Skinny Pancake owner Benjamin Adler says that if he paid a “livable wage” to employees working at his airport restaurants, he’d have to charge $20 for a sandwich. “No restaurant pays their dishwasher $17.71 an hour,” he tells Seven Days. “It’s not sustainable.”
Adler was reacting Tuesday to an avalanche of outrage prompted by a Burlington Free Press article, which reported that Burlington’s mayor and board of finance had approved the Skinny Pancake’s request for an unusual exemption from the city’s livable wage ordinance. Burlington’s ordinance requires that city employees and contractors receiving taxpayer funds pay workers a “livable” wage — presently $13.94 an hour, or $17.71 an hour if health insurance is not provided — unless they received a hardship exemption.
Adler lobbied for a hardship exemption and city officials approved one because Skinny Pancake says it would lose money on the airport venture otherwise. One reason for the special treatment: The Skinny Pancake and its sister restaurant, the Chubby Muffin, source almost all of their meat, cheese and vegetables from Vermont farmers and food producers. Adler estimates his restaurants spend $400,000 a year purchasing Vermont-grown foods — and will spend an additional $250,000 buying local food for the airport cafes.
The Free Press article also suggested — without saying explicitly — that Mayor Miro Weinberger’s personal relationship with Adler and his brother, Ted, both of whom supported the mayor’s campaign last spring, could have influenced the outcome.
Adler vigorously defended the exemption even as people who helped pass the livable wage ordinance back in 2001 warned that the move set a troubling precedent. Adler argues that the livable wage ordinance itself might need review. In spirit, he says he’s “all for” guaranteeing a livable wage to people working on the taxpayer’s dime. “But in practice, it’s setting the bar so high that even a company like mine can’t get near it. Is that the right bar to have set?” asks Adler, who pays himself “barely more” than livable wage standards. “Or is it too much money?”
Related Stories
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
If $12 – $13 is NOT a liveable wage then the State needs to change their pay grade system for State Employees.
A friend who used to work at the Waterfront Skinny pancake, quit because of bad wages calling it the “skinny paycheck”
I liked the Skinny Pancake food and atmosphere on the water front, and made it a habit to visit the location whenever I was in Burlington, but from the looks of it, it’s just another business looking for handouts from it’s government sponsors. I won’t be patronizing any establishment who thinks that this kind of behaviors is appropriate. Way to ruin a good thing with your greed guys.
Having worked in food service for a decade, I don’t believe for a damn second that restaurants in the area can’t afford to pay better. The average wage for a line cook at a busy church street establishment is only $12/hr. Meanwhile these restaurants take in several thousand dollars daily. Most cooks I know need roommates or a second, possibly third job to cover living expenses in Burlington; mostly due to grossly inflated rents compared to the rest of the state.
i interviewed there one time not long ago…. they were talking about starting wage being 9.50 or 10/hr if I remember properly. Not worth getting out of bed for.
just so you know then, you shouldn’t eat anywhere in burlington, vt then. SP got targeted in the BFP article. there are many businesses and restaurants in burlington that are in the same boat as SP. do you really think all those other burlington restaurants are paying their employees $17.71/hr?
It’s not the mandated $17.71/hr ordinance that’s got me miffed, its that a business used it’s relationship to a member of the government to get preferential consideration over other businesses and then got an exemption from the ordinance due to that relationship. That’s a clear case of political patronage in my opinion, and it shouldn’t be tolerated by the constituents of such politicicans, ever.
What compensation a business gives to its employees is between the parties involved, with either side having the freedom to say “no thank you”. To be frank, it’s none of my business. On the other hand, I generally try not to do business with businesses who are widely known for treating their employee’s poorly.
Mr. Mayor’s much ballyhooed “Fresh Start”: Privatizing the waterfront, patronage
appointments, shooting nonviolent protesters, and now subverting livable
wage laws for business owning campaign donors.
In the article, there’s a couple of paragraphs that state the opposite of what you are saying. Your reply is only an assumption and there is no evidence to support it. True or not, you shouldn’t stop going to SP based on an assumption. For me, at the end of the day, the SP serves great food.
“For his part, Weinberger tells Seven Days that his years-long acquaintance with Adler’s brother, Ted, and the small checks the brothers wrote his campaign had no influence on him voting “yes” on Skinny Pancake’s food service contract and livable wage exemption.”
You want me to believe this I suppose? Do you believe me to be so naive? When *I* do business my first considerations are ALWAYS my friends and family because I know for a fact that costs will be lower and that they will treat me better then some stranger. Why do you expect me to believe that these two fellas are any different?
What did anyone really expect with the ordinance in the first place? Look, it’s all relative… if you pay someone 17-18 bucks an hour, you have to charge more… at some point it becomes ridiculous… like trying to sell a sandwhich for $20.
Burlington and the path that the progressives have put it on are idiotic. No surprises Hoffer was in on the livable wage writing. And, no surprise that Miro has continued with the shady going ons that his predecessors initiated.
Looks like Weinberger and Adler would rather pay the Airport $145 thousand than pay the workers a livable wage. How much does Adler take home?
When I saw the headline I had the knee-jerk liberal response of “What a greedy b……..d.” But after reading the article, it seems sensible. Restaurants have a tiny profit margin. The inventory has a short shelf life and the sales volume is unpredictable. Adler and city officials did the math, and it doesn’t work. A livable wage law, with exemptions subject to detailed review, is progressive pragmatism at its finest.
I truly hope Weinberger is not subordinating the interests of the city to his personal relationships. If it is proven, not just suggested as in this article, I will have some choice words.
“Adler and Weinberger both took issue with the suggestion that Skinny Pancake’s unusual treatment was the result of favoritism. Adler says he simply outbid the other food vendors, pledging to pay the city 24 cents per passenger served, or a guaranteed minimum of $145,000 a year.”
…And there it is, folks: In order to secure the bid that would generate the highest amount of revenue for the City, the City had to grant the contractor an exemption to its livable wage ordinance. All that stuff about local food sourcing or representing Burlington values to visitors is nice, but it’s not what sealed the deal. As Lyle Lovett sang, it’s the “MMMM-o-n-e-y.”
But after all this, I’m not sure I actually *like* the livable wage ordinance. Yes, I want all workers to be able to pay for their life expenses on their income, but the minute our city starts requiring it from its contractors, it sets us up for these types of controversies of perceived hypocrisy.
