Are you a Millennial who’s frustrated with your lack of earnings, success, or even finding a place in the industry? Are you a Boomer who’s having trouble relating to and managing new, younger workers? Are you a Gen Xer who is irritated by having to work with both of them? Whichever the generational group you most closely identify with, getting along with the other generations in the workplace has become a prickly business for some.

Bringing the next generation up in the workforce is proving to be a challenge for all involved. Many have valid questions about whose responsibility it really is to do so, be it the employer or the employee themselves. There is a distinct clash of ideas when it comes to what younger employees and older employers expect from one another. With roles in businesses shifting between the generations, the gaps in mutual understanding seem to be getting wider.

Where do you fit?

Part of learning how to get along and manage better in the workplace is figuring out where you fit best within the generational dynamic, and how you individually approach both work and life. While generational generalizations are just that, there are certain traits and attitudes toward work and life that are common among the groups. While you might technically fall into the Millennial age boundaries, you may find your philosophies are more similar to those of Boomers. Or, as a Gen Xer, you might have more in common with your Millennial counterparts than your Boomer parents. As a younger Boomer, you may find you identify more closely with your Gen X colleagues. It’s up to you to decide where you fit best.

Once you’ve figured out where you fit into the generational equation, it then becomes your job to gain better understanding how each generation views work/life balance. As an owner or manager, it’s also about figuring out how to both adapt your management style and clarify expectations to improve relationships with those whose work/life philosophy differs from your own.

Roles are changing

It’s important to note that management styles are already changing organically within the industry as leadership roles are handed down to the next generation. And as such, we need to take a closer look at how the “next generation” will be guiding and managing the green industry. And before you get ahead of yourself and assume that I mean to say Millennials are taking over, let me remind you that there’s another entire generation that’s been patiently and quietly waiting its turn: Gen X.

While the media has focused an immense amount of attention on the communication disconnect between Boomer owners and Millennial employees, not much at all has been paid to Gen X and how they fit into the equation. While Gen X (birthdays from 1965 to 1980) will make up a smaller percentage of the work force by the time Boomers hand over their thrones, it’s important to recognize that many Millennials don’t yet have the experience and maturity to take charge. Therefore, it’s crucially important to understand how Gen X works and what it needs in order to lead.

Stuck in the middle

The Gen X crowd is firmly lodged between two much larger and extreme generational groups. Speaking for my Gen Xer compadres, we’re accustomed to having to balance between the wants and needs of both Boomers and Millennials. Basically, we’re Jan Brady. We’re used to Marsha stealing our thunder and Cindy driving us nuts. As such, Gen Xers tend to take a more moderate viewpoint on many things, from politics to work/life balance. A Gen Xer isn’t necessarily going to follow all the rules or do things the way their Boomer boss wants them to; but they also aren’t going to indulge Millennial employees in many of their expectations.

As employees, Gen Xers don’t want to be micromanaged. We’re used to working alone, unsupervised and without kudos. Tell us what you expect then leave us alone to get the job done; we work hard. As the original digital geeks, we’re very tech savvy. We don’t expect or need a pat on the back, but we do expect to be paid fairly. Unfortunately, the lone-wolf “let me get it done” approach can leave the Boomer owner/manager feeling unacknowledged and disrespected.

Helicopter management

Millennial employees were brought up under the much more watchful eye of the Helicopter Parent (some of whom, ironically, are Gen Xers). They often expect Gen X managers to be more collaborative and work with them as opposed to giving them marching orders. But that is the last thing many Gen X managers want to do. A Gen X boss is typically going to give you basic instructions, then leave you to it to figure it out on your own. Millennials that expect hand-holding from their Gen X manager may often feel personally neglected, all the while unknowingly annoying the heck out of their boss. But, if or when a Gen X boss does dole out the occasional compliment, you can be sure you’ve truly earned it.

As a Boomer or Gen X boss, there is one particular dynamic that may make your intergenerational communications most difficult for you: It’s that whole collaborative work thing. Younger employees seem to enjoy more face-time with managers and desire a bit more guidance than previous generations. While Gen Xers experienced a cell-phone and tether-free childhood (so much so to cause fierce independence) and Boomers had the value of hard work pounded into them (so much so to cause rebellion), most Millennials were under the constant close watch of their parents, both in person and digitally. Many are used to someone looking over their shoulder at all times, and many require more supervision.

Two-way street

Now, I’m not suggesting that it’s the manager’s responsibility alone to adapt their management styles for younger employees. Employment is a two-way street as far as I’m concerned. Employees of any generation must do their part to improve communication. However, as a manager, the key to better connecting with younger staff is perhaps is learning to be more personable, without getting too personally involved.

