Strike for $15.00 an hour, Sub shop fires everybody

[Trajan]

Actions have consequences. A sub shop in Chicago was the target of a recent protest of workers wanting $15.00 an hour. The shop fired everyone, three days before Christmas, en masse, everyone got the can.

That's the way to deal with these kinds of protests.

Chicago sandwich shop fires all its staff in an EMAIL just days before Christmas | Mail Online

A Chicago sandwich shop has fired all its employees over email just days before Christmas.
Staff at Snarf's Sub Shop in River North received the bad news on Sunday night in a group email notifying them that the drastic action was effective immediately.
The company blamed 'increased competition and losses' for the firings.
Director of operations Doug Besant said in the email the restaurant will likely close for a month as they remodel and reconcept the business into a burger joint.

The River North Snarf's shop was closed for four days, from December 5 until December 8, as employees went on striking for higher wages and better benefits.
They joined workers of fast-food chains like McDonald's, Subway, Potbelly and others in a broader strike orchestrated by the Worker's Organizing Committee of Chicago.

The owner is a scumbag to do that right before Xmas.

The employees picked a bad time to strike, apparently the biz has not been doing well for a while, the union who motivated these folks don't give a shit, any hate on for them?

 

[Gadawg73]

Firing all of the protesters, to me, only makes the person in charge of the place look worse than before. I wouldn't want to work for a person like that and if enough people in the area of that place were to share my opinion, it would be even harder for the person in charge to find new people to replace those who were fired.

God bless you and them always!!!

Holly

The "person in charge"? that you keep referring to. Who the hell is that?
The owner has to make A PROFIT because if he does not make A PROFIT then "the person in charge" and everyone else has NO job to protest about.

 

[syrenn]

Actions have consequences. A sub shop in Chicago was the target of a recent protest of workers wanting $15.00 an hour. The shop fired everyone, three days before Christmas, en masse, everyone got the can.

That's the way to deal with these kinds of protests.

Chicago sandwich shop fires all its staff in an EMAIL just days before Christmas | Mail Online

A Chicago sandwich shop has fired all its employees over email just days before Christmas.
Staff at Snarf's Sub Shop in River North received the bad news on Sunday night in a group email notifying them that the drastic action was effective immediately.
The company blamed 'increased competition and losses' for the firings.
Director of operations Doug Besant said in the email the restaurant will likely close for a month as they remodel and reconcept the business into a burger joint.

The River North Snarf's shop was closed for four days, from December 5 until December 8, as employees went on striking for higher wages and better benefits.
They joined workers of fast-food chains like McDonald's, Subway, Potbelly and others in a broader strike orchestrated by the Worker's Organizing Committee of Chicago.

 

[Noomi]

Firing all of the protesters, to me, only makes the person in charge of the place look worse than before. I wouldn't want to work for a person like that and if enough people in the area of that place were to share my opinion, it would be even harder for the person in charge to find new people to replace those who were fired.

God bless you and them always!!!

Holly

The "person in charge"? that you keep referring to. Who the hell is that?
The owner has to make A PROFIT because if he does not make A PROFIT then "the person in charge" and everyone else has NO job to protest about.

If he can't pay his workers a decent wage AND make a profit, then he's a shitty business owner.

 

[syrenn]

Firing all of the protesters, to me, only makes the person in charge of the place look worse than before. I wouldn't want to work for a person like that and if enough people in the area of that place were to share my opinion, it would be even harder for the person in charge to find new people to replace those who were fired.

God bless you and them always!!!

Holly

The "person in charge"? that you keep referring to. Who the hell is that?
The owner has to make A PROFIT because if he does not make A PROFIT then "the person in charge" and everyone else has NO job to protest about.

If he can't pay his workers a decent wage AND make a profit, then he's a shitty business owner.

his business..... and none of anyone ones else business but the owners.

 

[JoeB131]

Who won?

