Tim Hortons heirs cut paid breaks after minimum wage hike

This is a story from canada.

I edited the headline to make it fit the allowed space. Here's the complete title.

"Tim Hortons heirs cut paid breaks and worker benefits after minimum wage hike, employees say"

From the article.

"Employees at an Ontario Tim Hortons owned by the children of the chain's founders say they have been told to sign a document acknowledging they are losing paid breaks, paid benefits, and other incentives as a result of the province's minimum wage hike"

"Breaks will no longer be paid. A 9 hour shift will be paid for 8 hours and 20 minutes."

"These changes are due to the increase of wages to $14.00 minimum wage on January 1, 2018, then $15.00 per hour on January 1, 2019, as well as the lack of assistance and financial help from our Head Office and from the Government."

www.cbc.ca...

The law of unintended consequence strikes again.

a reply to: Bluntone22

Paid breaks are little to give up for a better pay rate.
Kinda sketchy on what the benefits are that the employees percentage of responsibility have gone up and what the actual cost is.

Generally if you are getting a product/service that is "cheap" there is suffering all the way through the supply chain....Except at the top.

a reply to: Bluntone22

The governments NEVER seem to realize that when you tax big corporations, said corporations simply offset the losses by increasing prices, delivering less to the consumer, or as in this case, penalizing employees.
Morons like Bernie Sanders and his ilk will never understand this. They simply can't force big corps to do their bidding.
The world doesn't work that way.

a reply to: ColeYounger

If they don't get the $$$ at work, they pick the pocket of the tax payer with bridge cards and medicaid.

"The benefits are what kept me there. Now you are going to make me pay that. "I don't understand why you can take it away. Sounds like you are penalizing your staff because the government is trying to help your staff," they said.

People don't seem to understand that their benefits package is what it is. It doesn't sound like Canada stipulates the employer has to pay 100% of an employee's medical coverage so it's beyond perplexing to me that they expect their employer to pay them dollars more an hour plus continue to do everything else the employer was doing as an offset to a lower hourly rate.

I used to work in the restaurant business. You treat your employees badly and the repercussions are costly.

Work slow downs and theft are just the obvious. Poor service will result and patrons will find another place to eat.
There are a few places I won't go back to because of just one snotty waitstaff incident.

The TH employees should unionize.

In my company wages are very closely monitored due to they represent the largest cost to the company of 60%+. The other side of the coin is I get additional 40% of my pay in benefits where many are non-required privileges the company provides. You mess with wages and normally a company needs to zero out that cost somewhere else, and if a company is only working on a 8% profit margin something get cut, so buh bye benefits that are not protected by law...

a reply to: olaru12

The real cost of a TH breakfast (in the US) is subsidized by the US tax payer.

a reply to: seasonal

Paid breaks are little to give up for a better pay rate.

Did you see all the other benefits they're losing? These workers are getting screwed!
They even said they didn't ask for the pay raise. They're much worse off now.

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: ColeYounger

If they don't get the $$$ at work, they pick the pocket of the tax payer with bridge cards and medicaid.

...which is a problem that also needs addressing in the USA.

a reply to: Xtrozero

Exactly.

Lower hourly rate offset with benefits? Great.

Hourly rate is suddenly forced to go up multiple dollars worth, with another guaranteed rise in the near future? Bye-bye benefits.

Minimum wages go up regularly in Canada, usually once a year to try to keep up with inflation/cost of living. Each province sets its own minimum wage rates based on cost of living in that particular province.

If a profitable franchise like Tim Horton's can't make ends meet paying minimum wages to part-time employess without government welfare, then no business can.

Tim Horton's in Canada is one of the most popular businesses across the country, literally.



So if this one particular location can't cut it while plenty of others can and do, well then...

Buh bye, Timmy's of Cobourg, Ontario... don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: olaru12

The real cost of a TH breakfast (in the US) is subsidized by the US tax payer.