The solution’s “easy” (note the quotes): Get rid of the livable wage requirement. Explain that it necessarily leads to these kinds of unwinnable situations. Who among us could do this? How about the guy who just successfully convinced two-thirds of Burlington taxpayers to take on higher interest payments for their own good?
Will Skinny Pancake management pledge neutrality on any organizing drive by its workers at any of its location? Will the mayor commit to supporting, or at least respecting, restaurant workers’ right to collectively bargain?
My concerns with this issue are about fairness in a competitive bidding process.
Was the exclusion granted after the bid was awarded, or were Brueggers and
Hudson News afforded the opportunity to base their bids using a lower wage also?
Miro and the finance committee should answer that question, as well as address whether the other vendors at the airport are receiving exclusions. If they are not, there is not a level playing field for airport businesses.
Sourcing local products and claims about profitability are not valid reasons to grant an exclusion from meeting local wage ordinances. Granting exclusions based on
non-statutory and arbitrary criteria gives the appearance of impropriety. If the local wage ordinances are unreasonable, they should be changed.
The total difference of $4-5 per employee per hour between the wages required by ordinance and the wages they seek to pay should not make or break a $1.8 M/year operation, and if they do, the margins are too thin to be attributed to staff costs alone. With good management practices, a consistent quality product, and reliable
service, a $17/hour employee should pay for themselves many times over, particularly at a business that enjoys the competitive advantage of a captive market and a liquor license.
As a business person, I agree. While I don’t necessarily believe liveable wage is the way to solve it, there has to be some recourse for employees. Restaurant work is exceedingly difficult, stressful, and underpaid. If the owners can’t make a go of it, that is their issue and should not be paid for by paying low wages to employees who are working their butts off in a restaurant kitchen.
An Airport franchise is a license to print money. It’s not a free market. In granting this exemption City Hall has only reinforced the image of political patronage, of rigged competitions, favors and influence. It stinks. Think about it the next time you buy a Five dollar muffin at BTV.
Whatever happened to the Federal FAA investigation of the Kiss Administration advertising and putting out bids for Airport Maintance contracts and then NOT awarding to the responsive low bidder and instead giving the work, and awarding the jobs instead, to the City of Burlington Department of Public Works at a higher cost to taxpayers and Airport users? If I remember correctly, DPW didn’t even submit bids on the various projects and were still awarded the contracts under the Kiss regime.
I say boycott them….this is criminal on the part of the mayor as well as the owners.
It’s ironic that they tout their locally sourced ingredients as a way of showing their support for VT farmers yet they can’t show that same support to their own employees by paying a livable wage. They have lost my respect.
Update: Skinny Pancake responds to Livable Wage Ordinance Exemption http://skinnypancake.com/2012/…
Mr. Burns: The plant’s first annual Fourth of July company picnic is this upcoming weekend.
Homer Simpson: Woo-hoo!
Mr. Burns: No, you misunderstand. The picnic is for me. You will all be spending our Day of Independence slaving away at my mansion under the hot summer sun, without pay, water, or gratitude.
Homer Simpson: D’oh!
Mr. Burns: Yes, duh-oh indeed.
Follow-up: Benjy Adler posts a thoughful response. Among other things, he says the Burlington Free Press flat-out got it wrong that Bruegger’s Bagels and Hudson News had offers that included meeting the livable wage requirement. That, in and of itself, is news:
http://skinnypancake.com/2012/…
This political tension would more easily be resolved were we able to trust anyone involved. What we have here is a conversation about how to best extract money from us, and who gets to do it. The vaguest notion that what happens at this government mandated absolute control of the only monopoly source of food (would you blink were it water? air?) of this captive population is going to be anything resembling a fair fucking transaction has apparently long ago blown away in the wind.
OK so here’s my idea for how to help with this supposedly difficult supposedly real tension we have here. With all this talk in the air of $20 sandwiches, why I think I’m going to just go to the kitchen and make a few sandwiches, hitch over to the airport and sell them! Ha. Ha ha.
Good evening: I’ll be responding to each and every comment here tomorrow…but in the meantime, please be sure to see our response to this story posted on our FB page: https://www.facebook.com/pages…
One thing that everyone is forgetting is that the location is in the AIRPORT. It’s not on Church Street or the Waterfront. Ridership is down at the airport and unless you are traveling, you aren’t going to be eating at the SP or any of the other kiosks in the airport. Also BTV isn’t like big hubs with constant traffic. The vast majority of the flights are in the early AM going out and late in the evening coming back. Not alot of traffic at noon or 2 in the afternoon. Also who ever heard of paying a dishwasher $17.00 a hour. That would be a great gig if you could get it!
This same ordinance affects construction services contracts with the City too and also tries to influence what percentage of the contract must be performed by, or subcontracted to, women and other minorities. This ADDS considerable cost to those contracts as well yet no one fusses because it doesn’t result in a $20 sandwich, just the equivalent in over priced and over paid for construction services that are forced on the collective taxpayer rather than a duped individual.
Excellent.
I would like to ask Mr. Weinberger, Hoffer, the finance committee etal if they pay their nanny, lawn mower, newspaper delivery, pizza delivery baby sitter etc $17.71 an hour or does that just apply when spending my money?
Deb,
hope I can clarify your confusion here: Brueggers, Hudson & Skinny all offered two versions of the bid…one with the LWO, one without. When we were selected, we were told THE LWO WOULD NOT APPLY (June). In September, the City Attorney changed their minds AND SAID THE LWO WOULD APPLY. At that time, we requested the exemption. The City could have declined and selected the next best bidder, who could have moved forward, asked for an exemption, or decided to NOT move forward. Nobody guaranteed they would pay the exemption if selected.
Is the Livable Wage Ordinance unreasonable? Well, at $17.72/hr for a first day starting employee, no restaurant can come close to affording it, not even City Market. BUT! It does make sense for City employees and contractors that receive $ from the City…the theory being the city will pay for i up from or in social services on the back end…up front is cheaper & more empowering. They say the exception proves the rule. Since a restaurant is subject to the LWO in this situation and it clearly would not work, the exemption was used…clearly, we think it was used rightfully.
