What's up with the restaurant surcharges?The last time I had lunch at the Slow Club, the check came with a little notice: $1 was added to the cost of every meal to cover the cost of complying with the city's new health-care mandate. That was fine -- if I can afford to eat at the Slow Club I can afford an extra buck so the people who work there can get health insurance.
But it's interesting that the place didn't just raise prices by $1 (which most people wouldn't have noticed -- restaurant prices go up all the time). They made a point of letting everyone know that the money was for a new government mandate. It was, in its own way, a political statement: Hey, sorry we have to charge you more, but the city is forcing us to do it.
That's made some local activists a bit angry (there's a fascinating little bit on it in the San Francisco Magazine blog -- Sup. Tom Ammiano (who wrote the health-care bill) and labor leader Chriss Romero were eating at 2223 Restaurant on Market, and Romero got pissed off when the tab came with a four percent service charge that mentioned the insurance rule.
I get Romero's point, and we supported the Ammiano legislation -- and as someone who works at a small business that has always provided health insurance to employees and is still getting hit with some serious additional expenses to comply, I understand why the restaurants are trying to make a point about it.
And it's absolutely true that restaurants never do this when other mandates, taxes, fees and expensive compliance rules take effect (you never see it for increases in the minimum wage, for example).
Mild statement or annoying protest? Thoughts?
digg •
del.icio.us •
sphere •
google
•
Comments (3)
Hey,
Two months ago, I was at Cafe Gratitude and they had a slip in their menu that the Golden Gate Restaurant Association had given them to give out about the rising prices.
I am a regular customer so I talked through the issues with the staff and shortly thereafter they stopped handing it out.
I never spoke to owners though and I think I should follow up and thank them for stopping.
Robert
Posted by Robert Haaland | May 2, 2008 09:42 AM
Noticed this at chain restaraunt Firewood on 18th St. in the Castro a few months ago - a little sign beneath the register announcing the surcharge. I found it off-putting. As if I should care about the owners' specific expenses... Why not list their garbage collection fee, their minimum wage fee and their health inspection compliance fees? The sign felt like it had the intention of making me disgruntled towards the person serving me directly behind the sign. I prefer to eat places where the owners aren't trying to pit me against the workers.
Posted by DG | May 2, 2008 01:03 PM
That's a good point, DG -- the workers, after all, are getting the benefit of health insurance, many for the first time; restaurants are notorious for not paying insurance and expecting workers to live off tips. I wonder how they feel about having to hand that stuff out?
Posted by tim redmond | May 2, 2008 01:20 PM