Advice to Gen X and Boomer managers

You may not have gotten any participation trophies or pats on the back for just giving it your best, but younger employees may not relate to or understand that attitude. Many Millennials don’t see any reason why they can’t expect to get the most out of their job, with great pay and plenty of kudos, while still having adequate time left over to focus on personal goals. Boomer and Gen X parents raised them with these expectations at home, but Boomer and Gen X managers didn’t necessarily have that kind of upbringing themselves; therefore, we tend to apply a very different set of expectations at the office.

Given the generational communication gap, it can be challenging to get the kind of work you want out of younger employees unless you’re willing to adjust your communication style. If you don’t first clearly define the terms of your one-on-one working relationship and clarify your job expectations of them, you’re going to leave younger employees confused. New employee orientations, clear descriptions of how you expect your new employee to communicate with you, and clear work/life boundaries are key. Don’t want them texting, Tweeting or Snapchatting half the day? You’d better put it in writing and have them sign it, from the get go. Expect them there on time every day and not leave before a certain time? Better put that in writing, too.

Advice to Millennial employees

Employment really is a two-way street, as I mentioned earlier. Employers don’t owe you a job, nor is it their job to worry about your personal life. You’ll find that Boomer and Gen X managers will be less than sympathetic to, or interested in, your personal goals or challenges. They simply do not feel it is their business or place to care about your personal issues, or pave your way to success. While you may feel emotionally neglected and disenfranchised by the seeming lack of concern for you as an employee, your success is ultimately your own responsibility. So, what can you do to better relate to your manager?

If you want to encourage your employer to feel more personally invested in you as a person, then you’re going to have to make an effort to learn about what they value. If your boss is a Boomer, then they probably want to see you show up on time every day, and they’ll want you to listen to them and acknowledge their ideas and success. Do so, and they’ll be more open to working with you on your needs. If your boss is a Gen Xer, learn that they may value independence and a more distinct separation of work and home life. Even if you make a mistake, they will be happier that you tried to accomplish the job on your own first, instead of hitting them with a million questions. The less you talk to them about your personal goals or problems, and the more you focus on your work, the more willing they’ll probably be to help you get ahead; so you can hit your personal goals and fix your own problems.

The making of a mentor

Younger employees tend to bring more of their personal life to work. This may not make you comfortable as a manager, but you’re going to have to figure out how to deal with it while still getting what you need from them as an employee. While it’s not your job to hold their hand, you can choose to adopt a more mentor-like management style.

A work mentor is not a personal counselor. A work mentor is someone who is going to help an employee grow professionally. When someone has professional success, it has a cascading benefit on their personal lives and goals. That is what you must clarify upfront to younger employees, that you care to a degree that they have a happy personal life, but that you are not part of it. Your job is to help them grow and achieve professionally at work, and that when they succeed in their job, it will bring them the stability and success they need to further their personal goals.

After you’ve made them sign your attendance and social media work policies, be sure your Millennial employee knows you’ll also be meeting with them once per month for a face-to-face check-up on how they’re doing. That way, you both get what you want.

Leslie (CPH) owns Halleck Horticultural, LLC, through which she provides horticultural consulting, marketing strategy, digital content creation, branding design, advertising and social media support for green industry companies. www.lesliehalleck.com

Often greenhouse growers must decide which supplemental lighting system is better: high-pressure sodium (HPS) or light-emitting diodes (LEDs). Meeting the necessary light requirement for certain crops during low-light periods can often be a challenge to greenhouse growers. Balancing operational energy costs, capital investment, and optimizing yield are the main concerns of selecting your lighting needs to overcome this common, yet unpredictable, limiting factor. Currently, the conventional standard in greenhouse supplemental lighting is HPS. Meanwhile, new horticulture-based light emitting diodes (LEDs) may be an option to replace or supplement HPS.

Before deciding which supplementary lighting is best for you, it is important to understand the differences in electrical efficiency, spectral distribution and other unique characteristics of the two lighting systems (HPS vs. LEDs).

Electrical efficiency

Horticultural Electrical Efficiency defines the ratio of electrical power that is converted to photons of light (micromoles per second: µmol s^-1) in the photosynthetic active radiation spectrum (PAR: 400 to 700 nm). In other words, it is measured by how many photons (µmol) a particular fixture emits every second (s) per every Watt (W) of electrical power provided.

This number is either provided or can be directly calculated from the manufacturer-fixture specs. For example, if the spec sheet gives the emission rate (µmol s^-1) and the power draw (W), you simply divide the emission rate by the total W. Alternatively, the specs will directly show the efficiency with the units of µmol s^-1 W^-1.

