Big Lantern pays big bucks to uncompensated overtime workers

Looks like the secret ingredient to Mission Chinese restaurant Big Lantern’s delicious meatless sesame chicken was a heaping scoop of unfair labor practice. SF Appeal reports the eatery has been busted for $230,000 in unpaid overtime:

In total, $230,535 was paid to employees, with workers receiving settlements between $457 and $38,880 each. An additional $5,300 was paid in penalties.

$38,800! Sounds like drinks are on that guy tonight.

[via SF Appeal, photo by Ariel Dovas]

16 Responses to “Big Lantern pays big bucks to uncompensated overtime workers”

  1. MrEricSir says:

    According to the liquor license notice, the place just changed hands a couple weeks ago. If that’s true, I wonder if the new owners are paying this, or the old owners?

    • moderniste says:

      I’ll betcha that the “new” owners are some sort of iteration of the old owners in an effort to avoid sanctions/lawsuits from any number of possible plaintiffs or agencies.

      And regarding their getting nabbed for being greedy a-holes that take advantage of their employees: KUDOS! Restaurants are a seething hotbed of labor abuse. Here in SF, they have the GGRA; their very own lobbying group to make them seem eternally victimized small business heroes who should never ever have to do anything in respect to the rights of their employees, and can’t possibly make nary a penny if they obey city regulations.

      Back in the 50s/60s/70s, SF was a strong union town; now, the Local 2 (of which I was a proud member while working at the Fairmont) has little reach outside of the big hotels. This crap like the Big Lantern thievery does not happen in a union shop!

  2. O_* says:

    shut up

  3. scum says:

    “delicious meatless sesame chicken” If it’s meatless, it’s not chicken.

  4. scum says:

    Also blue plate and pho clement were hit by the labor commission.

    • scum says:

      Time to change your name mini me, or move on. You bring nothing to the table and we are hungry.

  5. scum says:

    mini mes are the best!

  6. Rocky Ponk says:

    Hmm… I”ll reseve judgement. Does anyone know how expensive it is to run a restaurant?

    • rod says:

      ah yes, the hardships of wealthy owners and managers is always highly downplayed in these cases.

    • moderniste says:

      Yeah–it’s one of the slimmest profit margins of any business. But so what. If you can’t run your business without thievery and cheating at the expense of your minimum wage workers, then you should not be in said business, period.

      SF is the country’s most progessive city in terms of regulations involving employee rights, especially in the realm of minimum wage workers. Thus, restaurant owners, by the nature of their wage scales, have to deal with more HR restrictions than their counterparts in other jurisdictions. Yet SF has what is arguably the country’st most vibrant restaurant scene, even in the face of one of the longest economic downturns in recent history. And the current tsunami of restaurant openings have occured after the inception of the $10.24 minimum wage, required sick leave and access to health insurance, a la Healthy SF.

      Some restaurant owners have managed to get it right, and I know from the personal experience of working in management for the past 10 or so years for two very successful establishments, that while they may be operating on a very slim profit margin, a successful restaurant owner is still doing quite well.

      And even those who are operating within the style of a more modest downmarket/counter service shop are at least living comfortably amongst the middle class. (This is assuming that they are operating a successful, well-run shop. Bad management and/or poor marketing will kill a restaurant just like it will any other business, regulations or not.)

      So when you hear these guys moaning about paying their employees the kingly wage of $10.24/hr, providing sick days (shocker!) and providing all employees with access to health insurance, it’s not because they are on the dire edge of poverty.

      I say that if you go into the kind of business that requires employees, then the job that you offer needs to include at least the bare bones of a decent existence–the sort that are covered by current SF regulations. Otherwise, don’t have the kind of business that requires employees.

      Oops, I ranted.

  7. Dhard says:

    dammit,
    Now all I want for dinner is numbing noodles and wontons in chili oil.