3 ms·

> goofy exemptions You may be thinking of this: > Restaurants that operate a bakery that "produces" and sells "bread" as a stand-alone menu item as of Septemb

> goofy exemptions You may be thinking of this: > Restaurants that operate a bakery that "produces" and sells "bread" as a stand-alone menu item as of September 15, 2023, and continue to do so are exempt from the new law. Not "goofy" at all, perfectly rational -- once one learns that Panera is a contributor to Governer Newsom's political campaigns.

robotburrito 3y ago
Goofy question, but what stops any restaurant in CA from just running out and buying a $200 bread machine?
- kyboren 3y ago
  The law[0] stipulates in §1474(c)(2) that '"fast food restaurant" shall not include an establishment that on September 15, 2023, operates a bakery that produces for sale on the establishment’s premises bread [...]'. So in order to get the exemption you would need to get a time machine in addition to the $200 bread machine. [0]: https://legiscan.com/CA/text/AB1228/id/2843232 https://legiscan.com/CA/text/AB1228/id/2843232
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  (1) Individual independent restaurants aren’t effected by this, it applies to large fast food chains.(“large chains” is embedded in how the bill defines “fast food”, even though its not part of the usual definition of the term.) (2) They’d have to go back in time to do it (even if they did when the governor signed the bill), since the cut-off date was in the past when the bill was signed. If they were really pro-active, I guess a chain could have bought bread machines and changed its menu in the four days between the final bill text being presented in the committee and the cut-off date, but my guess is none did. (3) The main thing this bill does is create a uniform state wide regulatory body for fast food (large chain) working conditions including any potential higher-than-general minimum wage, exempting them potential local regulations doing similar things, possibly inconsistently, throughout the state. Wiggling out of the coverage of this bill would wiggle them back into that kind of potential multi-jurisdiction regulation issue; the $20 minimum wage is an initial wage boost for the industry included in the bill before the council is up and running, but not the main focus.
aegypti 3y ago
Panera was never going to be exempt, their dough is trucked in every day. They hire from the same pool of labor as fast food franchises anyways. Actual, proper bakeries are a bit different and more incestuous IME, I think it’s the odd working hours.
- everybodyknows 3y ago
  > Panera was never going to be exempt, their dough is trucked in every day. Bloomberg thought otherwise: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-02-28/panera-bread-exempt-from-california-s-minimum-wage-increase-for-fast-food-worker https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-02-28/panera-br...
gamblor956 3y ago
Panera would not have qualified for this exception, since their restaurants are not bakeries. Boudin is the only restaurant that would have qualified for the exception. Their owner is not a donor to Newsom.
nitwit005 3y ago
More that they have essentially attempted to define "large fast food chain", including what's effectively a definition of fast food. Companies can potentially escape the law by providing more than "limited service", or splitting the company so they have fewer than 60 locations, or selling food that requires some preparation by the customer.

robotburrito 3y ago

Goofy question, but what stops any restaurant in CA from just running out and buying a $200 bread machine?

kyboren 3y ago
The law[0] stipulates in §1474(c)(2) that '"fast food restaurant" shall not include an establishment that on September 15, 2023, operates a bakery that produces for sale on the establishment’s premises bread [...]'. So in order to get the exemption you would need to get a time machine in addition to the $200 bread machine. [0]: https://legiscan.com/CA/text/AB1228/id/2843232 https://legiscan.com/CA/text/AB1228/id/2843232
dragonwriter 3y ago
(1) Individual independent restaurants aren’t effected by this, it applies to large fast food chains.(“large chains” is embedded in how the bill defines “fast food”, even though its not part of the usual definition of the term.) (2) They’d have to go back in time to do it (even if they did when the governor signed the bill), since the cut-off date was in the past when the bill was signed. If they were really pro-active, I guess a chain could have bought bread machines and changed its menu in the four days between the final bill text being presented in the committee and the cut-off date, but my guess is none did. (3) The main thing this bill does is create a uniform state wide regulatory body for fast food (large chain) working conditions including any potential higher-than-general minimum wage, exempting them potential local regulations doing similar things, possibly inconsistently, throughout the state. Wiggling out of the coverage of this bill would wiggle them back into that kind of potential multi-jurisdiction regulation issue; the $20 minimum wage is an initial wage boost for the industry included in the bill before the council is up and running, but not the main focus.

aegypti 3y ago

Panera was never going to be exempt, their dough is trucked in every day. They hire from the same pool of labor as fast food franchises anyways. Actual, proper bakeries are a bit different and more incestuous IME, I think it’s the odd working hours.

everybodyknows 3y ago
> Panera was never going to be exempt, their dough is trucked in every day. Bloomberg thought otherwise: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-02-28/panera-bread-exempt-from-california-s-minimum-wage-increase-for-fast-food-worker https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-02-28/panera-br...

gamblor956 3y ago

Panera would not have qualified for this exception, since their restaurants are not bakeries. Boudin is the only restaurant that would have qualified for the exception. Their owner is not a donor to Newsom.

nitwit005 3y ago

More that they have essentially attempted to define "large fast food chain", including what's effectively a definition of fast food. Companies can potentially escape the law by providing more than "limited service", or splitting the company so they have fewer than 60 locations, or selling food that requires some preparation by the customer.