$4-$5/hr per employee WILL break a $1.8M operation when combined with 10% of revenues getting paid to the Airport vs 4% in our current leases. All of our numbers are on public record…the application’s pro forma projections, the math in our request for an exemption. I would gladly go over these numbers in person with you, but put simply: hourly labor is projected at 25% of sales. If we increase that labor by 50% (from $11.48/hr to $17.72), it becomes 37.5% of sales. With the LWO, we would split the cost beyond 25% with the City, meaning we would be responsible for the first 6.25% of the sales (ie our labor goes up to 31.25%. Payroll taxes are 5% of sales or 20% of payroll…so on that 6.25%, we then pay an additional 1.25% of sales. This is back of envelope, the actual application for exemption is slightly different. But you can see that the entire profit margin is eroded…and frankly, I don’t think we’re going to hit our projections anyway. We cannot borrow nearly $1M and then lose money on every transaction.
If you have any more questions or comments, please let me know. I am happily engaging in this important conversation for our community.
-Benjy
Raincntry: I’m sorry you feel that way. VT farmers we work with can’t pay $17.72/hr for every employee either. No restaurant in Burlington or beyond can afford that either. We are as aggressively socially responsible as possible, but we need to balance various demands…local food, good wages, surviving as a business. We pay very competitively and offer MANY unusual benefits (ex: paid vacation for hourly employees, a guarantee for tipped employees so they don’t get minimum wage on a slow night, a short term zero interest loan program, a free meal with each shift and 50% off meals when not working).
There is alot of misinformation out there about this story. We clarify alot of it, posted on our FB page…please take a look: https://www.facebook.com/pages…
If you have any additional thoughts or questions, PLEASE…our entire existence is based on being socially responsible. Its a challenging balancing act…we want to engage in conversation about it.
Sincerely,
-Benjy Adler
Harold,
there was no patronage appointment here. Our application for the airport operation is public record. Look at it, compare it to the competition. We offered a overwhelmingly more local product (a goal of the RFP), and tens of thousands more in investment to the airport and annual rent payments (other goals of the RFP).
Regarding ‘business owning campaign donors’: I donated $25. Do you think that is enough to buy subversive actions that generate this kind of political heat? Our application for the LWO is public record. Even prominent Progressives have now come out in support of it. The exemption exists for a reason…it is part of the rules because the authors recognized that exceptional situations like this would arise.
I am happy to engage you further on this conversation, Harold. I ask respectfully that you do not throw our business under the bus of corruption until you’ve reviewed the situation more fully.
-Benjy
Patrick:
I welcome you to audit our compensation and the way we treat our employees and then compare it to other businesses around. Not only do we pay better than most restaurants in the area, we also
have some very unique benefits for our employees including but not
limited to: paid vacation for hourly employees, a guarantee for tipped
employees so they don’t get minimum wage on a slow night, a short term zero interest loan program, a free meal with each shift and 50% off meals when not working. We have also been steadily improving on our compensation
to employees over the years as our business has matured.
We’re 100% open book. Rather than taking one anecdotal comment from a single friend, please compare our full payroll and compensation to that of other restaurants.
Thank you.
-Benjy
Zenasprime & Guest: you will chose to believe that which you want, but a large body of evidence is on our side. My donation to Miro’s campaign was $25…I first met him on the campaign trail. The article refers to a “his years-long acquaintance with Adler’s brother, Ted.” This doesn’t make them close pals. How many people do you know that would expose themselves to this type of political flack for an ‘acquaintance’
Both our application for the lease and our exemption request are on public record. Please look at them. We clearly beat the competition in the original request. We clearly made our case for the exemption. I don’t know a single person on the Finance board, who supported it unanimously.
Please consider where your skepticism is coming from…look at our history as a business. Please take a look at our response to this media story…there is a lot of misconceptions out there: https://www.facebook.com/pages….
-Benjy
You look like a douchebag trying to defend this. Dude, here’s all the evidence I need: You stand to make a shit ton of money from placement at the airport, you wouldn’t want the gig otherwise. Your definitively not taking the gig as a charity to the city of Burlington or to loose money, right? This is a dream gig and you got it, with special exemptions, because of your relationship with the mayor, regardless of how “minimal” it might look on the surface. Only an idiot would believe that that this isn’t political patronage at the community’s expense, which shouldn’t be tolerated. Stop trying to pretend everyone is an idiot. Anyone with a brain can read between the lines and know what is really happening.
I mean who wouldn’t want to open up a shop where they have a captured audience that can be charged over the top prices for your product? I’m not a fan of this ordinance, but really, why would you want the gig at all unless it was because you knew you were going to make out like a bandit? You can’t share the wealth and reward your staff accordingly if so? WTF? If you couldn’t turn a profit why apply? So I call bullshit.
Personally, if I was caught performing such shenanigans, I’d man up, do the right thing and not take the deal. I’d want my customers to know that I was an honest businessman with principles that I wouldn’t sacrifice regardless of the potential profits. I certainly wouldn’t try to weasel my way through it as if everyone was a chump because I was some kind of psychopath who couldn’t care less about abusing the situation for my own benefit.
If the LWO would break the bank, why even get involved? Why is this spot at the airport so important that you would go through the hassle of applying and getting the exemption… unless, perhaps, you had stacked deck to play with from the start?
Well said.
How about if we just get rid of all the cushy government contracts instead? Why does the airport need a Skinny Pancake, which will charge you out the nose for a crepe? Can people not eat breakfast at the restaurant BEFORE they go to the airport? I don’t really see what the “public good” of this entire scenario is about. Airports are for people to board airplanes, not shop at the mall and dine out.
Zenasprime:
First off, I’ve got dozens of compliments for our participation in this discourse.
Second, ‘douchebag’ and other cuss-words don’t help you look good yourself.
Third: we do not stand to ‘make a shit ton of money’ and actually have a significant risk of NOT making money…but we are in it for a mission, so that’s ok. I would GLADLY go over the numbers with you. Under no circumstances do we ‘make out like a bandit.’ Why? Because 10% of sales go to the airport (more than 2x what we currently pay) and we buy a majority of our food locally.
All the numbers are on the table. All of your accusations don’t look at numbers but make wild assumptions about me and my motives. Clearly you haven’t looked at the numbers or engaged in our history as a socially responsible business.
