It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by mytheroy
My GM of Waffle House told us that when obama care goes into effect that businesses that employ workers 30+ hours that company will have to provide healthcare, or reduce the hours to under thirty, then you are responsible , o provide your own healthcare, if not you'll get fined, don't pay the fine go to jail or taxes are taken or both. I won't buy it cause it goes against everything that my Constitution stands for, to live my life and do with my body AS I SEE FIT.
Originally posted by Dishonored
I liked the part where the article said "puts unique challenges on chain restaurants". Yes, those same chain restaurants that sell a pizza for $10-15 that only cost $2-4. The greed within this country is like a cancer that infects and destroys everything it comes into contact with. As if chain restaurants weren't already cutting hours and treating their employees like cattle before this.
Originally posted by thefurryone
reply to post by OccamsRazor04
I don't like chain restaurants but, food costs a lot more than most people think and I'm gonna sound like a chain apologist here. Chains do get some volume discounts, but they usually have to buy from select distributors. They don't get to shop around for prices. Then they have to pay franchise fees(a lot of chains are actually franchises).
You would be surprised how many loss leaders than chains run. Even if they don't actually lose money on a sale, it's hard to make money a nickel at a time. You have to do an incredible volume. The $5 pizzas at Littles Ceasars comes to mind. I don't know that the food cost would be $2, but I'll bet it's not a lot more. Even so, they only sell them for $5 and the difference isn't all profit. Most of that goes to other costs. Even if they net $1 on each one, how many can each store sell everyday? McDonald's is likely netting pennies on the dollar menu items that make up a huge percentage of their sales. Changes in costs that are pennies here and there turn into millions of dollars when you take volume into account. It's not hard to understand why these companies work they way they do, but it's the employees that are already struggling to survive that get screwed again.
Originally posted by newcovenant
Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by Daedal
"In light of the passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, restaurant companies and franchisees are looking into ways to lower costs to save money, including cutting employee hours. "
AND
There my friends goes the last bit of customer service. This will make an already painfully slow business even worse.
But hey that doesn't matter...
No it won't. Restaurants have to staff for the amount of business they have and if they can cut hours they were not working hours where those employees made tips. In the chain restaurants people are paid by the hour and if they can cut then they were over staffed. In this business it is already cut to the skin. Only difference is the guests - you and I - are less likely to be served by a contagious and diseased individual because their heath care needs will be tended to. Healthy employees are more economical to run a business with. Sick days cost American business's an estimated ___I don't know but it's a lot. They will save that money as well as lawsuits brought on by customers who got served by that 'sick" person and were injured because he forgot to present their nut allergy card to the chef. Things like that add up.
Originally posted by thefurryone
reply to post by newcovenant
They will now screw virtually all of their employees by employing part time workers almost exclusively. The article says that only full time employees working 30 hours or more have to be offered benefits, so Darden is testing 29.5 hour work weeks to make sure they don't have to offer benefits. What it doesn't say is that this will likely make the corporation a lot more money because instead of providing more workers with health benefits, many employees who currently have health benefits will lose them due to no longer being full time.
Originally posted by newcovenant
reply to post by SLAYER69
Regardless...you are finally talking about a topic I know about. If hours are cut they are going to be managerial hours. Please do continue what ever argument you are trying to make. Your fan club awaits.....
reply to post by newcovenant
Regardless...you are finally talking about a topic I know about. If hours are cut they are going to be managerial hours. Please do continue what ever argument you are trying to make. Your fan club awaits.....
Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by newcovenant
What percentage of call ins really relate to an ill employee or one of their children?
I have no numbers to give you, but can say that my belief is that it is well below 50%. When you talk service level employees, you are talking about employees who typically have less motivation to show up for work in a timely manner.
From someone who manages restaurants.
Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
Originally posted by newcovenant
reply to post by SLAYER69
Regardless...you are finally talking about a topic I know about. If hours are cut they are going to be managerial hours. Please do continue what ever argument you are trying to make. Your fan club awaits.....
I realize that things vary from state to state in this regard, so forgive me if I am ignorant of your states guidelines.
But in the state of Texas a "manager" is someone who is charged with supervising employees, guiding business decisions, and is salaried. A "supervisor" can be all of the above and hourly.
You can "cut" managerial hours all you want....but they are paid a salary. To have any impact you would have to determine a "new" payrate for the job, then get the manager to agree to work it (or pay them unemployment when they decline and file a claim).
A salaried person works to complete a job. If your managers aren't working at least 50 hours a week, then they aren't earning their money. To do the job in a restaurant properly, you might need more like 60, with some additional desk time at home for scheduling, etc.
ETA: the proper strategy is to cut hourly employees, preferrably the ones that make true minimum (untipped positions), and have salaried people work to fill those hours in This get more hourly employees below 30 hours while not increasing your payroll costs.edit on 19-10-2012 by bigfatfurrytexan because: (no reason given)