What is it like working in Europe as an American?

Well, in a lot of ways work in Europe is surprisingly like….work in America.

Let me give this obligatory caveat before I start: Europe is not uniform. Work in France is reputedly different from work in the UK or Germany.

I live in the Czech Republic. Business culture here is more or less like in Germany.

Most people get to work at a certain time; clock in; work; take a lunch break; work some more; then go home.

Factory workers and the like have set hours;(usually 6 am to 2 pm; with second and third shifts at many factories); some office workers might be required to work 40 hours a week, but might have some flexibility about when they choose to come in(between, say 6 and 8); and some salaried professionals have tasks that they need to accomplish and have much more flexibility in hours.

Managers and executives tend to work at the weekend, too, unpaid, and unofficial sending emails and so on.

---

I suppose the great majority of Americans working in Europe are professionals or teachers; Europe doesn’t have a great need for American waiters or factory workers or street cleaners. They have those.

Me, I am an English teacher and I own a school that employs about 30 people. So my job is different than the average job: I have, at times very LONG hours; but I also have about 12 weeks off in any given year.

On the other hand I have a lot of responsibility and a rather heavy workload(the heaviest at my school) and sometimes I have to work at the weekend. When I want to hire new teachers from abroad, I conduct Skype interviews at weekends, and sometimes that can take up to 6 hours. I spend weeks in the summer, when I don’t teach at all, making a schedule for the new school year, coordinating it with teachers’ wishes and clients demands.

During the school year, my days range from really light — on every other Wednesday, for example, I teach from about 7.30 am to 12.20 pm and then I’m done. But on other days I amexcessively busy. I work in two towns on Thursday and I start at 6.30 in one town and end at 745 pm in another town. I spend about 70 minutes driving between classes and I have a 90 minute break at lunch to eat lunch and plan my afternoon lessons. Otherwise, I’m working full on, non-stop.

---

Health Care:

Pretty much everybody who works in Europe has health care. Period. It doesn’t work exactly the same in every country but there it is. In my country, you just can’t get a job without health insurance.

Health insurance is automatically taken out of your pay check; for self-employed people on a sole trader’s license, they are responsible themselves for paying for insurance. If they don’t pay there are heavy, heavy fines. And they can lose their license. The only people who don’t pay are certain part time workers, children and of course, the unemployed. They are covered by the state.

Some people like to say this is ‘'Free Health Care.” That is, of course, nonsense. It is paid for by the employee and employer(or just the self-employed person.) However, it is true that when I visit a hospital or a doctor I don’t pay anything. Medical insurance actually FUNCTIONS here. In the US I’d probably pay twice as much for insurance and still have to pay when I visited the hospital.

And medicine is very very cheap, often free. (I take statins, blood pressure medicine, an asthma inhaler and aspirin regularly. The only thing I pay for is aspirin which is 100 kč or about $6—for a package of one hundred aspirin.)

A few years ago I was rushed by ambulance to the hospital, two hospitals actually and underwent bypass surgery and convalescence in the hospital which lasted for 25 days(complications). At the end of it I was asked to pay 750 kc for the stay…which works out to…maybe 30 dollars?

I was very pleased with the care in this hospital, by the way, which is in Brno. (Though I am not pleased with my local hospital in the small town I live in.)

As a result, of course, more people call in sick.

Europeans often laugh when I tell them ‘In America, we don’t get sick. We can’t afford to.’ But it really is true. I can’t EVER remember calling in sick in the USA; though I was sent home a few times once the manager took a look at me. Even so, I still didn’t go to the doctor’s. I just, you know, got over it.

Now in the past, naturally, some people took advantage of this and called in sick. So nowadays the way it works in this country is if you are ill you do NOT get paid at all for the first three days.

Afterwards, if you are ill, the state will pay you a fraction of what you officially earn. (Maybe 25 %).

It can take a while to get into your bank account, I must say.

Overall it is a good system and I think it contributes to the relative health of the people.

---

Job Security:

Full time employees have more job security than in the US. Companies are obliged by law to pay two months severance pay if they fire a worker.

However, a dirty little secret is that there are plenty of legal ways around it.

For example, most of the teachers working for me, including my girlfriend/co-director, work on a sole trader’s license. This means they are responsible for paying taxes/social/medical payments themselves; and there is an automatic write off of 60 percent for these people. Meaning that their official income is far, far lower than it actually is. So by employing them, I can pay a certain amount, and they pay perhaps 15 percent, all told, in social and medical and basically nothing in income tax because their official income is too low. Whereas on a full-time contract, I would pay the same, but 40–45 percent of it would go to social/medical/tax.