Based on all this, I don’t expect to persuade you. But we are ‘manning up’ by talking about it head on instead of ducking for cover. We’ve got the 15 year contract with the exemption…so why am I talking to Progressive leaders and the public forum so intensely? You could say its all about me & my greed…or perhaps I’m not pure evil and actually have good intentions…
Meet me in person. Lets go over the numbers. We have nothing to hide.
-Benjy
Because if he doesn’t have to pay the LWO, the airport operations add revenue and profit to his business? As he suggested, without the LWO exemption he wouldn’t open a money-losing site (nor would any bank or lending institution provide him the capital to do so).
That’s the beauty of a generally free market; business charge customers what customers are willing to pay, pay their employees what they can afford to pay them, and employees can either accept that compensation or work somewhere else. No one is being forced into business with any other party.
Plenty of businesses take in a lot of gross revenue with razor thin margins; for businesses like those, including many restaurants, a thirty or forty percent increase in wage costs would easily and instantly make them non-viable. It’s not clear to me how any business person could fail to understand that, but it’s easy to model – if you are an employer, take your total payroll and multiply it by 1.4. Take the difference between that and your current payroll and subtract that from your total profit, and see if you end up with a positive number. If you are Bill Gates or Tim Cook, you will. Otherwise, its doubtful.
No matter how many times you say “only an idiot”, the fact remains that you are misunderstanding what happened and ignoring most of the actual, pertinent facts. Being rude doesn’t make you right, although as we all know it’s easy to be a jackass on the Internet when you don’t go by your real name.
Working in a restaurant is typically low skill labor; no surprise it doesn’t pay Wall Street wages. If you have the skills or education to make more money, good for you and go for it. For people who don’t the $13 and change average wage for a Skinny Pancake employee isn’t all that bad, especially around here.
I don’t need to look good, I’m not the one taking cushy government contracts. What I need to do is attract attention to a situation that, in my opinion, is bad mojo for the public good. If hyperbole and cussing get people talking, it’s done it’s job.
What mission? What exactly are you hoping to achieve by getting this gig at the airport? Charging people out the wazoo for something they could get cheaper at your restaurant outside the airport? Please don’t try to convince me with the “local suppliers” nonsense. You could just as easily provide folks leaving Burlington via air travel with a discount on their way out of the city if you wanted to “promote” your business practices. Your location is within easy walking distance of two major hotel chains and at the heart of the tourist area. There’s no reason why you would need to take a gig that had the potential to loose money just so you could promote “local suppliers”.
To highlight ridiculousness of this all I’m going to repeat something I said elsewhere in this forum… Why does the airport need a Skinny Pancake, which will charge you out the nose for a crepe? Can people not eat breakfast at the restaurant BEFORE they go to the airport? I don’t really see what the “public good” of this entire scenario is about. Airports are for people to board airplanes, not shop at the mall and dine out.
Airport shops make their money by over charging for their goods. They make money, hand over fist, because of the artificial monopoly granted by the government on such sites. Gigs such as these are fought over with much gusto just for this reason. It is also why they are often awarded to businesses who have the right connections to the government officials responsible for choosing who gets the contracts.
If you are an honest businessman, you wouldn’t want anything to do with such a dirty arrangement.
The city shouldn’t be opening shops in an airport in the first place. Instead of wasting taxpayer money on building infrastructure to support private businesses, travelers can easily go out to eat prior to arriving at the airport. The only reason to build such infrastructure at the airport is so that government officials can provide their business buddies with opportunities to over charge the public on goods they could easily obtain prior to arriving at the airport.
“No matter how many times you say “only an idiot””
I only said it once. Claiming he has “the numbers” to support his claim that he isn’t going to be making any money from this gig is just absurd. Claiming he’s doing it to promote his business’ “mission”, whatever that is, is equally absurd. He hasn’t stayed in business for 15 years by making poor business decision simply because he believes in his business practices.
Ultimately this is a chance to get in on “free money” from “trapped travelers” at the airport. Anyone with an ounce of integrity wouldn’t get involved in such an enterprise, especially if were able to happen due to special circumstances (i.e. my brother is friends with the mayor).
Acquaintances? Do acquaintances provide such ringing endorsements?
http://threadvt.com/?p=1173
After SP was awarded the contract, there was no way for the other groups to request an exemption because YOU ALREADY HAD THE CONTRACT. The only way that could have happened is if bids were re-opened in September, and the city was not going to violate a contract that had already been awarded.
Don’t tout free market bullshit when the topic of the debate is a government granted monopoly contract awarded to the business whose owner’s brother just happened to be friends with the mayor partially responsible for choosing who got the gig. I mean, really dude! You give libertarians a bad name which you pull this kind of bullshit.
Again, if you would like to look at the numbers with me, we are 100% open book. The reality is that this is NOT a ‘cushy’ contract…it is actually a big risk…bigger than many other places we could try to open because of the cost of renovating behind TSA lines and the cost of the lease (10% of sales with a guarantee at ~$150k+/yr). The risk is real. Not all shops at airports make $ hand over fist and the reason they charge som much is because industry standard is 10% of sales for rent…ALOT MORE than elsewhere.
Unless you’re willing to look at the actual numbers–all available publicly–I can’t find, and don’t know how others could, validity in your argument…and am done trying. You are welcome to have the last word as I will not be responding to you here.
What good are numbers that you’ve made up when it’s not even the numbers that are the issue. The whole LWO issue is completely irrelevant and could more easily be legislated out of existence at some point in the future. Meanwhile, that you got granted a gig at a location where a government mandated monopoly exists for your business to take advantage of, and that you got the gig by the graces of your personal relationship with the mayor is what’s untrustworthy in this situation. Why don’t you actually address that?
I find it hilarious that people would down rank this comment. As if it’s a good thing to waste taxpayer money on infrastructure that’s unnecessary and really only beneficial to private businesses. Awesome!
Sure, here ya go: ‘absurd’ is the suggestion that my personal relationship with the mayor got us this gig. I met him during the campaign and donated $25 to his campaign. He has known my brother as an ‘acquaintance’ for a few years…they aren’t close or chummy. You won’t believe that, I know.
But the PROOF that this wasn’t due to a ‘chummy’ deal is the application itself compared to the other applications. They are on public record…go look at them. We clearly, undeniably beat the competition. We strongly responded to their request for local food, we offered the most in investment in the space & the most in annual rent payments. On all levels, we clearly beat them.