The efficiency of multiple fixtures ranges between 0.9 and 2.7 µmol s^-1 W^-1 for LEDs and 1.6 and 1.9 µmol s^-1 W^-1 for HPS. From the two highest advertised fixture efficacies, you can see that LED has around 40 percent greater efficiency than the new double-ended HPS. This, in theory, will generate a 40-percent energy savings. In the article, “Do the math, see the light,” published in the January 2016 issue, you learned that this number is key for electrical savings. As a warning, we have often seen horticultural LED fixtures with lower efficacies than HPS fixtures. For this reason, always make sure to obtain the efficiency information before you buy any horticultural light. Simply put, greater µmol s^-1 W^-1 is better.

All the power that is not converted into light photons is then emitted as heat. It is fair to note that because LEDs have relative comparable efficiency to HPS, they also have comparable heat production. This means LEDs produce almost as much heat than HPS, but in different forms. LED fixtures release most of their heat through convection cooling (most heat generated on the circuits), while HPS fixtures undergo radiative cooling (heat generated by the light spectrum). Although not visible, HPS heat energy is emitted as near infra-red (NIR). This can result in a 0.5 to 2°C increase in leaf temperature. Typically, plants under higher temperature have a greater growth rate, which may be beneficial during winter months; however, it may also be detrimental for cool-season crops or during high-temperature summer periods. Under identical light intensities, plants under HPS can have higher leaf/canopy temperature.

Spectral “tuning” of LEDs

The light emitted from LEDs can be customized, meaning that certain spectrum of color can be delivered in varying dosages. LED arrays can be comprised of many one-color diodes (making it all blue or all red, for example) or of several different diode types that would comprise a multiple color array (this can even include radiation that falls outside of the PAR spectrum such as UV and far-red radiation). Most commonly marketed LED panels contain some combination of blue and red light.

The advantage in customizing spectrum is the application of eliciting morphological responses by using different light qualities (colors) of light. This could potentially replace or reduce the use of chemical plant growth regulators in your operation.

For example, in one greenhouse study, cucumber transplants were grown under supplemental HPS, red-LEDs, and blue-LEDs. And cucumber seedlings under supplemental HPS and blue-light were 46 to 61 percent taller (less compact) than plants grown under supplemental red-LED (see Figure 1) (Hernández and Kubota, 2015). This could be a useful trait to utilize if a grower needs sturdier and more compact seedlings.

In another study, researchers found that petunia cuttings supplemented with LED lighting (consisting of 70 percent blue and 30 percent red light) had a larger accumulation of both leaf and root dry mass than when compared to those cuttings under supplemental HPS lighting (Currey and Lopez, 2013).

In contrast to LED spectral versatility, HPS has a set spectrum and the composition of the spectrum varies slightly between fixtures. However, the spectrum roughly contains 5 percent blue (400 to 500 nm), 53 percent green/yellow (500 to 600 nm) and 42 percent red (600 to 700 nm) (spectroradiometer scan on a 600W HPS lamp). The set spectrum limits the grower’s ability to manipulate a crop at the photomorphogenic level in novel ways.

It should also be noted that each crop species will react differently to specific lighting regimes, and thus more research is needed to know how horticultural plants will respond.

Future of LEDs

Ricardo is an assistant professor in Controlled Environment and Sustainable Energy, Department of Horticultural Sciences at North Carolina State University.

Hans is a Ph.D. student in Controlled Environment, Department of Horticultural Sciences at North Carolina State University.

For more: visit hortenergy.cals.ncsu.edu

Citations

Currey, C.J., and Lopez, R.G. (2013). Cuttings of Impatiens, Pelargonium, and Petunia Propagated under Light-emitting Diodes and High-pressure Sodium Lamps Have Comparable Growth, Morphology, Gas Exchange, and Post-transplant Performance. Hortscience 48, 428-434.

Haitz, R., and Tsao, J.Y. (2011). Solid-state lighting: ‘The case’ 10 years after and future prospects. physica status solidi (a) 208, 17-29.

Hernández, R., and Kubota, C. (2015). Physiological, morphological, and energy-use efficiency comparisons of LED and HPS supplemental lighting for cucumber transplant production. HortScience 50, 351-357.

The use of biological control is one means of dealing with insect and mite pests of greenhouse-grown horticultural crops by making releases of parasitoids or predators. The characteristics of an efficient biological control agent include: 1) high female reproductive capacity, 2) short generation time, 3) sufficient dispersal capabilities, and 4) life cycle that is synchronized with generations of the prey or pest. Biological control agents have to compete with pest population development and reproduction in order to successfully regulate populations. In fact, the intrinsic rate of increase (rate of increase of populations that reproduce within discrete time intervals, and have generations that fail to overlap) of biological control agents must be similar to pests in order to provide sufficient regulation.