But the downside is they have no guarantee of severance pay or anything like that. And ultimately less gets paid into their pension fund. (many sole traders have private pension plans.)

If I was to fire somebody, I could do it: I would simply tell them that we had no hours for them. Now, I might give them some severance pay anyway if they had a situation at home with children or whatever.But I’m really not legally obliged to do it.

Happily, I am careful about who I hire and thus have never had to fire someone who was working a significant amount of hours. That would be dreadful.

Another way around this severance pay issue that I have seen is that companies just make short-term contracts, say, for six months. When the six months is over, they can then terminate the contract without severance pay.

And it is done a lot.

So don’t be lulled by the surface of the law.

Don’t be lulled by the wages either. Wages in Europe may seem lower, but remember we are set for health care; and there are loopholes like the one I just mentioned, where people are officially making only 40 percent of what they are actually making.

Parental Leave:

Having a child is so much less stressful in Europe. No ten thousand dollar bill for delivering a baby; as a result, 'alternative' methods of giving birth seem to be a little less popular. Gee, I wonder if the cost of health care has to do with that? 

And after birth there's maternity leave. Every country in Europe -- indeed, nearly every country in the world -- has a developed parental leave system. It differs from country to country, of course. In the Czech Republic, one of the parents(usually, but not always, the mother) can take from 6 months to 3 years off in order to raise their child. The employer must hold the position the mother held(if he doesn't than he is obliged to pay three months of severence pay) for that time period; and the mother receives some money from the social state. This is usually not much; it's based on the wage of the mother; and often doesn't reach above minimum wage(approximately 7000 kc/month net, or 300 dollars. But considering the money saved for health care and child-care, it is probably enough for anyone, except single mothers, of course. Single mothers obviously have the same struggles with money here as they do anywhere. 

---

Vacation:

Probably the biggest and best difference between working in Europe and working in US is the vacation time.

IN my country I believe workers(again on a full-time contract) can expect 4 weeks of paid holiday. Many companies give an additional week as a perk, so lots of professionals have 5 weeks of vacation.

As a teacher and a language school owner, I basically have nearly three months of holiday(counting Christmas and summer, spring break…but as an administator and language school owner I do quite a lot of administrative work on the computer in the summer. Still, I am able to take it easy.)

Now, if it seems that that is awful generous of the employer, remember: wages are lower in Europe. One of the reasons is the holiday pay. Obviously an employer in the USA could do the same: just pay 1/12th less per month and he is covered.

There are so many destinations in Europe that are affordable and easy to get to, beautiful and awesome.

. Here in the Czech Republic, I can easily choose between the Adriatic Sea or the Baltic; both places are within a twelve-hour drive. The Alps are 8 hours away, the High Tatras, 4.

For further destinations, there are very cheap airlines. (I can fly to the UK for as little as 600 kc—$36 dollars!—if I am lucky.)

---

There is a cliche that Europeans work to live while Americans live to work. I feel that that gives the impression that Europeans are lazier than Americans. I don’t really think that is true, at least not in my corner of Europe. There are some lazy people, sure, like anywhere, but on the whole most people are hard-working and efficient. The lazy people don’t usually achieve a high positions. They don’t have good jobs.

But there is some truth to that cliche.

When I first came here, I literally had no idea what to do when I didn’t work. I had two weeks ahead of me with nothing to do. I actually kind of freaked out! I literally begged my boss to give me some work to do.

I’ve gotten over that now.

Honestly, when it comes down to it, I would much, much rather live and work in Europe than the USA. I’m not putting the USA down: it is my home country and there are some things I am proud of it for. I understand that in some fields, the USA is the place to be. But for the average joe, life is more comfortable in Europe. Moving here was the best decision I ever made.

Game of Thrones/ASOIAF: Why have the Lannisters seem to have so many more advantages than the other Houses of Westeros?

They are the wealthiest. They have the biggest army. Casterly Rock is the strongest castle. Tywin founded the strongest, most powerful house… why are things so properly adjusted to favour them?

The TV series has deviated from the books a little in this and emphasized their power, especially. IN GRRM’s books, by the end of A Dance with Dragons, the Lannister army is very much a spent force. And anyway, throughout the books, the Tyrells have by far the largest, most powerful army.

