Call it the triple whammy. Restauranteurs in San Francisco have to pay their workers a higher minimum wage than the state minimum. If their restaurant has over 20 employees they have to pay for health care expenditures. And now, they have to pay for sick leave for all workers. Needless to say this is all costing them money, making many of them mad as hell and seeking relief.

Perhaps you saw the news yesterday, Burger King is being applauded by animal rights groups and customers. The company announced that it will start buying eggs and pork from suppliers that do not confine their animals in cages and crates. It will also favor suppliers of chickens that use more humane methods of stunning birds before slaughter, in particular a "controlled atmosphere stunning" rather than the standard electric shock currently used. Of course this will all cost money, but somehow the value seems to outweigh the costs.

You don't have to live on a farm to care about animal welfare. But surely anyone who eats in a restaurant should care about the welfare of its workers. I am not a restauranteur nor have I ever worked in a restaurant, but I really do care about the welfare of the people who work in them, both for their own well-being and mine. Can you imagine if we didn't give sick leave and health benefits to nurses? It would be an outrage, yet it's standard practice for restaurants, for people who make and serve us food.

Just as Burger King has chosen to lead the way in farm animal standards, San Francisco has the opportunity to be a leader in making life more sustainable for its workers. Restauranteurs can complain all they want, but owning and running a restaurant has always been an expensive proposition and they knew that when they got into it.

Bottom line? San Francisco is an expensive town. It costs more to live here and to do business here, but that's true for everyone. I used to pay $13 for a residential parking permit now I pay $60. That's the price I pay for being able to live in a city I love. And you know what? I would pay even more if I had to. I'm not moving due to the increasing costs of living here and I doubt most restaurants will either. While I appreciate reasonably priced food as much if not more than the next person, I appreciate workers being treated reasonably even more. My guess is that people will be willing to pay more when it comes to dining out, especially if they understand why.

We want to hear from you! Are you a diner? A restauranteur? A restaurant worker? Are you willing to pay more? Do you think it's an unfair burden for restaurants? If so, who should pay for these costs?

Interested in this topic?
Read another BAB post addressing issues regarding the restaurant industry:
Is The Public Ready For A Transparent Restaurant Industry?

Those expecting a brawl got more of a lovefest when Whole Foods CEO John Mackey met with Michael Pollan author of The Omnivore's Dilemma at UC Berkeley last night. The feud, if you can call it that, goes to back to a time shortly after the publication of the book when Mackey took issue with the quality of Pollan's research, his criticism of Whole Foods and what he called "industrial organic". Over the months that passed a series of letters were made public in which each seemed to take the other to task. Those letters can be found here:

Letter 1: Mackey to Pollan
Letter 1 Response: Pollan to Mackey
Letter 2: Mackey to Pollan
Letter 2 Response: Pollan to Mackey

Mackey complained that he wasn't contacted by Pollan before the book was published and tried to argue that all "industrial organic" is not bad. Pollan challenged Mackey on the authenticity of the storytelling present in the store, and on how much produce was truly "local".

The problem is and was, that Pollan and Mackey agree more than they disagree. While Mackey got his chance to explain his philosophy and to announce several new praiseworthy initiatives that deal with fair trade, animal welfare, support for local "food artisans" and loans for farmers and food producers, he admitted that criticism was good, and that it spurred a reexamination of their practices and a rethinking of their approach. Pollan in turn praised Mackey for the new initiatives and for being willing to so thoroughly engage his critics, something few CEO's are willing to do.

It was surprising how unpolished and passionate Mackey was compared to the almost slick and sometimes snide Pollan. Mackey even went so far as to say the backlash against his company and the concept of organic has actually been good in some ways. Still Mackey doesn't like being compared with Wal-Mart, and his philosophy of a more enlightened capitalism and movement towards a post industrial age he calls the "ecological era" puts him on the forefront of progressive businesses.

For his part, Pollan kept the conversation to a discussion more about the future than the present or the past in the discussion part of the program which was entitled "The Past, The Present, The Future of Food". Pollan even envisioned a kiosk in a grocery store that would allow shoppers to scan items and see what was happening back on the farm for a kind of nanny-cam meets corporate transparency, a vision that Mackey seemed to embrace. Perhaps both Mackey and Pollan are ready to put down the gloves and make peace with the past and present (in addition to each other) and to make more room for a focus on the future.