Regulations | KRG Hospitality

December 27, 2022by David Klemt David Klemt No Comments

FAST Act Dealt Knockdown Blow

FAST Act Dealt Knockdown Blow

by David Klemt

A bill we think is one to watch, California’s Fast Food Accountability and Standards Recovery Act, may be on the ropes already.

Assembly Bill 257, known as the FAST Act, is “on hold” until 2024. So, while the Save Local Restaurants coalition and voters have yet to kill the bill, it may be out on its feet.

We reported two months ago that fast food chains were moving quickly to kill the FAST Act. It appears that the initial attack on AB-257 was successful.

That is, the chains and coalition got what they want: the ballot initiative vote has knocked down AB-257.

For those unfamiliar with the Save Local Restaurants Coalition, the following organizations are members: The National Restaurant Association (NRA), US Chamber of Commerce (USCC), and International Franchise Association (IFA). Further, fast-casual and QSR chain coalition members—including Starbucks, In N Out, McDonald’s, and Chipotle—threw nearly $13 million at the ballot measure that halted FAST.

What’s FAST?

To read AB-257, the FAST Act, in its entirety, click here.

In summary, FAST:

FAST does the following:

establishes the Fast Food Council, ten members appointed by the Governor, the Speaker of the Assembly, and the Senate Rules Committee. The council will operate until January 1, 2029;
defines “the characteristics of a fast food restaurant“;
gives the Fast Food Council the authority to set “minimum fast food restaurant employment standards, including standards on wages, working conditions, and training“;
provides the council the power to “issue, amend, and repeal any other rules and regulations, as necessary”; and
allows the formation of a Local Fast Food Council by a county, or a city that has a population of more than 200,000.

Voters effectively stopped California from implementing FAST until November 2024 at the earliest. (That is, if the California Secretary of State verifies that the referendum effort did indeed secure the required amount of signatures.)

Opposition

A statement from Save Local Restaurants reads, in part:

The quick-service restaurants targeted by the law – which include coffee shops, juice bars, pizzerias, delis, and salad shops – already operate on small, single-digit profit margins. These include more than 10,000 small businesses, including thousands of women- and minority-owned businesses.

If these restaurants are forced to absorb the costs, the result will be bad for workers and local communities. To survive, many restaurant owners will have no choice but to reduce worker hours or introduce automation. Some may choose to leave their communities entirely or go out of business.

As is often the case with overreaching California policies, this is likely only the beginning.

Additionally, the National Restaurant Association, a member of the coalition, has said the following:

The impacts of the FAST Act won’t be limited to quick service restaurants in California. The law allows the new regulating council to set a higher minimum wage for quick service restaurants. Independent restaurants will, however, be forced to increase their pay to match, so they can remain competitive when recruiting and retaining workforce.

Takeaway

We believe this bill is one to watch because similar efforts could spring up in other states. Also, just because the bill is on hold until 2024 in California doesn’t mean other states aren’t working on similar legislation right now.

Now, there are obviously two sides to consider. Opponents, as we see above, say FAST will raise prices, eliminate jobs, and hurt families.

Proponents believe FAST will protect the health, safety, and welfare of fast-food workers. Additionally, the Fast Food Council could increase the minimum wage for fast food workers above California’s $15.50 minimum (effective January 1, 2023).

We’ll keep an eye on FAST over the next couple of years. Perhaps the coalition can work with California on a bill that protects fast food workers and doesn’t hurt operators and the communities they serve.

At any rate, FAST is down but certainly not yet out.

Image: Johann Walter Bantz on Unsplash

December 26, 2022by David Klemt David Klemt No Comments

Canada’s Single-use Plastics Ban

How Canada’s Single-use Plastics Ban Affects Operators

by David Klemt

With a few exceptions, Canada’s ban on the manufacture, importation, and sale of single-use plastics is now officially in effect.

However, that doesn’t mean restaurant and bar operators need to worry about current inventories just yet. While the Single-use Plastics Prohibition Regulations are in effect, operators have a year to deplete their stocks.

SUPPR is a crucial element of Canada’s overall plan to combat pollution and reach a goal of zero plastic waste by 2030. The single-use plastics ban was announced in June of this year.

“We promised Canadians we would deliver a ban on single-use plastics. Today, that’s exactly what we’ve done,” said Minister of Environment and Climate Change Steven Guilbeault the day SUPPR was announced. “By the end of the year, you won’t be able to manufacture or import these harmful plastics. After that, businesses will begin offering the sustainable solutions Canadians want, whether that’s paper straws or reusable bags. With these new regulations, we’re taking a historic step forward in reducing plastic pollution, and keeping our communities and the places we love clean.

Now, six months later, it’s the law of the land.

What’s Banned?

Essentially, Canadian operators must evaluate everything they use for delivery and takeout or pickup. If any items are single-use plastic, they must be gone by December 2023.