Highgarden, the Tyrells castle in the Reach

The source of the Tyrell’s wealth is simply that they have a very big area of very fertile land. Fertile land and food in an agrarian economy easily translates to gold when the winter comes; furthermore it means that a higher, healthier population, and thus the ability to field a much larger army. In a very measurable way, fertile land=food=power in a medieval feudal economy.

On the other hand, The Westerlands have what appear to be Westeros’ (and maybe the world’s) only gold mines. (In the show, these have gone dry: there is no evidence that this is the case in the books.)

So why did the show make them so much more powerful than the Tyrells, which is actually diametrically opposed to the situation in the book?

I think it’s just that the specifics of an agrarian feudal economy are lost on the average audience member.

What modern audiences do understand is the money=power equation of the modern world.

Since the Lannisters have the gold(or at least people think they have the gold), the audience member can easily accept without really suspending their disbelief that the Lannisters are the most powerful

Besides that, the show is emphasizing the theme that even great power can not save you in some situations.

No matter how rich/powerful your family is , you still might end up with

• a chopped off hand
• three dead children
• a crossbolt bolt or two in the bowels
• a deformed son

And it’s true in our world too. Many of the dynasties of today’s world have their own share of tragedy.

72 Views · View Upvotes · AW

Upvoter1

ASOIAF: What can we learn about leadership from Jon Snow's example?

I think that a lot of people — myself included, at times — focus on mistakes of Jon Snow, but we really need to understand that, like Daenerys, he really is in an impossible situation.

Let’s look at that situation:

• He’s understaffed — big time. He’s got three hundred miles of Wall to defend and less than a thousand men; most of whom are, like, turnip farmers, lumberjacks or male hookers. Only a third of them at most are rangers; the great majority of them can’t read and area bunch ofmeth-head rapists who kill their leaders and run for the hills at the drop of a hat.
• He is in a political Catch 22 vis-a-vis the struggle for the Iron Throne.
  
  He has to staff a bunch of abandoned castles or else give them to Stannis. If he doesn’t give into Stannis, Stannis will do what he wants by force; if he helps Stannis he pisses of the Iron Throne. Either way, he overtly breaks his oath to take no sides.
  
  Yes, he covertly supports Stannis. But just blithely handing over the castles to Stannis’ knights is a no-go and clearly not the right decision for the Watch.
• He has got a half dozen friends and subordinates who are competent and trustworthy.People say he shouldn’t have sent the likes of Dolorous Edd, Pyp and Grenn away, but that ignores the reality of his short-handedness. Who is going to command those castles? The retard from Mole’s Town? The sissy-boy from the brothel. RAndom gang rapist #32?
• He has got an army of Wildlings at the gates, who will be turned into an army of zombies if he doesn’t let them through the gates.

So, let’s look at some of his other choices, mistaken or otherwise..

• He antagonizes the Karstarks (and by extension the WArden of the North, Roose Bolton) by marrying Alys Karstark to the Magnar of Thenn. Yes, Alys Karstark is the rightful ruler of the Karstarks. But the Night’s Watch pays no part. In the end, it is fuel for the Boltons’ fire and legal justification for Ramsay’s proposed attack. I would argue that this was a mistake; an emotional decision to stick his nose in Northern politics borne from Jon’s hero complex and a desire to stick it to the Bolton-supporting Karstarks, who betrayed the Stark cause.
• He takes a hefty loan from the Iron Bank. While this will doubtless keep the Wall, which now has a gaggle of Wildlings to feed, fed throughout the long Winter. I am not sure if it is a mistake but it is certainly a massive gamble seeing as how the present administration has rather meagre incomes considering the underpopulated Gifts. Again what else is he going to do? Though.
• He lets the Wildlings in, using them to staff the castles of the Wall. It is the humane decision and I think the right one, unpopular though it is.
• He undertakes to send a force North to Hardhome, even though the innocents there are PLAINLY doomed. This is after, most likely, throwing away most of Eastwatch-by-the-Seas rather meagre fleet at that problem already. His hero complex at work, again, mainly; though he rationalizes it by telling himself he is reducing the future army of the dead.

Alright.

So the big criticism that most of us level on Jon Snow is that he doesn’t communicate to his senior officers the rationale behind his plan.

I’m not sure if that really holds up to examination.

It’s true that he doesn’t sway them from their opinion, which is based on fear of the Wildlings, fear of the Iron Throne and fear of the Others(in that order.) But I think he does communicate his reasons. At some point he gives up and he certainly does not really take their objections as seriously as he should. But he does present his argument to them. So what should he have done?

