and email at night after her two young boys are sleeping. "There's a constant stream of messages," Herchuk said. "You can work yourself 24 hours, around the clock. And people will let you do that." More and more, office workers are feeling overwhelmed by the flood of faxes, e-mails and other messages they receive each day — and with good reason. Office workers send and receive an average of 190 messages a day, and most get interrupted by such communications at least three times an hour, a new study revealed. It's no wonder then that workers dial in for messages from dawn to dusk, scrambling to stay ahead of the communications deluge while trying to get their work done, too. "We all want the empty mail box, and we try to get there all day long," said Meredith Fischer, vice president at Pitney Bowes Inc., the office products company that funded the study. "-Jf we don't respond, we become the weak link in the communications chain." The study, based on a survey of 1,000 workers in large companies as well as face-to-face interviews, tallied 12 different forms of communication, including 'Acres of Skin' documents experiments on inmates Ely DAVID KINNEY Associated Press Writer PHILADELPHIA — The first time he walked into the prison in 1971, he noticed the telltale signs: gauze bandages on the arms, backs, even faces of iiirriate after inmate. • '-Had they rioted? he asked a guard. Were there fights? Stab- bings? No, he remembers being told. The-prisoners were testing perfumes for the University of Pennsylvania. "My jaw must have dropped Six feet from my head to my feet," Allen M. Hornblum says. He would later discover that the 1 inmates were not just test subjects for perfume, soap and cosmetics but for more menacing chemicals, from dioxin and psychological warfare agents to radioactive isotopes. • Now a 50-year-old prison activist and an instructor at Temple University, Hornblum never forgot that first visit to the Philadelphia prison system. ' •' Five years ago, he began digging into what happened. The result is a new book, "Acres of Skta." • °:In the decades after World War II, medical experiments on prisoners were largely unquestioned. By 1969, fully 85 percent of new drugs were tested on inmates in 42 prisons. •Could prisoners volunteer freely? No, concluded the National Commission for the Protection of Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, which took a stand against the practice in the late 1970s. •' "Prisoners are, as a consequence of being prisoners, more subject to coerced choice and more readily available for the imposition of burdens which others will not willingly bear," the'commission decided. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration followed suit, and'by the early 1980s, most prison testing was history. : See INMATES, Page B-8 telephone calls, letters and courier packages. Adding to the stress on employees is the fact that their work is constantly disrupted. Forty percent of workers get interrupted six or more times an hour by messages, while another 37 percent get interrupted three to five times an hour, according to the study. To cope, workers should be better taught how to juggle all the new technologies available to them, Fischer said. For now, they deal with the glut by delegating, setting priori- ties or simply turning off, according to author David Shenk, author of "Data Smog: Surviving the Information Glut." "People stop taking their cell phone home with them, leave their beeper in their desk, stop reading their e-mail all day long," he said. "The issue of information proliferation is going to be a major issue for businesses in future." Famous For Meats Our Ground Beef is 100% Beef, 100% of the Time. Guaranteed. You may have heard news reports recently about something called "adulterated" ground beef- that is, beef containing pork, lamb or poultry. At Raley's, we want to assure you that every package of our ground beef is 100% beef, 100% of the time. What's more, if the label says Ground Chuck, you can be sure it's 100% Ground Chuck. Ground Round is 100% Ground Round. And our Ground Sirloin is 100% Ground Sirloin. That's our policy. Our guarantee. It probably won't surprise you that our meat departments have always had some of the strictest operating policies and food safety standards in the industry. For instance: • We grind our beef fresh... in small batches, several times a day. It stays fresher that way. And we never mix in any of yesterday's ground beef. • We test every batch of ground beef to ensure that the fat content does not exceed what's marked on the label. • We disassemble, clean and thoroughly sanitize our grinding equipment every day. Work counters, cutting tools, meat trays... everything is sanitized with a USDA-approved cleanser. We also have third-party experts conduct unannounced inspections of the preparation areas. ^^$&&&^ t : • i-A ft ?•;«/•*¥*'•* * ft t^C ' At Raley's, you can buy ground beef with the condfidence that you're getting fresh, wholesome, 100% beef every time you shop. And that's value.
What members have found on this page
Get access to Newspapers.com
- The largest online newspaper archive
- 9,800+ newspapers from the 1700s–2000s
- Millions of additional pages added every month