I keep pointing to real documents, you keep throwing out unfounded accusations. I said I’d stop responding, pardon me for failing to have self control in that regard…I think, I hope, I’m done…
Gee I wonder who would down vote my comment? Perhaps the guys with everything to gain from having government sponsored business infrastructure and monopolies. Awesomely hilarious.
John…first off, that’s my brother quoted who does not work for or with the Skinny, not me. Second, yes acquaintances do provide ringing endorsements. Third, the applications speak for themselves. They are on public record. It is very evident that we put together the strongest application. LOOK AT THEM.
Finally: you are exactly mistaken…we did not have the contract when we asked for the exemption. We had the opportunity to sign a contract at that point. In other words, we were awarded the right to negotiate a lease with the City based on our proposal. That awarding did not include a guarantee that we would actually get the contract. We asked for the exemption. If the City had turned it down, we could have chosen to pass on the contract and they could have taken the next best proposal. The City Finance Board unanimously approved it across party lines because our request makes sense. Its public record…LOOK AT IT BEFORE DRAWING SUCH HARSH, UNSUBSTANTIATED CONCLUSIONS.
LOVE,
-Benjy
The document is worthless when the mayor could easily tell your brother that if you bid below this figure you would get the gig. Numbers are irrelevant and everything is legitimate where the paperwork is concerned. Just saying. That’s why any legitimately honest businessman wouldn’t touch such a gig to begin with. It’s just dirty business, though and through.
Trust me, I want to believe you. I loved your establishment and the food was great but what looks like dirty business deals are most likely dirty business deals in my book. Maybe it’s because I come from a state where dirty business is the norm, but I don’t fall for this kind of shenaniganry. It’s just too obvious from my perspective.
So you were offered the right to negotiate, including a negotiation of LWO? The other bidders were not offered that right, correct? And therefore were not able to request an exemption?
Frankly, your comments are either dishonest or reflect a gross misunderstanding of the facts, or both. You make all these ugly allegations on the basis of zero evidence, make assumptions about business despite your obvious lack of insight and experience in the field, and are free with character assassination from your anonymously self-righteous perch. Maybe, just maybe, that’s why people are voting down your comments.
Whatever, the deal with the devil is done. SP will get to over charge travelers for crepes in exchange for the good will of some of it’s past customers. This all smells very fishy to me but what do I know. Perhaps this really is just a big misunderstanding and Benjy and crew are really just trying to do a good job at providing great tasting crepes for people. Unfortunately, in our ever more corrupt local, state, and federal governments, this was a bad move for Skinny Pancake in my opinion. I’ll just take my business elsewhere. Good luck!
In one comment you say “People should just eat at home or at a restaurant before going to the airport!” and in another you complain that Skinny Pancake has a sweetheart monopoly contract. A contract for providing services on government property is perfectly within the ambit of American-style free market. The LWO is not.
You complain about how he treats his employees (despite evidence that he treats them well), and denigrate his business practices (despite evidence that he is perfectly responsible and ethical), but the reality is pretty simple – everyone in all sides of the deal has the unfettered right to vote with their feet.
I’m hardly anonymous. I quick google search will provide you with much information. Yes I tend to get “passionate” when I debate. Feel free to continue your public relations campaign. You’ve already lost the loyalty of this patron by trying to smooth this issue over with irrelevant arguments.
Relax, Benjy. First rule of social media reputational defense is stay calm, second rule is don’t over-engage with every critic on every point. Let others do some of the heavy lifting.
Yes, I kind of wasn’t feeling the love!
The exemption is built into the law, so everyone has the right to request it. The bidding process, from what I’ve read, solicited LWO and non-LWO bids on the City’s assumption that the LWO didn’t apply. When it turned out that it did apply, before signing any agreements the SP requested the exemption (as a different winning bidder, where winning means getting first pass at a contract, could have done). All of the bids were predicated on the same set of facts and circumstances.
I said that they could easily eat at the restaurant on their way to the airport, which is practically within walking distance of the airport and practically next door to two major hotel chains in the heart of the tourist district. I’d hardly call that a complaint. I know that on my last visit to Burlington, that’s exactly what we did before leaving.
I’d hardly call a government grated monopoly contract a red blooded American “free market” arrangement. I also stated that I wasn’t in favor of the LWO. I think it’s asinine. I also stated that “What compensation a business gives to its employees is between the parties involved, with either side having the freedom to say “no thank you”. To be frank, it’s none of my business.” so if anyone is misunderstanding or misconstruing comments it might be you.
I can see you’re not one to let facts get in the way of a good story, but just for my own peace of mind I’ll correct you anyway – I have no stake in Skinny Pancake, don’t know the Adlers or anyone else connected to either the business or city government, etc. So *I* haven’t lost your patronage, nor do I have any self-interest in a “public relations campaign.”
Sorry, exchange “you” with the “Skinny Pancake”. Really, your grasping at straws here to discredit my opinion. Why not address that actual issue?
Thanks, Nate. Good points.
Additionally, the city government shouldn’t be building business infrastructure in a true Laissez-faire economic environment. Rather, business should have the freedom to individually compete for resources and infrastructure around the airport area, free from government interference, to attract business with success or failure a measure of their own merits rather then as the decision of some bureaucrat.
A “true laissez-faire” environment is theoretical; it doesn’t exist anywhere and never has in modern civilization. And while you wouldn’t see business infrastructure, you also wouldn’t see an airport, or probably roads to get to the airport, etc.
In any case, you seem to have stripped your grounds for complaint down to what you believe was a corrupt conspiracy between the Adlers and the Weinbergers to line their pockets at public expense. Since there isn’t a single shred of evidence anywhere to support that, and plenty suggesting that didn’t happen, I guess we’re done here. At least until your muckraking turns up fresh evidence of collusion.
Then don’t talk about “free markets” like you are reading from the bible. There is no “free market” as you have made clear for me. See what I did there? :p
At any rate, if you don’t want to wake up with fleas, don’t sleep with dogs. If you want to be a “free market libertarian” don’t got defending business deals made with the government under questionable circumstances.
more leftovers from ordinances developed under Progressive rule. Time to revisit all policies developed under the Kissers and Clavelles progressive rule, and Bernie too.
What I said was “American-style free-market.” See what I did there?
