California fast food workers are facing mass layoffs ahead of the new minimum wage law.
The forthcoming law will award fast-food workers a 25% hourly raise, increasing their pay by four dollars.
California fast food workers are facing mass layoffs ahead of the new minimum wage law. The forthcoming law will award fast-food workers a 25% hourly raise, increasing their pay by four dollars. Several fast-food franchises in California have already begun laying off workers in anticipation of this legally mandated minimum wage hike that is set to take effect on April 1st.
According to California's new fast-food labor law, a national fast food chain means a set of limited-service restaurants consisting of more than 60 establishments nationwide that share a common brand or are characterized by standardized options for decor, marketing, packaging, products and services and which are primarily engaged in providing food and beverages for immediate consumption on or off premises where patrons generally.
Handel's only sells ice cream treats and has more than 120 locations nationwide with about 40 of them located in California.
During warmer months, with wages and tips, Handel's employees can already make more than $20 an hour.
Accuracy
The new fast-food labor law in California will require major fast-food chains to start paying their workers at least $20 an hour on April 1.
Deception
(30%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author implies that the new fast-food labor law applies to all ice cream shops and other similar snack vendors when federal law does not consider them as limited-service restaurants. Secondly, the author uses a quote from Gaby Campbell to suggest that her employees can make more than $20 an hour during warmer months with wages and tips, which is misleading because it implies that they are already making $20 an hour or more when in fact they may not be.
The author uses Gaby Campbell's quote to suggest her employees can make more than $20 an hour during warmer months when they may not be.
The author writes 'It's unfathomable that somebody would think that a business like ours should be lumped in with fast food,'
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains an appeal to authority fallacy by stating that the governor pushed for a special exemption for bakeries and used nondisclosure agreements in negotiations. The author also presents information from Gaby Campbell, who claims her ice cream shop is not considered a limited-service restaurant under federal law, which contradicts the definition of national fast food chain provided in California's new labor law.
The governor pushed for a special exemption for bakeries to benefit one of his billionaire donors.
Bias
(85%)
The author uses the phrase 'national fast food chain' to describe chains that are exempt from California's new fast-food labor law. This is a biased term as it implies that only large corporations with standardized options and practices should be considered for exemptions. The author also quotes Gaby Campbell, who argues against being included in the law because her business does not fit the definition of 'national fast food chain'. However, this argument ignores other factors such as revenue or number of employees that may make a business eligible for an exemption.
The author uses the phrase 'national fast food chain' to describe chains that are exempt from California's new fast-food labor law. This is a biased term as it implies that only large corporations with standardized options and practices should be considered for exemptions.
Fast food workers are losing their jobs in California as more restaurant chains prepare to meet a new $20 minimum wage set to go into effect next week.
Restaurants making cuts are mostly pizzerias, according to a report published by The Wall Street Journal. Multiple businesses have plans to axe hundreds of jobs, as well as cut back hours and freeze hiring, the report shows.
Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom signed the Fast Act in September 2019 which requires fast food chains with 60 or more locations nationwide to meet a $20 minimum wage increase after labor unions fought for it alongside the healthcare industry, which will also see a boost to earnings in June.
Layoffs began last year. Pizza Hut announced cuts to over 1,200 delivery jobs in December 2019 and some franchisees discontinued their delivery services entirely according to Fox Business.
Excalibur Pizza, a franchisee of Round Table Pizza, plans to cut 73 driver jobs in April which amounts to about 21% of its workforce. The company is transferring their delivery services to third-party.
Greg Flynn who has monopoly over Panera franchises in California tried to get out of the state's new mandate earlier this year, holding fast to a loophole that restaurants making in-house bread do not have to boost employee earnings. Newsom's office called the claim 'absurd'
Chipotle's CFO told Yahoo Finance that the company will be forced to increase their prices to comply with the minimum wage increase.
Starbucks has committed to at least a 3% increase in wages that went into effect on Jan.1, according to a statement put out by the company.
Accuracy
Chipotle’s CFO told Yahoo Finance that the company will be forced to increase their prices to comply with the minimum wage increase.
Deception
(30%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, it states that the combined number of eliminated positions was attributed to a single company which is not true as multiple businesses are making cuts. Secondly, the article mentions Pizza Hut and Excalibur Pizza cutting jobs but does not provide any information on how many other companies are also doing this. Thirdly, it states that some fast food chains with 60 or more locations nationwide will have to meet the $20 minimum wage increase after labor unions fought for it alongside the healthcare industry which is true but does not mention anything about other industries being affected by this law.
The article mentions Pizza Hut and Excalibur Pizza cutting jobs but does not provide any information on how many other companies are also doing this. This is an example of selective reporting which is deceptive.
Fallacies
(70%)
The article contains several fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by citing the statements of Gov. Gavin Newsom and labor unions without providing any evidence or context for their claims.
> Fast food workers are losing their jobs in California as more restaurant chains prepare to meet a new $20 minimum wage set to go into effect next week.
Bias
(80%)
The article reports that fast food workers are losing their jobs in California as a new $20 minimum wage goes into effect. The author does not provide any personal opinions or biases and presents the facts of the situation objectively.
Excalibur Pizza, a franchisee of Round Table Pizza, has plans to cut 73 driver jobs in April, which amounts to 21% of its workforce.
California fast food workers have been hit with layoffs ahead of new minimum wage law
The forthcoming law will award fast-food workers a 25% hourly raise, increasing their pay by four dollars
Several fast-food franchises in California are laying off workers in anticipation of the legally mandated minimum wage hike that is slated to take effect in April
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(30%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, it states that the new minimum wage law will award fast-food workers a 25% hourly raise when in fact it only increases their pay by $4 per hour. Secondly, the article implies that major restaurant chains are opposed to the new minimum wage rate of $20 per hour but does not provide any evidence or quotes from these chains to support this claim. Thirdly, the article states that small restaurants are also doing layoffs due to financial consequences caused by higher wages but fails to mention how many other factors may be contributing to their financial struggles.
The forthcoming law is essentially a compromise between owners, unions, and negotiators following the state's decision to raise the minimum wage of local fast-food workers. Major restaurant chains opposed the initially proposed $22 per hour rate, but many say the soon-to-be $20 hourly pay still comes with possible financial consequences.
Pizza chains have already begun cutting an estimated 1,280 delivery jobs this year.
Fallacies
(75%)
The article contains several fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by citing Inc., a business news website, and the Wall Street Journal as sources for information about layoffs at fast food chains in California. However, these sources are not reliable or trustworthy because they may have their own biases and agendas that could influence their reporting. Additionally, the author uses inflammatory rhetoric by describing the minimum wage hike as a
The forthcoming law is essentially a compromise between owners, unions, and negotiators following the state's decision to raise the minimum wage of local fast-food workers.
Bias
(85%)
The article is biased towards the idea that fast food chains are negatively affected by the minimum wage increase. The author uses quotes from several sources to support this claim without providing any counter-arguments or evidence of potential benefits for workers. Additionally, the use of phrases such as 'financial consequences' and 'not going to hire anymore' creates a negative tone towards the minimum wage increase.
The forthcoming law is essentially a compromise between owners, unions, and negotiators following the state’s decision to raise the minimum wage of local fast-food workers. Major restaurant chains opposed the initially proposed $22 per hour rate, but many say the soon-to-be $20 hourly pay still comes with possible financial consequences.
Two San Jose-based Vitality Bowls restaurants are currently being run by two employees instead of the typical four. The restaurants’ owner, Brian Hom, told the WSJ that he is definitely not going to hire anymore.