Furthermore, in terms of application, it is important to understand the procedures that will ensure success when using biological control agents, including: a) ordering biological control agents early, b) checking to make the biological control agents are alive, c) making releases immediately upon arrival, and d) applying before pest populations reach outbreak proportions.

However, another critical factor that may affect the effectiveness of biological control agents in regulating pest populations is the environmental conditions associated with greenhouses, such as temperature, relative humidity, day length (photoperiod) and light intensity. These environmental parameters, if not appropriate for the specific biological control agent, can influence reproduction, foraging behavior and survival. Therefore, the greenhouse environment must be taken into consideration when implementing a biological control program.

Temperature

Temperature can influence the rate of development and reproduction of both biological control agents and pests. For instance, the predatory mite, Phytoseiulus persimilis is most effective at temperatures between 20 and 30°C (68 and 86°F) because at this temperature range, the development time of Phytoseiulus persimilis is shorter than its prey, the twospotted spider mite (Tetranychus urticae). The optimal temperature for foraging, development and reproduction is 25 to 30°C (77 to 86°F). However, searching activity decreases when temperatures are greater than 30°C (86°F). Furthermore, at temperatures greater than 30°C (86°F), the development time of the twospotted spider mite is shorter than Phytoseiulus persimilis.

Relative humidity

A relative humidity less than 40 percent may affect egg survival, adult longevity and female reproduction of the predatory mite. The effects of temperature and relative humidity on the development of the larval and nymphal life stages of Phytoseiulus persimilis are presented in Table 1. Whiteflies, at temperatures between 17 and 30°C (63 and 86°F), disperse more quickly and across longer distances, which may impact the success of the greenhouse whitefly (Trialeurodes vaporariorum) parasitoid, Encarsia formosa.

Relative humidity may also impact the ability of parasitoids to attack prey. For instance, the parasitoid Encarsia formosa has a higher parasitism rate at a relative humidity between 50 and 70 percent. A relative humidity, below or above this range may result in decreased reproduction and longevity.

Day length and light intensity

Moreover, day length and light intensity may influence natural enemy-prey interactions. For example, the aphid predator Aphidoletes aphidimyza enters a resting (diapause) stage when experiencing short daylengths (less than12 hours). The predatory mite Neoseiulus cucumeris enters a diapause stage during the winter when temperatures are less than 21°C (70°F) and the day length is less than 12 hours. An option to overcome the direct effects of day length is to extend the photoperiod by using supplemental lighting, which can, in most cases, prevent the induction of diapause in certain biological control agents that enter a reproductive diapause under short daylengths.

Low light intensity may decrease the activity of certain biological control agents. For example, Encarsia formosa may be less effective during the fall months due to the direct effects of lower light intensities. However, reports indicate that the parasitoid Eretmocerus eremicus is more effective than Encarsia formosa in regulating populations of the greenhouse whitefly under lower light intensities. Therefore, more frequent release rates of Encarsia formosa may be required in order to compensate for this condition. Although, costs associated with purchasing the biological control agent and making frequent releases may be too expensive. Light intensity may also indirectly affect the performance of biological control agents. For instance, the heat generated from high light intensity (especially during the summer months) associated with sunlight may force Phytoseiulus persimilis to inhabit the leaf underside on the lower leaves of plants. This allows twospotted spider mite populations to escape exposure to the predatory mite because twospotted spider mites will feed on the upper portions of the plant.

When implementing a biological control program, be sure to take into consideration the existing environmental parameters in order to be successful when releasing parasitoids or predators. If you have any questions or comments regarding the appropriate environmental conditions for specific biological control agents, always contact your local supplier/distributor.

Raymond is a professor and extension specialist in horticultural entomology/plant protection in the Department of Entomology at Kansas State University. His research and extension program involves plant protection in greenhouses, nurseries, landscapes, conservatories and vegetables and fruits.

References

Stenseth, C. 1979. Effect of temperature and humidity on the development of Phytoseiulus persimilis and its ability to regulate populations of Tetranychus urticae (Acarina: Phytoseiidae, Tetranychidae). Entomophaga 24: 311-317.

Once again, lawmakers waited until late in the year to pass another tax “extenders” bill. The new “Protecting Americans from Tax Hikes (PATH) Act of 2015” retroactively extended 50 or so temporary tax provisions that each year are routinely extended, in many cases not only making them permanent, but enhancing their benefits for growers, garden centers and other green-industry companies.