Ultimately, I think that the failed Lord Commandership of Jon Snow ultimately offers these lessons:

1. A leader needs to listen to his most senior officers and perhaps modify his plans somewhat to accommodate him. 
   He must compromise.
   Not only with Stannis but with your own men. No matter how wrong you think they are. Especially when your men have a tendency to kill leaders when they don’t agree with their decisions.
2. A leader needs to be realistic. It is one thing to help some starving Wildlings at the gate. It is another to send not one but TWO suicide missions to a far land to save them. No matter how much you want to be a hero, you need to preserve your meagre army and learn to say know to the victims of the world.
3. A leader must mind his own affairs and keep the personal from affecting his decisions. There was really nothing that the marriage of Alys Karstark accomplished except a rather dubious alliance between the Karstarks and the Thenns. It’s another gamble on Stannis, ultimately that could backfire and spell his doom.

Written Oct 1

ASOIAF: Why did the Sealord, someone historically anti dragonlord, support and house Daenerys?

Sure she's freeing all the slaves now, but at that point it seems in Braavos’ best interests to kill or ransom them.

While the Braavosi were historically anti-Valyria, I don’t think there is a lot of evidence that they have been anti-Targaryen dynasty in Westeros.

Despite their inclinations towards believing they are a master race, Westeros does not have chattel slavery like the Valyrians did and the Targaryens did not instate it, either; and by Daenerys’ time, the dragons have been gone for quite a long time.

At the point of Robert’'s the Targaryens are the dragon-free ruling family of the backward continent to the West, not the all-powerful dragon riding Valyrians of yore, forcing slaves to mine active volcanoes to fuel their sorcery.

The Iron Bank among others have had their nose in politics in Westeros among others .

It is a good question as to why the Sealord of Braavos sheltered Daenerys and Viserys. Maybe or he owed a favor to someone. Or he just wanted to influence Westerosi politics somehow.

But I reckon the fantastically rich team of Varys the Spider and Illyrio Mopatis had something to do with it and were willing to spare some money or perhaps services to have them shelter the two — perhaps as conspicuously as possible so that Robert kept sending his knives after them instead of Aegon.

Written Oct 1

ASOIAF: Could the Red Wedding have been prevented?

Of course it could have been prevented. Just not visiting the Twins would have prevented it.

But I think that we have to realize how very, very, very radical and unusual the Red Wedding was. It was simply unthinkable that anybody in Westeros would have broken the taboo of guest right the way that Walder Frey shattered it. Breaking that taboo means that it’s much harder for any side in any conflict in Westeros to enter a negotiation with another; it is one of the chief seams that keep the fabric of Westerosi society from unravelling into disparate threads of utter savagery..

The only time in Westerosi history that I recall someone else doing it was when Brynden “Bloodraven” Rivers killed a Blackfyre visitor to court to remove his political threat.

He was imprisoned for it and eventually sent to the Wall. And he was the Hand-of-the-damn-King and what he did really did have an element of political expedience in it.

But the Freys are paying for it: the brace of hanged Freys in the Riverlands, Frey pies in the North and the complete and utter contempt the rest of the Realm feels for them attests to that.

And all they got out of it, really, was Riverrun. And some marriages that are all ending in utter disaster

There seems to be this belief that Robb was some kind of fool to trust Walder Frey. In fact, he was no more a fool than any politician visiting any other country. Were Gorbachev and Reagan fools when they met in the 80s? Would it have been a good idea for either one of them to have the other one murdered at that meeting? Of course not. It would have been terrible for both the USA and the USSR and terrible for the entire world — even without the threat of nuclear annihilation.

Or better, Should the USA have arrested or murdered Mahmoud Ahminemajab when he addressed the UN in New York City? I mean, Iran and the US were pretty much enemies at that point. No. Of course not.

We all need and benefit from diplomatic immunity. Only the most dangerous and radical of political bodies does not recognize that; and diplomatic immunity is, essentially, what guest right is.

Written Sept 25

ASOIAF: How is Val so well-spoken and courteous if she's a wildling?

She doesn’t talk like the common free folk at all. What is it about her and Dalla that makes them so different? And how did she survive in the woods when she went to get Tormund

The Wildlings are not a monolithic folk.

While there are some among them that have something of the uncouth, unwashed barbarian about them; others who are flat out scumbags and trailer-park gangsters; but there are others who are really no more barbaric or uncouth than the Mountain clans south of the Wall, or many another Northern House(cough, cough, Umbers.)