Yes, all the bidders have the right to request exemption, but none did so in the initial June round because ALL parties submitted both LWO and non-LWO bids. Then, SP was awarded the bid, which provided them with the right to request an exemption. The others were not, since they were not winning bidders. Is that not accurate? Am I missing something?
Unfortunately, there is no distinction for an “American-style” free market in the general consensus. Nice try through. 😉
Most passengers arrive at the airport 1-2 hours before their flight departs, in case of delays in check-in or screening. Usually, they have time to spare after clearing security and while waiting for their flights. I would have liked nothing more than to have crepes and mimosas at Skinny Pancake, with my wife, at the start of our honeymoon flying out of BTV. Instead we had cold food from the stand. Let’s not forget people who transfer from the Greyhound bus to an airplane flight too. Are they expected to walk to a restaurant?
If you are in such a good position to eat before arriving at the airport, you are free to do so. Please tell the rest of us which restaurant pays it’s workers so well. I might have to start moonlighting there.
Mostly unnecessary, especially for such a small airport like Burlington’s. I bet, if you knew that once you got to the airport, there wouldn’t be a way to eat again until you landed, you would plan accordingly. In fact, I’ll go so far as to suggest that such a senario might be more beneficial for the establishments outside of the airport as folks looking for meals before they leave would probably visit those establishments in place of the over priced establishments that will now exist.
Hell, all the businesses who would normally be serving those customers on the outside should be pissed that the government has taken their business away by making available food services on the inside. And be doubly pissed that some beauracrat made the decision against their best interest.
Well you can call it Keynesian or whatever you want, luckily this isn’t an econ seminar! Boils down to, it’s an approximate free market solution in an approximate free market economy, to the extent possible on government property. Competitive bidding, open records, etc. etc. etc.
An appropriate solution would be that no facilities be made available by the government and that people who are looking for food before taking a flight, do so outside of the airport complex.
I guess that’s fair; the thrust of your comment seemed to be to suggest that they weren’t negotiating on equal footing, but they were. SP just moved on to the next part of the process because it had the best bids in the first stage; the others would have no basis to request an exemption if they couldn’t anticipate that they would win the contract.
As Adler has said, even the granting of the exemption wasn’t a guarantee. The city still had the right to refuse the non-LWO bid or renegotiate the terms in some other way, but they chose to proceed on the basis of the non-LWO terms. It would be a fair assumption at that part of the negotiation, I think, that an exemption granted to SP was within reach for the other bidders; even so, the city moved forward with SP, since they had non-LWO terms from all three bidders already in hand.
Stop playing with yourself in public. It’s disgusting.
What do you have against restaurants in an airport? People who want to eat in an airport are willing to pay a premium, which is partly passed on to the airport and more than makkes up for the cost to the airport of allowing the vendors. People get bumped from flights and flights can be delayed or cancelled. People get stranded in airports for lots of reasons. At this point I’m here out of sheer intellectual curiousity wondering what motivates your anger at this arrangement. Who are you trying to better in the exceedingly unlikely event that airports cease to allow concessions?
In a big city like NYC or Philly this might make sense, but in Burlington, the airport is within walking distance of most of the city. There’s no need for taxpayers money to be wasted on infrastructure that is unnecessary when there are a host of eateries that would no doubt enjoy the business.
I get it now. You haven’t actually been to Burlington International Airport. It’s not even in Burlington city limits, and it’s about five miles from downtown Burlington. For anyone who wants to walk three miles in whatever weather, with no sidewalk, they can eat at Als French Fry’s (sic) or one of the restaurants at Tafts Corners, then hurry back on a full stomach to clear security again and board the plane.
Where is the taxpayer’s money being wasted? The airport collects leasing fees, which not only pay for the additional cost of accommodating vendors but have a positive net effect on the airport’s earnings, providing money towards maintenance of the terminal and runways.
Finally, the economy of Vermont in general, and Burlington in particular, benefits when people visit for business or tourism. Saying “You can eat before you get to the airport” isn’t exactly welcoming.
I say those of us who support Skinny Pancake should go out of our way to eat there now.
It’s about 3.8 miles from Skinny Pancake to the airport and yes that is walkable for folks who don’t live and die by the cult of the automobile. It’s less then a 5 minute ride by bicycle. It’s not technically within the city limits (most airport aren’t by the way) but Burlington isn’t really that large of a city either. You can walk from one end to the other in less then 30 minutes.
I don’t generally eat at airports because the food is over priced and often less then appealing. It’s hardly welcoming to charge them twice as much for a sandwich they could get cheaper five minutes before they enter or after they leave the airport.
You obviously don’t visit airports around the country that much, most of which are dozen or more miles away from the actual city.
3.8 miles is less than a five minute ride by bicycle? And walkable for senior citizens, people with injuries or disabilities, and in February when my flight is delayed because of high winds?
Whose interests are you advocating? I don’t see anybody benefiting from kicking concessions out of the airport, besides die-hard libertarians who will sleep better at night.
I’m not advocating everyone walk, I’m simply making a comparison. You’ve got it good there in Burlington with the Airport a short drive from anywhere in town. In big cities the airports are located many miles away down busy, huge, often traffic jammed highways. There are no easy to get to, by any means of locomotion, eateries except those inside the airport. This is why they are able to get away with such insane pricing structures because they know they have people trapped there. It’s shady and they know it.
Burlington, on the other hand, has no reason to emulate these other metropolitan airports other then as patronages to political favorites. And if it wasn’t for the insidiousness of the TSA keeping people from passing freely through the airport, folks probably wouldn’t stand for such high prices. They would check in, figure out their flight departure time, then head out for some grub at a nearby restaurant, who would no doubt make out like bandits for having the business acumen for locating themselves near such a crossroads of travel.
And yes, as an avid bike rider I can tell you honestly that it doesn’t take long to travel 3.8 miles when you are actually trying to get somewhere.
Um, you really are being an idiot about this.
Hey, everybody: Zenasprime says, eat before you arrive at the airport, or tough shit to you.
Jeezus.
5 minutes to go 3.8 miles is about 45.6 miles per hour. You’ve exaggerated, admit it.
So if they are inside the airport and they charge extra, because they have high leasing costs and because they can, it’s shady. If they are outside the airport and they charge extra because they can, it’s business acumen? Do you think that restaurants with the business acumen to locate themselves near such a crossroads of travel wouldn’t raise their prices?
