Even before Gov. Gavin Newsom signed the landmark law in September that would raise the minimum wage for fast food workers to $20 an hour starting in April, there were some questions about the so-called Panera exemption.
The law was designed to raise wages and improve working conditions for employees at fast-food restaurant chains, but it contained an oddly specific exception: It would not apply to restaurants that bake and sell bread as a stand-alone item on the market. . menu.
Now, Bloomberg reports that Newsom lobbied behind the scenes for the exemption, which will benefit billionaire Greg Flynn, a campaign donor and business partner who owns two dozen Panera Bread locations in the state.
Flynn runs one of the largest restaurant franchise operations in the world and openly opposed the law, which sets a wage for fast food workers and creates a Fast Food Council that would raise wages in future years and develop standards. labor, health and safety for the covered Restaurants.
Flynn, who also attended the same high school as Newsom, contributed a combined $160,000 to the governor's anti-recall campaign in 2021 and his reelection in 2022. That's a lot of money.
When asked about the bread exemption last year, Newsom dismissed it as “part of the sausage-making” of the policy. On Thursday, amid growing outrage, Newsom's office issued a statement calling Bloomberg's story “absurd” and suggesting Panera is No is exempt from the law because it mixes the dough at an off-site location and only bakes and sells the bread in the restaurant.
Okay, but we're going to need some proof. Because the exclusion for bakeries has been reported on numerous occasions, using Panera as an example of a restaurant that would benefit from the exemption. The governor's office has yet to publicly explain why the bakery's exemption was warranted. AND Assemblyman Chris Holden (D-Pasadena), who introduced the bill, said he had nothing to do with the bread-breaking idea.
Newsom and legislative leaders must explain themselves. This sounds exactly like the kind of legislative shenanigans that undermine public trust. Lawmakers should expect to explain why an exemption is necessary for any new law.
But it is difficult to imagine how this could be justified. How does it make sense that if a restaurant bakes bread for sandwiches, its workers deserve $20 an hour, but if it sells it in loaf form, its workers don't?
If you were thinking, well, why doesn't McDonald's start selling McBaguette in California to avoid the law? The exemption applies only to restaurants operating on-site bakeries on or after September 15, 2023.
Anyway, this is really a half-baked idea. Anyone who works for Panera or another exempt bakery-restaurant chain can easily switch to another restaurant that pays the new minimum wage. This idea is so ramshackle it could only have come about in Sacramento.
