Morning Fix: No Getting Any Kicks on Route 66

Views: 691

Comment by shotsie on February 18, 2013 at 11:42am

Okay, so about that Rt66 owner claims - the worse case of him being effected by the wage hike is the waitstaff increasing the wage from $2.13 to 3.83 per hour - then he's calculating the hike from:  $3600/$2.13 = 1690 hours paid out every two weeks.  If you now multiply the hours by $3.83, you get $6472 - close enough to see his payroll increase.  (I'm just ignoring the increase for dishwashers and cleaning staff - the ratio is much less - 8.5/7.5 = 13% increase.)

This means that he has 20 full time waitstaff though - that's a lot of business for that size shop.  Usually waitstaff is hired to work the busier hours - that would mean 4-5 hour shifts.  So, over a week, he would have 1600 hours spread over 14 days, 2 shifts a day, 5 hours/shift, or 11 waitstaff per shift.  Even with three shifts, that would be 8 waitstaff/shift - damn good coverage!  ( I remember going there last summer on a Friday night, and there were two waitrons for the place.  That's the reason I'm going through the math... - I just don't remember it being so busy.) 

Anyway, it's more interesting to note that the city is going to ignore enforcing the ordinance - yeah, so how can a poor waitron afford to press forward with a law suit?  Beats me.  I'm sure other owners/managers are viewing this story with great interest.... 

Comment by Izquierdo on February 18, 2013 at 12:10pm

Phil, I confess to writing my rant on the Route 66 headline and Nob Hill's casual involvement with it, without reading any of the stories. I was severely off topic on this and I apologize for not bringing my thoughts up elsewhere.

Comment by RM on February 18, 2013 at 12:14pm

Thanks for doing the math, shotsie. The owner appears to be BSing big time.

Comment by Phil_0 on February 18, 2013 at 12:26pm

OBTS and Adelita's experiences are by no means isolated. If Mr. Szeman feels his business is too weak to pay his employees the wages to which they're legally entitled, he might want to look into why. While anyone is free to publicize their politics however they see fit, choosing to do so may negatively influence a potential patron's dining selections, especially if any political points are made offensively (and accompanied by cockroaches)

Comment by ramon t on February 18, 2013 at 1:19pm

While I think what Mr. Szeman is doing is terrible (even though I didn't like the wage increase), I think the numbers Shotsie calculated may be off.  I'm not going to take the time to try to reconcile them, I do enough of that in my day to day job.  Mr. Szeman probably is referring to all $'s in a persons's wage.  Meaning Mr. FICA, SSI...etc..etc

Comment by Dee Cohen on February 18, 2013 at 1:19pm

Double pox on Szeman, although he is probably suffering already for lack of a vowel... D

Comment by SoyJames on February 18, 2013 at 1:48pm

We stopped going to this restaurant over two years ago when they stopped serving something that resembled food.  The (very few) employees there did not seem to care about good service or quality.  I guess the owner gets what he pays for. 

Comment by Phil_0 on February 18, 2013 at 1:53pm

Yeah - hard to imagine putting your heart into a job when the boss requires you to sign a contract authorizing him to pay you less than the legal minimum wage.

Comment by JeSais on February 18, 2013 at 2:26pm

it takes a while to organize the masses...  tomorrow, Tuesday, 11:30 am some folks are going to protest:

Comment by Hunter on February 18, 2013 at 3:47pm

Some additional thoughts:

SB416 from Richard Martinez would raise the State minimum wag $1 to $8.50.  However, it would not change the base wage of $2.13 for tipped workers.  Who among the local State reps are supporting this and what is their justification for not adjusting tipped workers base pay?

Remember when Carol Wright and the Restaurant Association pretty much predicted the total demise of the restaurant business within the City limits if the smoking ban was passed?  Yeah, we should listen to them for economic advice.

If the City is not going to enforce the voter approved minimum wage ordinance does this mean any initiative based legislation is a waste of time.  How about the current mail-in measure?  Is someone going to have to go to court to force the City to conduct a run-off if no candidate gets 50%?

Seems to me if people like Dinelli are really serious about putting some distance between themselves and the Mayor on how this City will be run they will be calling pressers to state their administration will support the City minimum wage and make an appearance tomorrow.


You need to be a member of Duke City Fix to add comments!

Join Duke City Fix

Connect with Us!

Big Changes to the Fix!

We're making changes to the Fix! Check in with us for local news stories, events, photos, all the usual DCF stuff, on Facebook and Instagram starting September 1st. Find out more!

© 2017   Created by Duke City Fix.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service