Sub shop loses business while they scramble for new employees, employees go get another low paying job

The sheep who listened to the union unicorn piss purveyors lost, the purveyors will move on and pretend they zip to do with this and the owner will hire new folks, being a bus. person I am sure he understood his lost days without help are a necessary cost.....next time the AstroTurf unicorns show up I bet the employees then tell them no thx I want to keep the job.

Yup, you got to keep them wage slaves in their place. How DARE they demand decent pay.

Oh, by the way, this restruant was in downtown Chicago, and what they were paying in rent or taxes for that tony downtown address was probably no doubt a lot more than they were paying the wage slaves...

 

[Mac1958]

The "person in charge"? that you keep referring to. Who the hell is that?
The owner has to make A PROFIT because if he does not make A PROFIT then "the person in charge" and everyone else has NO job to protest about.

If he can't pay his workers a decent wage AND make a profit, then he's a shitty business owner.

his business..... and none of anyone ones else business but the owners.

Yup.

The Left has convinced itself that the purpose of a business is to serve its employees.

Wrong.

.

 

[hjmick]

Firing all of the protesters, to me, only makes the person in charge of the place look worse than before. I wouldn't want to work for a person like that and if enough people in the area of that place were to share my opinion, it would be even harder for the person in charge to find new people to replace those who were fired.

God bless you and them always!!!

Holly

The "person in charge"? that you keep referring to. Who the hell is that?
The owner has to make A PROFIT because if he does not make A PROFIT then "the person in charge" and everyone else has NO job to protest about.

If he can't pay his workers a decent wage AND make a profit, then he's a shitty business owner.

This comment right here tells me you know not of what you speak. Really, nothing. You would be better off sticking to what you know, but I have yet to be able to determine what that is...

 

[JoeB131]

If he can't pay his workers a decent wage AND make a profit, then he's a shitty business owner.

his business..... and none of anyone ones else business but the owners.

Yup.

The Left has convinced itself that the purpose of a business is to serve its employees.

Wrong.

.

Actually, what we've convinced ourselves of is that the country works better when people are gainfully employed rather than when a few rich douchebags are living well and the rest of us are fighting over the scraps.

Oh, for the asshole who owns this store. He has received so much backlash that he had to get on the News and announce he was giving his ex-employees a week of severance wages because public opinion of him was so negative.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Who won?

Sub shop loses business while they scramble for new employees, employees go get another low paying job

So obviously you didn't read the article...or choose to ignore what the employees did to him.
They all walked out and held nasty signs for FOUR DAYS - so THEY closed his shop for four days completely disregarding the fact that he was already in financial trouble. The owner said they were aware of LOSSES he was sustaining before they went on strike. Which was stupid and showinh complete lack of concern about the place they were working.
If you were the owner, and were closing the business to re-concept - WOULD YOU HIRE THESE PEOPLE BACK??
Of course you wouldn't. They are all jerks for walking out on an owner that was struggling.

He paid low wages and his business was failing. Was he going to pay his workers while he changed from a sub shop to a burger joint? Workers were leaving anyway

His business was failing because it no longer served a changing demographic.
This is very, very, very common in the restaurant business. Neighborhoods change.
Pay his workers while he was closed for a month?? What the...what part of he was struggling and losing money do you not understand?
So you are one of those people who think that business owners have an infinite supply of money sitting around and are just greedy?? I would think you are smarter than that.
When a business loses money it is quite common for the owner to NOT PAY HIMSELF to meet payroll. I do not know if this guy was doing this, but it is possible. What is not possible was for him to pay his employees a ridiculous $15 per hour...and even more unrealistic to expect him to continue paying his employees for a whole month to do nothing. I suppose you think he should have taken out a 2nd mortgage on his house to do this.
Geez.

 

[Camp]

So obviously you didn't read the article...or choose to ignore what the employees did to him.
They all walked out and held nasty signs for FOUR DAYS - so THEY closed his shop for four days completely disregarding the fact that he was already in financial trouble. The owner said they were aware of LOSSES he was sustaining before they went on strike. Which was stupid and showinh complete lack of concern about the place they were working.
If you were the owner, and were closing the business to re-concept - WOULD YOU HIRE THESE PEOPLE BACK??
Of course you wouldn't. They are all jerks for walking out on an owner that was struggling.

