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!
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
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.
Well said.
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?
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.
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
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
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
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
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