So a company spends $$$ to create a positive brand, spend $$$ on costly advertising but won't pay or treat the help right so they become slackers.

Then they wonder why the customers patronize a place down the street. Employee Loyalty ain't free....

How can management, franchisees, and HR be so stupid.

Tim Hortons is a # pile. I worked in one once...for a week....just after highschool, I left when A&W called me back to offer me a job. As crappy as A&W was, Timmy's was so much #ing worse. The pay was crappier, the work was harder, they didn't supply me with a uniform, they made me use one from the dirty uniform bin, my breaks were not paid as it was, I got no benefits and there was zero hint of any future benefits. The schedule was ridiculous and illegal, they had people working opening shifts right after graveyard shifts, they gave even the people who'd been there for years less than 32 hours effectively making them part time employees. The owner of that particular location also owned a Wendy's, he would make his employees work at both of them without a proper working agreement. Right around the time I worked there was also when Claus, the owner, began bringing philipino workers in on visas, keeping them in homes he owned and deducting rent and expenses directly from their pay cheques. Which is fairly illegal. The last time I was in either of his establishments all his workers had been replaced by them.

I really try not to support Tim Hortons. Also their coffee sucks and their food is frozen garbage.

originally posted by: olaru12
So a company spend $$$ to create a positive brand, spend $$$ on costly advertising but won't pay or treat the help right so they become slakers.

Then they wonder why the customers patronize a place down the street. Loyalty ain't free....

This story is about an individual franchisee, not the franchiser.

The bit about them being the original creator's heirs is just for the emotional benefit and has no real bearing on any of the legalities. They have to follow the same rules as every other franchisee. If Tim's (Restaurant Brands International) is unhappy with the publicity, I doubt they will hesitate to force the franchisee's hand.

originally posted by: olaru12
I used to work in the restaurant business. You treat your employees badly and the repercussions are costly.

Work slow downs and theft are just the obvious. Poor service will result and patrons will find another place to eat.
There are a few places I won't go back to because of just one snotty waitstaff incident.

The TH employees should unionize.

That didn't work to well for all of the 500 or so companies that moved to Mexico.

originally posted by: Nickn3

originally posted by: olaru12
I used to work in the restaurant business. You treat your employees badly and the repercussions are costly.

Work slow downs and theft are just the obvious. Poor service will result and patrons will find another place to eat.
There are a few places I won't go back to because of just one snotty waitstaff incident.

The TH employees should unionize.

That didn't work to well for all of the 500 or so companies that moved to Mexico.

Worked out great for the Mexicans. Corporations are only interested in profit.

originally posted by: olaru12

originally posted by: Nickn3

originally posted by: olaru12
I used to work in the restaurant business. You treat your employees badly and the repercussions are costly.

Work slow downs and theft are just the obvious. Poor service will result and patrons will find another place to eat.
There are a few places I won't go back to because of just one snotty waitstaff incident.

The TH employees should unionize.

That didn't work to well for all of the 500 or so companies that moved to Mexico.

Worked out great for the Mexicans. Corporations are only interested in profit.

Worked out great for the corporations, you mean. Not so much the employees.

Well....former employees is the more accurate term, I guess.

a reply to: CranialSponge

My thoughts exactly. A Tim hortons franchise are cash cows, it would take lots of severe mismanagement to not profit. Everyone I have met who owns one is upper middle class bordering rich status bringing in 6 figures.
This one tims seemed to have a decent business model with benefits, but they just can't seem to shake off a bit of their own take home pay it to have happy emplyees it seems. Greedy if you ask me.

originally posted by: ColeYounger
a reply to: seasonal

Paid breaks are little to give up for a better pay rate.

Did you see all the other benefits they're losing? These workers are getting screwed!
They even said they didn't ask for the pay raise. They're much worse off now.

I did not see, they were not listed in the story. Or are you talking about a bonus to come to work on your birthday?