Per SUPPR, the manufacture, importation, and sale of the following is prohibited:

Checkout bags designed to carry purchased goods from a business and typically given to a customer at the retail point of sale.
Cutlery includes:
- knives
- forks
- spoons
- sporks
- chopsticks
Foodservice ware designed for serving or transporting food or beverage that is ready to be consumed, and that:
- contains
  - expanded polystyrene foam
  - extruded polystyrene foam
  - polyvinyl chloride
  - carbon black
  - an oxo-degradable plastic
- are limited to the following items
  - clamshell containers
  - lidded containers
  - boxes
  - cups
  - plates
  - bowls

Ring carriers are flexible and designed to surround beverage containers in order to carry them together.
Stir sticks designed to stir or mix beverages, or to prevent a beverage from spilling from the lid of its container.
Straws include:
- straight drinking straws, and
- flexible straws, which have a corrugated section that allows the straw to bend, packaged with beverage containers (juice boxes and pouches)

For accuracy, the above comes from the Government of Canada website directly, unedited.

What does this mean for Operators?

Again, operators in Canada don’t need to toss their current stock of the above items.

However, Restaurants Canada does recommend that operators contact suppliers and customers if they import, export, or sell prohibited items currently.

The single most important thing for operators to do now is research single-use plastic alternatives. Items need testing as changes will affect F&B items and the guest experience.

Of course, it’s possible an operator’s current supplier already offers alternatives to single-use plastics. That could prove convenient but costs, supply chain reliability, and impact on menu items need careful consideration.

Sustainability and responsible practices are no longer just conversation topics within the industry. As of this week, in Canada, they’re the only way forward.

Image: Volodymyr Hryshchenko on Unsplash

October 21, 2022by David Klemt David Klemt No Comments

Cali Chains Move Quickly to Kill FAST

California Chains Move Quickly to Kill FAST

by David Klemt

If recent reporting is accurate, fast food chains with locations in California are fighting the Fast Food Accountability and Standards Recovery Act.

Several well-known restaurant chains have reportedly already dumped well over $10 million into a ballot drive effort. Among the chains lobbying to kill the bill are In N Out, McDonald’s, Wendy’s, and Chipotle.

In other words, the group of chains aiming to defeat AB-257 in California have very deep pockets. These heavy hitters are reaching deep to contribute millions of dollars to Save Local Restaurants, the coalition responsible for starting the ballot initiative.

And who are the Save Local Restaurants coalition members? The National Restaurant Association (NRA), US Chamber of Commerce (USCC), and International Franchise Association (IFA).

What is AB-257?

The Fast Food Accountability and Standards Recovery Act, also known as the FAST Act, is a California bill. Enacted on September 5 of this year, FAST amends a section of the state’s labor code that relates to food facilities and employment.

Click here to review the bill’s text in its entirety.

To summarize, FAST does the following:

Establishes the Fast Food Council, ten members appointed by the Governor, the Speaker of the Assembly, and the Senate Rules Committee. The council will operate until January 1, 2029.
Defines “the characteristics of a fast food restaurant.”
Gives the Fast Food Council the authority to set “minimum fast food restaurant employment standards, including standards on wages, working conditions, and training.”
Provides the council the power to “issue, amend, and repeal any other rules and regulations, as necessary.”
Allows the formation of a Local Fast Food Council by a county, or a city that has a population of more than 200,000.

It’s that third bullet point that likely stands out the most to chain operators. On January 1, 2023, California’s minimum wage increases to $15.50 an hour. If the Save Local Restaurants ballot initiative fails, the Fast Food Council could boost the minimum wage to $22 per hour right after we all yell, “Happy New Year!”

Proponents say the bill protects the health, safety, and welfare of fast-food workers. Opponents call it radical.

Fighting FAST

According to Save Local Restaurants, it’s not just chains that want to kill FAST:

“The FAST Act is opposed by small and family-owned businesses, minority-rights groups, workers, consumers, your favorite restaurants, taxpayers and community-based organizations,” reads their website.

Among their reasons for attempting to kill the bill are:

a resulting increase in the price of food;
the elimination of thousands of jobs in California;
an increase in the cost of living in the state; and
the millions of dollars the coalition claims the bill will cost California taxpayers annually.

Reportedly, full-service restaurant operators also oppose FAST. The reason is simple: If the Fast Food Council hikes fast-food worker minimum hourly wages significantly, FSRs will struggle to compete. FSR operators will have to hike menu item prices further, a situation that’s growing untenable as consumers balk at paying more at restaurants.

Then, there’s the fact that bills similar to FAST could pass in other states. So, chains are contributing millions to see that the Save Local Restaurants ballot initiative succeeds.

Should the effort be successful, FAST will be included on California’s 2024 ballot. That means it will be suspended until 2024 and be in the hands of the voters.

Image: Tima Miroshnichenko via Pexels