Guaranteed minimum number of weekly hours. Weekends off after a year employ. The employees wanted their guaranteed breaks but didn't want their tables transferred from them whilst on their break (union claim it was being done as retaliation to unionization). Also some of the signs the striking employees held up were "I have to eat my meal by the toilet", "I shouldn't have to choose between work and school" which I'm not sure what that means. Want a break room? Want to choose your own hours? Lots of typical union stuff about seniority having to be awarded.
Interesting, thanks for this. My restaurant experience is a long time in the past so some of this is kind of entertaining to me. But I am still well connected with a large number of people in the industry. Read that as: old guy gonna tell you how it used to be.
Guaranteed minimum number of hours? Most restaurants then ( and a great many now) relied on predominantly college aged kids to wait on tables meaning nobody outside of management, prep and finance staff were full time employees. More importantly nobody was guaranteed any amount of hours as we were all hired as part time employees. So I guess this would come down to the conditions of being hired. I highly doubt many of these employees are looking at full time employment as a server. If they are, it's largely because of the substantial untaxable earnings they get from tips. Cake and eat it too.
Guaranteed breaks? LOL at this one. My usual shift bartending was 4:00 P.M. (half hour before opening) until 1:30 A.M. (half hour after closing) with exactly zero guaranteed breaks. I fully recognize that is pretty much against the law now but one also has to understand the actual restaurant industry. In a sit down place like Stella's or the Keg you are waiting on tables; you have the responsibility for those tables and the restaurant is relying on you to provide quality service to said tables. An average wait shift at the Keg was at the time perhaps five or so hours. There were no breaks for that either. Now under the law you're entitled to a break but most restaurants work around this with short shifts or tacking on the 15 minutes of pay to the end of your shift.
Taking a break in the middle of a customers dinner? C'mon, that's entirely unrealistic. Restaurants are very fluid in their dynamics and as a server you don't get robots seated in five table intervals that all leave at the same time. I'm supportive of the notion of you're legally entitled to a break but you also have to understand how the industry works. It's not about you the employee getting everything exactly at a precise time, it's about the customer getting everything at exactly a precise time, in a consistent manner. The request to not transfer tables is an absolute flat 'no' from management perspective - put it this way: if I'm in a Stella's and my server comes out and gives me drinks and takes my food order then disappears and my service suffers, I'm not likely coming back. In reality, another staff member takes up the slack and given that's the individual that does all the work, well that's the individual deserving of the tip. Again, cake and eat it too.
Weekends off? Um, seriously, choose another area to work. Restaurants, without fail, are busiest on weekend evenings. So all the senior staff want to be off on weekends? There will never be any senior staff. That's a flat out stupid request. When I worked in the industry we were allowed to request either Friday or Saturday off, not both. If we wanted both, we had to swap or give up shifts to another willing team member. Weekends were also by far the best for tips since as mentioned this was the busiest time. I can only imagine there's a "living wage" request associated with this. And I'm supportive of a living wage in the restaurant industry so long as the expectation of a tip disappears with it. I laugh at the machines that come out now with 20% as being the default tip. I'm not sure I've ever received service that deserves 1/5 of the amount as a gimme. That's an incredibly rare occasion.
On the work and school thing given Stella's does a big daytime business I'm guessing people were being staffed while they were supposed to be in class. Again, good management works around this. The old Keg Prime Rib/Caesar's in the IG building (now a Pony Corral) had lunch staff and evening staff. Either could ask to work outside their normal hours of choice (you were hired for one group or the other) and management would accommodate as they could. I expect the issue at Stella's, though I have no way of confirming, is that they were running a pool of employees and scheduling them across the range of hours (does Stella's do breakfast?) from morning to night, meaning classes were being missed. And I'd be pissed too. But that's just flat out poor management.
I understand that there are additional factors with management being less than considerate in a number of areas that shouldn't be discussed in an open forum, so I won't broach those. But these issues on the surface are kind of laughable in the face of how the restaurant industry has always worked. They remain largely non-issues to this day because most management groups take decent enough care of their employees but that seems to perhaps not be the case at this establishment.
It sounds to me like this organization (or location) does a horrible job at the start from hiring an employee. There is an easy way to set up expectations of the restaurant to the employee and the converse, employee to the restaurant, that would address lots of this. Where I worked did this very, very clearly from the outset in the orientation when we were hired. If we didn't agree with the conditions then we were free to leave the employ of the establishment. The first thing that should be explained is "this is not a career unless you choose to make it so by moving out of the serving/cooking/bussing/hosting areas". It's part time employment unless you prove competent and want to move into those other areas.