Posted on 04/05/2024 5:19:47 AM PDT by george76
Another California small business and its workers have seemingly suffered at the hands of the state’s newly enacted $20 minimum wage.
...
When making their way to work Monday morning, Navarro and her team learned upon arrival that the restaurant owner had made the decision to close its doors for good.
The owner, Loren Wright, told local Fox affiliate KMPH that this was the “last thing” they wanted to do, but knew by Friday night the business likely wouldn’t be able to absorb the wage hike and didn’t “want to ruin their Easter Sunday.”
The new California statewide legislation went into effect Monday and enforces a $20 minimum wage for restaurants that have at least 60 locations nationwide, except those that make and sell their own bread.
...
“I can see their intentions with increasing the minimum wage, thinking that it will attract more people,” the ex-manager added, “but I honestly don’t think it will work. This is not the first business that’s closing. There’s already a few local businesses for me that are closing, so I feel like this is just only the beginning.”
Speaking on behalf of the now unemployed Fosters Freeze team, Navarro claimed they would have preferred working at a lower hourly rate than being laid off.
“From the people that I spoke to, my employees, we would have rather stayed at the wage that we did have before, just because now we don’t have a job,” Navarro said. “And those who are still working in the areas around us that went up to $20 an hour, they got their hours severely cut. And it’s a lot less people working on shifts. So their jobs got a lot more difficult.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Wow…just wow…
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/united_states_v._darby
United States v. Darby
United States v. Darby is a Supreme Court of the United States case that revolves around the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 and issues of federalism. Congress set out federal standards for employment conditions, specifically addressing issues of minimum wage, maximum hours, and child labor, under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. Congress used its powers under the Commerce Clause to prevent goods produced under employment conditions that do not meet federal standards from entering interstate commerce. The plaintiff in this case, the United States government, brought a suit against the defendant, Darby Lumber Company, in the District Court for the Southern District of Georgia alleging that Darby failed to meet the requirements of Fair Labor Standards Act while using interstate commerce.
The District Court dismissed the indictment in favor of Darby, holding that the Tenth Amendment prevented the Government from meddling in intrastate matters. The Courts held that Darby’s lumber manufacturing activity occurred solely in the State of Georgia and was therefore not interstate commerce even though some of the lumber was eventually sold outside Georgia. Furthermore, the Fair Labor Standards Act was unconstitutional because Congress did not have the power to regulate employment conditions of such intrastate manufacturing activity. The United States government appealed to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court unanimously reversed the District Court, holding that the Fair Labor Standards Act was constitutional because the Commerce Clause allowed the Government to regulate employment standards in the production of goods that touch interstate commerce. The Court explained that the Commerce Clause gave the Government the power to prevent states from using sub-standard labor practices to gain advantage in interstate commerce. While intrastate manufacturing of goods was not interstate commerce, the shipping of those goods across state lines made it interstate commerce. And because Darby’s lumber was sold across the United States, the Fair Labor Standards Act applied to Darby’s manufacturing activities.
This case overturned a previous Supreme Court opinion on the Commerce Clause in Hammer v. Dagenhart which held that Congress could not regulate the production standards of goods that flowed into interstate commerce because the production activity by itself did not touch interstate commerce.
United States v. Darby was a landmark decision for Commerce Clause jurisprudence because it expanded Congress’ powers under the Clause with regard to economic legislation.
#1 Running a business in the red is untenable whether or not the owner has sufficient money to retire. ,
#2 Fast food is supposed to be inexpensive. As cost to consumer rises eating home or packing lunch becomes preferable.
I didn’t realize it applies only to restaurants with 60 (or more) locations nationwide. So the little neighborhood burger joint should be ok I guess.
For how long?
Nonetheless, if the law exists at all, it still affects those to whom it may not apply.
That’s not your call to make. Businesses exist for one reason and one reason only. To make money for their owner or shareholders. They are not in business to provide jobs. That’s a side benefit.
More than most, I have been the recipient of that. Twice I’ve lost career level jobs due to the economy slowing down and the business having to trim staff. I had to move 600 miles and be apart from my family for eight months when I got a new job after being unemployed for six months. It is what it is.
The owner probably scrimped and saved for years even decades building up the business and hopefully a decent income only to be destroyed by the dictates of a clown show of economic illiterates who with the stroke of a pen destroyed her company and many others. I hope they choke.
Envy.
Resentment.
Not good.
In the famous words of Gomer Pyle “surprise, surprise, surprise!” Ask these schmucks how they voted in the last election!
>>>>> Stupid employees.
It’s not the employees who were stupid. It’s the politicians and their voters.
One of my favorite stories.
If $20 is so wonderful make it $30 or $40 per hour. Drive the cost of everything up AND then, when the “poor” can’t afford anything” raise the MINIMUM wage to $50 an hour.
Is there a greater example of the retarded thought process of liberals?
“What’d they think was going to happen? Manna from heaven?”
These indoctrinated morons think that all businesses are owned by people who are incredibly wealthy. Any negative consequences from the huge rise in minimum wage is due to business owner greed. Those business owners must be Republican because they don’t care about people. The conclusion:
Vote for more Democrats.
I doubt that. He’s gotta do something with the $20 min wage to stay afloat. Many food places have reduced the portion size and quality of their menu items, and I suspect this guy has already done that. What’s left is to raise prices to pay for the wage increase, which will drive customers away.
The best way to keep from going under is to close the doors now. If the place is paid for, at least he can sell it and save something. To keep going he risks losing all.
The definition of tyranny is when the government tells employers how much they have to pay their employees. Private employers can’t collect taxes like the government bass turds can. When they are told by fascists in the government how much they have to pay their employees, THEY, lose money.
What makes them different? Why do thy need "protection"? Force the bill-makers to go on record.
1. charge employees for parking
2 charge them for uniforms
3 no paid breaks, you clock out for every smoke or bathroom break.
4 all tips have to be reported - All. take 50% .
5 miss 3 days a quarter for any reason, and you are gone.
6 unionize your employees, charge them $3 an hour for "union dues"
employees can now be paid $20/hour.
Whether it's by increasing the minimum wage, or by increasing entitlements, inflation will go up.
My understanding is the loophole is the place has to make bread to get the exemption. Most fast food joints have biscuits on their menu. Make the biscuits there.
Oh No …. Another warning unheeded ……
I was thinking along those lines, too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.