Val herself does kind of come off a real lady among them, with her white fur trimmed garments and sickle-bladed sacrificial knife. Some have speculated that she and Dalla really were nobility, as Stannis believed; others that she is some kind of priestess of the Old Gods.

No matter her prestige, clan or role in Wildling culture, the timbre of her challenging flirtation with Jon Snow, when she almost nakedly invites him to have a try at ‘'stealing” her —provided he is man enough for the task — places her preferred mating rituals squarely in Wildling culture.

Jon Snow. Youth is wasted on the young.

Written Sept 25

What is the best food to try in the Czech Republic?

Czech Republic has a lot of good food. Broadly, Czech cuisine fits into the general cuisine of Central Europe and has a lot of similarities with other Central European food of the former Austrian-Hungarian empire. It tends to be of the solid meat-sauce-potato variety, though local restaurants are definitely beginning to experiment with more international cuisine and fusion. This is great: I would say that Czech cuisine has begun a bit of a renaissance in the last decade that I hope continues.

And yet, some of the traditional foods that have featured on the Czech menu for decades just can’t be beat.

1. hovězí gulaš (beef goulash) When I first came here in 2003 I fell in love with with this dish, originally from Hungary. The Czech version of this is probably falls less on the spicy side and more on the savoury side, with a strong underflavor of caraway seed, which so often grounds the flavor of Czech cuisine. Big chunks of stewed beef swimming in brown stew, with a brace of sliced onions and liberally sprinkled with pepper, with weighty slices of Czech chleba (bread) or knedlik(dumpling) to sop it up, washed down with a cold Czech beer. My god. My mouth is watering right now.

1. For something a little more complex try svičkova. Slices of beef sirloin in a unique and complicated-to-make vegetable sauce, known as svičkova omačka (which literally means candle sauce), topped with a dollop of whipped cream, a smudge of cranberry sauce and served alongside the ubiquitous knedliky(dumplings.)

1. The Czech Republic in general makes good soup: garlic soup is a popular and unique one. But if you are in the Eastern region of Valašsko (Vallachia) of the country, where I live, you really should try a hot bowl of steaming kyselice (sauerkraut and potato soup). I am personally not a fan of sauerkraut, and the Czech national dish of pork-cabbage-dumpling leaves me cold; but this soup, made with cream, potato, chunks of saussage and sauerkraut manages to balance rich savoriness with sour in a way that just works. If you find a place that serves a good bowl of this, I’m sure you willl agree.

1. The Czech bakery produces a number of different pastries — an amazing variety. My personal favorite it závin, a soft, almost gooey pastry stuffed with sweetened curds, poppyseed or (my personal favorite) a sweet almond paste. Whenever my girlfriend brings this home, there goes my diet.

Beyond those specialties, Czech Republic excels in roast meats of various kind. One of the greatest meals I’ve ever had was roast goose on St. Martin’s day(a traditional feast.) You really can’t go wrong with roast meat, whether beef, pork, poultry.

There are a plethora of other dishes that I like, but those are the ones that stick out in my mind.

I can’t say that everything on the Czech menu is to my taste(tlačenka, utopenec, the aformentioned pork-saurkraut-dumpling, Christmas carp…). But when it is done well, and on a brisk windy autumn day or cold winter afternoon, nothing really beats the best of it.

Written Sept 25

How do Slavic men differ from WEstern men in mannerisms and habits? Are they more manly? A top ten list

Slavs are not monolithic: there are vast differences between, say, Croatians and Poles. Neither are 'Westerners.'

My perspective comes from living in the Czech Republic. Let me offer the caveat that it is impossible to discuss this without making vast generalizations about both “Slavs” and “Westerners”(who are also not monolithic.)

So here I go with my vast generalizations, focused on Czechs vs. Americans.