He paid low wages and his business was failing. Was he going to pay his workers while he changed from a sub shop to a burger joint? Workers were leaving anyway

His business was failing because it no longer served a changing demographic.
This is very, very, very common in the restaurant business. Neighborhoods change.
Pay his workers while he was closed for a month?? What the...what part of he was struggling and losing money do you not understand?
So you are one of those people who think that business owners have an infinite supply of money sitting around and are just greedy?? I would think you are smarter than that.
When a business loses money it is quite common for the owner to NOT PAY HIMSELF to meet payroll. I do not know if this guy was doing this, but it is possible. What is not possible was for him to pay his employees a ridiculous $15 per hour...and even more unrealistic to expect him to continue paying his employees for a whole month to do nothing. I suppose you think he should have taken out a 2nd mortgage on his house to do this.
Geez.

Seems to be alot not being told in this story. Snarfs has about 15 sandwich shops, most in Colorado, but this one and another on in Chicago, at least one in Texas and a couple in St. Louis. Not sure if these are company owned or franchises. That leaves alot open to speculation. Is this owner loosing his franchise? Are the other Snarfs having the same problems? Is Snarfs changing all it's business models at all it's places? How does this place compare to other Snarfs in regards to employee pay and relations?

 

[iamwhatiseem]

He paid low wages and his business was failing. Was he going to pay his workers while he changed from a sub shop to a burger joint? Workers were leaving anyway

His business was failing because it no longer served a changing demographic.
This is very, very, very common in the restaurant business. Neighborhoods change.
Pay his workers while he was closed for a month?? What the...what part of he was struggling and losing money do you not understand?
So you are one of those people who think that business owners have an infinite supply of money sitting around and are just greedy?? I would think you are smarter than that.
When a business loses money it is quite common for the owner to NOT PAY HIMSELF to meet payroll. I do not know if this guy was doing this, but it is possible. What is not possible was for him to pay his employees a ridiculous $15 per hour...and even more unrealistic to expect him to continue paying his employees for a whole month to do nothing. I suppose you think he should have taken out a 2nd mortgage on his house to do this.
Geez.

Seems to be alot not being told in this story. Snarfs has about 15 sandwich shops, most in Colorado, but this one and another on in Chicago, at least one in Texas and a couple in St. Louis. Not sure if these are company owned or franchises. That leaves alot open to speculation. Is this owner loosing his franchise? Are the other Snarfs having the same problems? Is Snarfs changing all it's business models at all it's places? How does this place compare to other Snarfs in regards to employee pay and relations?

I don't see your point.
Each business is it's own entity and unique book.
What employees getting paid in Chicago would have no bearing on what employees would be paid in Seattle. (as an example) Especially if they are franchised.

 

[Trajan]

Who won?

Sub shop loses business while they scramble for new employees, employees go get another low paying job

The sheep who listened to the union unicorn piss purveyors lost, the purveyors will move on and pretend they zip to do with this and the owner will hire new folks, being a bus. person I am sure he understood his lost days without help are a necessary cost.....next time the AstroTurf unicorns show up I bet the employees then tell them no thx I want to keep the job.

Yup, you got to keep them wage slaves in their place. How DARE they demand decent pay.

Oh, by the way, this restruant was in downtown Chicago, and what they were paying in rent or taxes for that tony downtown address was probably no doubt a lot more than they were paying the wage slaves...

Slave wages I worked for those slave wages

And your ignorance is aptly demonstrated in your own post, yes their other expenses may indeed be higher than if they were in a suburban strip mall, so what's your point ? Right, make one up......

 

[Trajan]

his business..... and none of anyone ones else business but the owners.

Yup.

The Left has convinced itself that the purpose of a business is to serve its employees.

Wrong.

.

Actually, what we've convinced ourselves of is that the country works better when people are gainfully employed rather than when a few rich douchebags are living well and the rest of us are fighting over the scraps.

