Working in chain restaurants isn’t a bad experience if the rest of the staff is chill. Obviously the pay could be better but that’s not the fault of the managers, or really anyone below the level of CEO.
Indirectly they definitely are. If they for instance demand cost cuts, and wages are on that table, their demand for those cost cuts lead to the wage levels.
That and it’s not as high and mighty. People eating there don’t get taken seriously when they complain that you took 3.4 seconds to hand them their food instead of 1.2. At least, if you have good managers.
I met some of the coolest people back in the day (2007ish) bartending at California Pizza Kitchen. So many gems. Went on to work at higher end boutique restaurants where people start to take themselves too seriously.
You can't blame them either. The market is what it is. People are willing to work for a certain amount and they are willing to pay a certain amount for a meal. The business exists to streamline the space between those variables that are essentially out of their control.
No, you absolutely can blame the owners of the business. They each rake in millions a year. They could afford to not buy another yacht each year so that their workers can make a decent living. People are only “willing” to work for what they do because they have no choice. Business owners know this—that’s why they can pay so little, because they all know everyone else is paying just as little. It’s a race to the bottom.
Then do it. Just because you don't recognize the value they are adding doesn't mean that it's not existent. Getting it to the place where you can get a bunch of drones to microwave food and people pay real money for it is the hard part. What you are saying is akin to saying a smartphone is just a rectangle with some lights in it. It's shit like that why nobody takes socialists seriously.
The CEOs of OG or Chillis could quit tomorrow and all of the restaurants could operate just fine. If even 10% of the staff quit, the restaurants could collapse before new staff was found. CEOs and the other owners of these chains do not actually work for their money, they get paid by simply owning.
Your smartphone analogy is irrelevant, as the CEOs in that analogy would just told an engineer to make the phone, not actually make it themselves. That act of commanding something does not justify an average of 300x the pay of the typical worker in their business.
No it's not. You didn't present any argument to strawman against. You only had a completely unfounded claim that everything should belong to the workers and a laughably bad summation of what the business is. There wasn't an argument anywhere in sight hence whatever I said can't be a strawman.
Calling things logical fallacies just makes you look stupid man. If something is a bad argument, say why it’s a bad argument. Using what is essentially a literary term in attempt to devalue what someone says just makes it look like you can’t be bothered to explain why you disagree with it.
They're not literary terms. They are well-defined fallacious argument structures.
Anybody who has taken classes in formal logic would recognize them, and not require me to explain further.
The fact that you think fallacies are merely "literary terms", exposes a gap in your knowledge base. And creates a great opportunity for you to learn something new!
175
u/WantedFun Nov 19 '22
Working in chain restaurants isn’t a bad experience if the rest of the staff is chill. Obviously the pay could be better but that’s not the fault of the managers, or really anyone below the level of CEO.