The so-called “Cadillac” tax on the high-cost health insurance plans so many business owners provide themselves and key employees will be delayed from 2018 to 2020. And beginning with the Forms W-2, W-3, and returns for reporting non-employee compensation (e.g., Form 1099-MISC) filed for the 2016 tax year and later, PATH will require them to be filed on or before January 31. But, the big deal for many growers will be the permanent extension of the Section 179 small business expensing deduction.

First year write-offs

The so-called “Section 179” deduction allows growers an up-front expense deduction for the cost of equipment ranging from computers to POS systems to vehicles and machinery. The amount allowed as a write-off in the first year (instead of slowly deducting or depreciating over several years), is now permanently fixed at $500,000 per year (phased out dollar-for-dollar as expenditures begin to exceed $2 million in a year).

PATH for the first time also treats air conditioning and heating units placed in service after 2015 as eligible for expensing. And, in an unusual move, lawmakers will allow these amounts to be permanently adjusted for inflation beginning in 2016.

For 2015, a grower can expense up to $500,000 in equipment purchases. While the equipment can be new or used, if it is purchased using a trade-in as part of the price, the expense allowance only applies to the excess of the cost of the property over the undepreciated cost or book value of the property traded.

Faster write-offs for improvements

While many growers are already benefiting from shorter depreciable write-off periods for greenhouses and other “special purpose” structures, the IRS recently created a unique safe harbor for faster write-offs for remodeling or “refreshing” expenditures made by retailers. Garden centers and nursery retailers making improvements may also benefit from PATH’s new accelerated depreciation rules.

Under the new, now-permanent and faster write-offs for improvements made to leased property, as well as qualified retail property, PATH has created a permanent 15-year depreciable life for small business buildings and the improvements made to them. Without this unique write-off, buildings and many improvements would be depreciated over the much longer 39-year period associated with the building itself.

Energy efficient commercial buildings

A provision in PATH extends through the 2016 tax year, the above-the-line deduction for the cost of energy efficient improvements made to commercial buildings. A grower, garden center or nursery retailer can claim a tax deduction for new or renovated buildings that save 50 percent or more of projected annual energy costs when compared to national standards. A partial deduction for efficiency improvements to individual lighting, HVAC and water heating, or envelope systems is also available through the 2016 tax year.

The tax deductible amount is up to $1.80 per square foot and is available to owners or tenants (or designers, in the case of government-owned buildings) of new or existing commercial buildings that are constructed or reconstructed to save at least 50 percent of the heating, cooling, ventilation, water heating and interior lighting energy costs.

A partial deduction of 60 cents per square foot can be taken for improvements made to any one of three building systems — the building envelope, lighting or heating, and the cooling system. The partial building improvement must reduce total heating, cooling, ventilation, water heating and interior lighting energy use by 16 2/3 percent (16 2/3 percent is the 50-percent goal of the three systems spread equally over the three systems).

On a related note, the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) standards used for measurement purposes under the energy efficient commercial buildings deduction have been updated in PATH.

The work opportunity tax credit

PATH retroactively extended and greatly expanded the Work Opportunity Tax Credit (WOTC) through the 2019 tax year. The WOTC entitles employers who hire members of certain targeted groups credit against income tax of a percentage of first-year wages up to $6,000 per employee ($3,000 for qualified summer youth employees). In situations where the employee is a long-term family assistance (LTFA) recipient, the WOTC is a percentage of first and second year wages, up to $10,000 per employee.

While the maximum WOTC for a nursery growing or landscape contracting business hiring a qualifying veteran is generally also $6,000, it can go as high as $12,000, $14,000, or $24,000, depending on factors such as whether the veteran has a service-connected disability, the period of his or her unemployment before being hired, and when that period of unemployment occurred relative to the WOTC-eligible hiring date.

With individuals who begin work after Dec. 31, 2015, the credit also applies to employers who hire qualified long-term unemployed individuals (i.e., those who have been unemployed for 27 weeks or more). The credit with such long-term, unemployed individuals is 40 percent of the first $6,000 of wages.

More extended deductions

There are, of course, quite a few more tax-saving provisions, many of them quite narrow in scope such as those for film and theater producers, NASCAR racetrack owners, racehorse owners, and rum producers in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, all included as part of PATH. But, which of the provisions will best help your operation reap its share of the $622 billion in tax savings?

The fact that many of its provisions apply to transactions occurring in 2015 and the uneven expiration date for many of these tax benefits makes professional assistance almost mandatory — at least if the grower, garden center or nursery retailer hopes to maximize write-offs for the 2015 tax year as well as plan to reap all of the benefits it is entitled to in the years ahead.

Mark is a financial writer based in Ardmore, Pa.