I’m sorry, 12 minutes… The point is that it’s really damn close to the center of town.
Whatever… enjoy wasting your taxes so your elected official’s buddies can get awesome gigs for their business while you toil away in their dust as they pass you by.
Why do you think the leasing costs are so high? How can you charge people high prices if they aren’t locked in to your establishment and hungry? You really don’t understand how small Burlington is compared to the rest of the worlds metro areas do you?
Guys, if you’re going to turn this into a pissing contest based on demonstrably-untrue facts and/or schoolyard namecalling, y’all can hop on your rocket-powered bikes and take it somewhere else. There’s been a lot of quality discussion in this comment thread and I won’t let it get buried under nonsense.
I think we’re done here. I hope for your sake that you can some day enjoy delicious crepes without being tormented by the political implications of airport concessions.
Well it won’t be at the airport, that’s for sure. I’ll save my money and make em myself.
Benjy,
Hi there. Hope this finds you well in spite of the #crepegate PR nightmare. That said, let’s not needlessly cast aspersions (that I am “throwing your business under the bus”). My critique was fact based and focused policy stances on a certain policy maker, not you. The patronage appointment comment was directed at two different ethically problematic Miro appointments, not you. The specious conflation of an adversarial stance between any BTV friends and neighbors critical of the controversial policy stance undermining Burlington Livable Wage law by the Weinberger administration, with criticisms of a specific crepe shop or crepe shop owner doesn’t serve to advance this conversation constructively. Clearly the RFP clearly states ‘Also, the contractor on this work will be required to comply with the Equal Employment requirements of the City of Burlington and provisions of the City’s Livable Wage Ordinance.’ Ultimately this is much larger than you or Skinny Pancake. This RFP process could pose huge collateral consequences for our local food system: that we have to approach the question of livable wages and local, organic sourcing as mutually exclusive; or that business owners couldn’t be transformative figures, turning to co-operative business models to cut through this
unnecessary gordian knot of internecine 802 consternation and teeth nashing. Then there is the rather dangerous policy precedent Miro has established: that businesses contracting with the City could now appeal any of the City’s environmental, labor, sexual orientation or gender expression ordinances if they are detrimental to a businesses profit margins. In many folks opinions it would be tragic if, as an ancillary affect of this RFP process, the largely low income female school staffs of the Sustainability Academy, the Integrated Arts Academy and Burlington Schools writ large lost their livable wages, plunging them back down into poverty wages, and thereby problematizing their families’ “food security” and opportunity to hopefully join the fortunate who currently get to eat locally and organically. Obviously, this goes for employees of businesses contracting with the City too.
By all accounts you’re a nice guy. Here’s hoping you become that transformative figure, and turn to a co-operative business model which sets a food justice precedent for the local ag movement, and you go on to write a NYT bestseller about it, do speaking tours, at college campuses and foodie conferences and pull down a sweet salary and more importantly leading access to the local food system for forward. Even for the folks making the crepes.
Best,
Harold
Hi Benjy –
Thanks for responding, I appreciate that you’ve taken the time to address my concerns.
One of the things I value highly is ethics in business, and a level playing field for all those who wish to compete. My experience with bidding government contracts is that the process and parameters are defined so stringently that a level playing field is assured.
My concern is not with you personally or your business; in fact, I sympathize with you about the negative publicity you have had to deal
with because of what appears to be a sloppy process conducted by the city. The gray areas which kept the bidders guessing are exactly the weaknesses that more corrupt governments and private entities exploit in order to unfairly treat competition. I believe fair competition is paramount in creating a vibrant economy.
Regarding the livable wage ordinance, inconsistent application
of this or similar ordinances is a second ingredient that can create a business environment that is ripe for exploitation. If it isn’t working, scrap it, but don’t apply it inconsistently and then allow exclusions based on undefined factors.
The fact that you and others were kept guessing about the requirements
of the bid throughout the process is disappointing. I expected more from the new administration; I expect them to hold themselves to the highest standards. They should have been savvy enough to anticipate this and guard against it.
You and I could debate profitability and numbers endlessly; squeezing
more profit out of an operation for the purpose of rewarding the workers who made it happen is both a challenge and a sense of pride to me (the value of a well-paid workforce and low employee turnover is entirely undervalued in business today). But that really isn’t paramount to my concern, just a bit of a challenge thrown out indulgently on my part. As much as I love business competition, my heart has always gone out to hardworking people who work 40 hours a week faithfully and live only marginal existences. That is not a comment on your business, it is a universal issue and causing a divide in this country that must be addressed.
Thanks again for your reply,
Deb
Harold,
first, my apologies for the ‘throw the biz under the bus’ comment. Been trying to keep my cool and stay above that fray.
Second, your vocabulary is huge and I enjoyed your comment.
The irony is that we chose to get into the airport effort to be just that transformative figure you reference…bringing local food to the airport en masse unto itself really is a remarkable feat. Doing that & paying the Livable Wage Ordinance of $17.72/hr for a starting dishwasher on up looks like magic from the numbers I have. THAT SAID, I am intrigued to learn more about City Market’s progress to hit a variation on the LWO and looking into it…for real.
I ABSOLUTELY now understand the dangerous precedent of the slippery slope of using the exemption. I ABSOLUTELY DID NOT get that when we applied. Frankly, it didn’t seem like that big a deal. We just made our case and it was accepted. In trading notes with several Progressives in the past 48 hours, I have seen a move on their part towards validating our exemption and the idea of an exemption (ex: Shay Totten) but also alot of disappointment that the process was not vetted by the City more thoroughly…which isn’t really on me. The City definitely stood to get alot more $ if we didn’t pay the LWO and get an authentic vendor with a deep, proven commitment to sourcing food locally.
You observe that “the RFP clearly states ‘Also, the contractor on this work will be required to comply with the Equal Employment requirements of the City of Burlington and provisions of the City’s Livable Wage Ordinance.’ Please note: The exemption is built into
the law, so everyone has the right to request it if given the opportunity…which we had and did.