Oh, for the asshole who owns this store. He has received so much backlash that he had to get on the News and announce he was giving his ex-employees a week of severance wages because public opinion of him was so negative.

You should be sued by the Eisenhower estate for name abuse, Eisenhower rep.? You sound like an 18 year old half drunk college freshman know it all after a few classes using howard zinn texts

 

[JOSweetHeart]

The "person in charge"? that you keep referring to. Who the hell is that?
The owner has to make A PROFIT because if he does not make A PROFIT then "the person in charge" and everyone else has NO job to protest about.

Whoever fired the employees is who I am referring to there. The write up says that the owner of the place fired them, but normally it is the manager who does that.

Also if the wages are not fair enough, no one will want to work such a job which will only make it harder for the owner/manager to make a profit because all that they are going to have to keep the place going are themselves.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

 

[GHook93]

Preston added that fired staff will be allowed to reapply for their jobs when the restaurant reopens in the new year.

I think this has less to do about the ineffective strike, but more about the heartless way a corporation let go it minimum wage employees.

I know many of you have little sympathy for minimum wage employees, but they do have a hard life. Does that mean they deserve a government raise? NO, but you must recognize they have a hard life.

I think the OP sensationalized the strike as the cause of the mass firing and the liberal media helped that theory along. However, after reading the ENTIRE article, the restaurant employees went on strike during a bad time and then shortly after that the company decided to rebrand and give the location a make over. The employees would have been out of work for at least a month. Not something they could do.

You might say poor timing right at Christmas, but in reality, there are many many retailers and other like companies hiring low wage workers at this time, so maybe the timing wasn't to bad.

 

[Spiderman]

Who won?

Sub shop loses business while they scramble for new employees, employees go get another low paying job

They won't be "scrambling".

There are plenty of people who are willing to work.

The entitled assholes who think they should get paid more than the job is worth are the ones in for a rude awakening.

 

[BillyZane]

Not if the state is an "work at will" state. You can be fired for any thing

Actually you can't.

Bias and whistleblower laws still apply.

If you are employed at will, your employer does not need good cause to fire you. In every state but Montana (which protects employees who have completed an initial "probationary period" from being fired without cause), employers are free to adopt at-will employment policies, and many of them have. In fact, unless your employer gives some clear indication that it will only fire employees for good cause, the law presumes that you are employed at will.

Employment At Will: What Does It Mean? | Nolo.com

Meanwhile in the real world. People tend to sue if they feel they have been wrongfully terminated. I mean realisitcialy , you could as an employer fire a person for being black, and tell them that right to their face, and if they don't sue, they ARE fired.

By the same token, if you fire a black person and don't give a good reason, then they could sue and if they can convince a jury that your real reason for firing them was b/c of their skin color then you are screwed.

Very few, if ANY , successful businesses EVER fire someone without giving a reason for doing so. And the reason is obvious, to protect themselves from a lawsuit.

 

[BillyZane]

Who won?

Sub shop loses business while they scramble for new employees, employees go get another low paying job

They won't be "scrambling".

There are plenty of people who are willing to work.

The entitled assholes who think they should get paid more than the job is worth are the ones in for a rude awakening.

Completely off topic, but please define what jobs are worth.

I could list a hundred different industries in a hundred different locations which all pay roughly the same , are you seriously suggesting that those jobs are just coincidentally worth the same amount?

 

[Gadawg73]

Firing all of the protesters, to me, only makes the person in charge of the place look worse than before. I wouldn't want to work for a person like that and if enough people in the area of that place were to share my opinion, it would be even harder for the person in charge to find new people to replace those who were fired.

God bless you and them always!!!

Holly

The "person in charge"? that you keep referring to. Who the hell is that?
The owner has to make A PROFIT because if he does not make A PROFIT then "the person in charge" and everyone else has NO job to protest about.

If he can't pay his workers a decent wage AND make a profit, then he's a shitty business owner.

If an employee does not like their wage then they can leave.