4 ms·

Why can't they pay their chefs more until the chefs too can afford to live closer?

tptacek 8y ago
At least in part because restaurant margins are very slim, and customers are paradoxically price sensitive to menu prices despite being largely insensitive to rent (probably because everyone feels like they can go across the street to get a better value for food, but nobody feels like they can trivially move to a higher-value neighborhood).
- abalone 8y ago
  There’s no paradox. Rent is a necessity, given that you want to live in and get your career going in SF. Restaurants are a luxury. Thus there are those who will spend as much as possible on rent (esp. if they think it will help them earn more later), taking it out of their going-out budget.
- gamma-male 8y ago
  This. You can always get cheaper food and find it acceptable. Cheaper rent in SF is often no great...
abalone 8y ago
Is this not obvious? Seriously, this question always comes up in these discussions. The answer is it’s a macroeconomic problem: SF restaurants have already increased prices to $34 for a pork chop and $13 for a cocktail (Nopa.. which I attest is a very good value by SF standards). Restaurant margins are low. If they triple their cook salaries it will result in a net decline and they’ll close. What we’re seeing is a shift towards “fine casual” formats like Souvla that have lower labor costs. But there are just fewer midrange restaurants opening due to labor and rent and the ceiling on what they can sustainably charge. The high end and low end / fine causal are doing ok.
- gamma-male 8y ago
  This. Restaurants in SF are already quite expensive !
- selestify 8y ago
  So then why not let them close? Seems like the supply-and-demand problem will eventually reach a new equilibrium.
  - abalone 8y ago
    Because then chefs would be even worse off because half would lose their jobs? A better solution is to provide them affordable housing.
jarcane 8y ago
This was my first reaction too, especially after the line about “figuring out how to pay him more without having him lose access to different low-income programs for which he currently qualifies.” But they get into the actual wages below, and while it is absurd to me that servers are making almost double what the cooks are, what’s even more insane is that both of them are paid an absolute shitton by restaurant standards nationwide. 50k per year puts you at the top end of Cooks in the entire country. Hell, anywhere but SF, that is still solid middle class wages regardless of job, and in a field where customarily only the truly high end even bothers to pay more than minimum wage. I would’ve donated a spare kidney to make that kind of money when I was still cooking. And the idea that that is still not enough to survive even rent should be a massive alarm bell that something is deeply fucked with your economy.
thirdsun 8y ago
From a european perspective it already seems mind-boggling that chefs and service staff make 80-90k and still can't live comfortably. I don't think that doubling down on that trend will help as long as there isn't enough housing available.

At least in part because restaurant margins are very slim, and customers are paradoxically price sensitive to menu prices despite being largely insensitive to rent (probably because everyone feels like they can go across the street to get a better value for food, but nobody feels like they can trivially move to a higher-value neighborhood).

abalone 8y ago
There’s no paradox. Rent is a necessity, given that you want to live in and get your career going in SF. Restaurants are a luxury. Thus there are those who will spend as much as possible on rent (esp. if they think it will help them earn more later), taking it out of their going-out budget.
gamma-male 8y ago
This. You can always get cheaper food and find it acceptable. Cheaper rent in SF is often no great...

abalone 8y ago

Is this not obvious? Seriously, this question always comes up in these discussions. The answer is it’s a macroeconomic problem: SF restaurants have already increased prices to $34 for a pork chop and $13 for a cocktail (Nopa.. which I attest is a very good value by SF standards). Restaurant margins are low. If they triple their cook salaries it will result in a net decline and they’ll close. What we’re seeing is a shift towards “fine casual” formats like Souvla that have lower labor costs. But there are just fewer midrange restaurants opening due to labor and rent and the ceiling on what they can sustainably charge. The high end and low end / fine causal are doing ok.

gamma-male 8y ago
This. Restaurants in SF are already quite expensive !
selestify 8y ago
So then why not let them close? Seems like the supply-and-demand problem will eventually reach a new equilibrium.
- abalone 8y ago
  Because then chefs would be even worse off because half would lose their jobs? A better solution is to provide them affordable housing.

jarcane 8y ago

This was my first reaction too, especially after the line about “figuring out how to pay him more without having him lose access to different low-income programs for which he currently qualifies.” But they get into the actual wages below, and while it is absurd to me that servers are making almost double what the cooks are, what’s even more insane is that both of them are paid an absolute shitton by restaurant standards nationwide. 50k per year puts you at the top end of Cooks in the entire country. Hell, anywhere but SF, that is still solid middle class wages regardless of job, and in a field where customarily only the truly high end even bothers to pay more than minimum wage. I would’ve donated a spare kidney to make that kind of money when I was still cooking. And the idea that that is still not enough to survive even rent should be a massive alarm bell that something is deeply fucked with your economy.

thirdsun 8y ago

From a european perspective it already seems mind-boggling that chefs and service staff make 80-90k and still can't live comfortably. I don't think that doubling down on that trend will help as long as there isn't enough housing available.