I can see that “this RFP process could pose huge collateral consequences for our local food system: that we have to approach the question of livable wages and local, organic sourcing as mutually exclusive.” As a deeply committed participant in the local food movement, this is a concern. That said, from another angle, this actually brings to light an important conversation: the reality is participants in the local food movement…from farmers to non-profit employees to restaurant workers…are mostly far from this LWO standard. What does that mean? Is there in an inseparable divide between the cost of living and the cost of doing business? Could there be a lower rate looked at in certain circumstances? As a leader in a business that defines itself by its social responsibility, I can tell you that if there was an attainable goal that I could rally towards, I’d set my sites on it…but I don’t believe that’s $17.72/hr on day one. To that end, a critical piece here FOR A BIZ LIKE MINE is that the policy needs to apply after an employee has been with us for a year…that’s the way City Market has it structured…
Hope I helped here in contributing to the public discourse…
-Benjy
You got your way. Stop trying to sugar coat it. The livable wage does not apply to other restaurants or farms. It does, however, apply to the airport. You decided to side step it and it has rightfully angered many people. This shouldn’t matter as your clientele at this point is wealthy people passing through the Burlington airport.
You can pay what you want at your restaurant and people have the choice to work there or not. I’ve heard the same comment about your pay scale but to be fair, the pay scale all over Vermont for all level of jobs is low. However, loaning money and providing discounts (on which I’m guessing you still make a profit) do not help pay bills and should not be factored in as compensation. I’ve also heard that you are a trust funder who really doesn’t know the perils of trying to survive on a low paying job. I guess we take what we hear with a grain of salt.
What gets me here is that the owner has taken it upon himself to turn these boards into his own personal forum for trying to win back popularity. It reeks of arrogance and selfishness in how he wants the last word on every point. You’ve made your points through your actions and have angered some people. Take what comes with that.
2 facts here are all that need to be known end this conversation. 1) “Zenasprime’s first comment in this ludicrous thread was that “governement shouldn’t be wasting taxpayer money building infrastructure.” The inconvenient fact is that the Skinny Pancake is spending all of the money to build the infrastructure and the Skinny Pancake is paying the city 10% of the sales for the privilege. Not only is the city not spending any money, it’s making much more than double and getting a significant investment into its space. 2) This was what is called an “RFP Process–“Request For Proposal.” It was an open process, which anybody could apply for and several did, with clear deadlines, deliverables, standards, and documented protections against exactly the kind of thing that you are railing against. All proposals were due the same day. They stated exactly how they would evaluate the proposal: first and foremost, the guaranteed amount of money that would be paid to the city. Second, the quality of the food offering, and commitment to local Vermont products. All businesses had to pay 10% of sales. So whoever projected the most sales AND GUARANTEED THEM won. In order to prove that you could make your guarantee, the applicant had to show their numbers. I personally read 2 PHD theses on airport concessions (yes people get their PHD in that) and a 220 page report from the FAA on “in terminal concessions” and used those dozens of hours of research, with footnotes, to justify our projections. Nobody knew what anybody else was bidding. The mayor isn’t friends with Brueggers and Dunkin Donuts so even if your conspiracy theory holds true about us, he couldn’t know what they were bidding and couldn’t know what to tell us to bid. He certainly couldn’t have known all of the trends in in-terminal concessions to justify the difference between spend per enplament if pre-security vs. post security either. He couldnt’ have put together the 75 page proposal with pro-formas of specific numbers and footnoted examples. I mean, he’s the Mayor, he’s busy. You have to actually research to put together a proposal like we di. We did, and we did a good job of it, we projected aggressively, we suggested the best and most detailed idea, we spent thousands of dollars on renderings and architects to show that, and we won the contract. The facts of what I have just written are indisputable and on the public record, which you could see if you took the time to check for yourself. If you think the mayor could have given all of that to us just because he was an acquaintance of my brother, then you are truly unconvinceable. Fortunately, anybody unfortunate enough to have read this thread all the way to this point most likely is not. Look, I hate corruption too, so does everybody. But just because it is bad doesn’t mean that people are automatically guilty of it.
I look forward to my next use of the Burlington Airport. So I can finally get some good food if I’m hungry — at the Skinny Pancake.
The uninformed, hateful, self-righteousness of the SP-haters on this board is unbelieveable, and a little scary. And, no, I don’t know and have never met the Skinny Pancake people, or anyone in the Mayor’s office, or anyone at the airport.
But that’s not all! I heard his cousin’s sister’s grandmother’s roommate’s stepson from another marriage also had a non-deciding vote on the panel! Conspiracy and corruption abound!
You may be doing better than Nate though, doofus. You’re only giving yourself a bad name.
Do you have any idea how the bidding process works? It’s no more government granted than any other location requiring 800 permits and payoffs. You think you can just go pay cash for a property on 2A and throw up whatever the hell you feel like there? Trust me, you are only harming your cause- your comment vote record speaks for itself.
Even in a bidding process, the government grants the contract to the “winner” of the bid. There’s noting “free market” about that process, even if it’s not corrupted by favoritism. I’m not really sure what you are talking about.
And how the hell would you know what my voting record is. o.0
Like I said earlier, all that fancy paperwork looks great in the public record. Unfortunately it can have little to do with the actual decision making process at the end of the day. It’s convenient in that it can be pointed to at the end of the day for folks to go “see we are legitimate” but for the sake of the folks who said “yes you will do” all it could take is all of them saying together, “the Adlers are good people, make sure they got all their t’s crossed and i’s dotted, and lets give them the contract”.
Given the ease with which government corruption can occur in these cases, it’s hard to trust any of the public record. Anyone who isn’t skeptical is either naive or complicit, in my opinion. Ultimately, this is why I believe that this kind of government sponsored business shouldn’t be approved by the constituency in the first place and why I made the commits I did regarding the air port concessions in the first place. There doesn’t NEED to be concessions at the airport and thus this heated debate needn’t take place at all.
Why eat at the airport when you can simply leave it to go to variety of real restaurants that wont over charge you for your effort and are within 5 miles of it’s door. Really, you are not making any sense.
Yes, Your Holiness, there DOES need to be food at the airport.
blame the city for the way the bid was written, NOT the companies trying to create jobs and grow their business….
“Oh look honey, on top of our flight being delayed 4 hours, there are no restaurants at the airport”….”Oh, that must be to avoid any type of croonie capitalism so let’s pack all the kids in a cab and wander around a town that we are completely unfamiliar with”…”sounds good, Burlington is such a great place I’m glad we are among the privileged few that use their airport” !……what is in the water that makes so many people in this area such oblivious anti-business trolls ????