1. Czechs are much more casual about personal appearance on a day to day basis. White collar workers will typically wear a polo shirt and jeans and trainers or even shorts to work. Ties are seldom worn. The clothes are ironed and clean, of course, but very informal by American standards. Amusingly when foreign visitors are coming, everyone is warned ahead of time and dons shirts, ties and sometimes even suits. But it is all very much for show. I like this aspect of the culture.
2. Czech men shave MUCH less often than American men.
3. Czechs bathe every day — don’t let anybody tell you different. However, they are not as perfumed as Western and especially American men. Sometimes, but by no means always, this can mean that some of them stink by the afternoon.
4. Czechs are sportier than American men BY FAR. I can’t count the number of Czechs I know who regularly jog, run, hike, play soccer/squash/floorball/ice hockey/volleyball....Another positive.
5. Czechs, like most Europeans, have a relaxed attitude about drinking alcohol on off hours compared to Americans. Which is not to say that alcoholism is rampant. But some Americans would see adults drinking beer at a child’s birthday as something inappropriate. Here, it is completely normal.
6. Czechs in general are blunter and more frank than many English speaking westerners, especially in sensitive political matters. They are familiar with concepts of political correctness but they don't like it; some of this comes from history, where the former totalitarian government used a lot of euphemisms and mouthed politically correct platitudes that were sometimes blatant lies.
7. Whether or not Czechs are more manly…well, I am not sure I quite know what “manly” behavior is. I think that traditional gender roles are more reinforced in the Czech Republic than America — this goes for both men and women. I tend to think that this is similar across most Central/Eastern European countries.
8. Americans are a good deal more open than Czechs; more likely to talk about emotional matters. Czechs seem more taciturn and frowning to strangers; but genuinely warm once you’ve been introduced.
9. Czech men and women both are less aggressive than Americans, but more passive-agressive. When they get behind the wheel and feel relatively anonymous the men, in particular, become incredibly impatient and agressive. Czech has one of the highest rates of mortality on the road in Europe as a result.
10. Czechs can be very competitive in sports. Look at their per capita wins in the Olympics, at least twice as high as Americans'. But overall, Czech culture does not have as many of the so-called Alpha Males (see Donald Trump) that dominate American society. 
11. Czechs are much, much more adept at fixing things or doing handy work around the house than Americans. They excel at technical matters.

ASOIAF: Is Craster's Keep inspired by any historical places or events?

Many things in a Song of Ice and Fire were based on historical places and events. The Wall is based off of the Great Wall of China/Hadrian’s Wall, Valyrian Steel is based off of Damascus Steel. When reading about Craster's Keep, I wondered if that had historical inspirations as well.

There is a real Craster’'s Tower in the village of Craster which is, (yep) not too far north of Hadrian’s wall in Northumberland. It has long since been expanded into a huge mansion and in fact the site has been owned by the Craster family for centuries. (Though at one point it had different owners, the Crasters apparently own it now, though it has been converted into a number of residential apartments.)

The Crasters are an ancient family that literally pre-date the Romans in Britain. Their name comes from Crawceastr, which meant “Crow’s earthwork.’'

I am afraid that rumors of midden heaps, the rampant sacrifice of newborn babies to snow-demons or enthusiastic attitudes towards father-daughter incest in the Craster family cannot be substantiated.

more info here:

Craster Tower

Written September 21

ASOIAF: Bran is more like Frodo in ASOIAF than any other character, yet unlike Frodo, the goal of his mission is unclear. What is the goal of Bran’s mission?

Bran is not like Frodo.

Bran is a 7–8–9 year old child who who has been crippled but dreams of being a great knight but will settle for being a wizard. His prime motivation is gaining able-bodiness, self-empowerment and agency.

Frodo is a 52 year old adult bachelor who hangs out with twenty-somethings, because they don’t mind his weirdness, likes hiking and languages and dabbles in poetry.
He is highly intelligent; fantastically rich but unambitious; his motivations is a sense of heavy duty — which he got because he is essentially free from an urge to power and thus uncorruptable.

Bran has a lot of self-pity because of his injury; Frodo, on the other hand, pities everybody else he sees: Boromir, Gollum, even the Orcs.

Bran, like most characters in A Song of Ice and Fire, is seeking power at some level; Frodo is trying desperately to get rid of power.

These are majorly different themes in the two stories, by the way.

The only correlation between the two of them is that they are journeying into danger, and fleeing from danger. And they have a broad hero’s journey with mentors and so on(but again, Frodo being a grown man — er, hobbit that is— changes the mentor -pupil dynamic. He is not really a padawan learning about life the way Luke Skywalker or Bran is.)

AS to what Bran’s mission is: I think — and there is some ambiguity, I’ll admit, in the books — it is mainly to take his place as a Greenseer, i.e., an Old God, a protector of those who pray to the Heart Tree…and to see the Winter through to it’s conclusion to Spring, which means defeating, or playing a role in the defeat of the Others.

IN the sense that Frodo and Bran are serving all humanity, I suppose they are similar. But they are very different characters, with different roles and different goals.