
SF Supervisors Move to Ban Workplace Cafeterias - aliston
http://www.sfexaminer.com/supervisors-move-ban-workplace-cafeterias/
======
mbgaxyz
Maybe office workers prefer not to have to run the gauntlet of feces and
hypodermic needles, just to buy a sandwich.

"San Francisco Man Steps on Hydodermic Needle, Demands Action"

[https://www.nbcbayarea.com/on-air/as-seen-on/SF-
Businesses-W...](https://www.nbcbayarea.com/on-air/as-seen-on/SF-Businesses-
Want-City-Hall-to-Take-Action-on-Diseased-Stre_Bay-Area-475616773.html)

"Junkies Take Over Corridors Of San Francisco Civic Center BART Station"

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gT5NULvRSk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gT5NULvRSk)

"SF Crime, Squalor Scares Away $40 Million Medical Convention"

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLcoOIDJBsc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLcoOIDJBsc)

SF Mayor: 'There's More Feces ... Than I've Ever Seen'

[https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/SF-Mayor-Theres-
more-f...](https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/SF-Mayor-Theres-more-feces-
on-the-sidewalks-than-Ive-ever-seen-488156431.html)

~~~
jonny_eh
Maybe those things will get addressed once people have to run a gauntlet to
buy a sandwich. It's much harder to ignore in an ivory tower.

~~~
refurb
Unless you live and work in the same building, there is no ignoring this stuff
in SF.

~~~
Hjalti
I don't see in FIDI. Not sure how SOMA is

------
dragonwriter
To the extent that discouraging this practice is useful, a tax seems more
sensible than a zoning ban; a zoning ban, by effectively grandfathering
incumbents, is basically a barrier to new entrants competing (if on-site
cafeterias didn't have a business function, firms wouldn't spend money on
them) with incumbents (whether for talent, or on productivity if food in-house
contributes to that.) A tax can internalize whatever negative externalities
are seen from the practice in a manner which neither prohibits use of existing
investments nor creates an unfair preference for incumbents.

~~~
mkempe
Instead of quibbling about the choice of means in social engineering, maybe
the first question to consider is whether such interference is a legitimate
power of government.

~~~
ibeckermayer
It is a legitimate power if the people who form the government consented to
give the government the power to write zoning laws. The real question is —
when did we consent to be governed by these dopes?

~~~
cirgue
Vote in local elections. If you want your voice heard, you have to take the
time to speak.

------
seibelj
SF should ban private cars, because it deprives public and commercial
transportation of customers.

SF should ban owning your own apartment, because it deprives landlords of
rent.

SF should ban e-commerce purchases, because it deprives local retail stores of
sales.

SF should ban cleaning your own home, because cleaning companies need more
business.

~~~
themagician
The first three would create a pretty interesting urban space.

~~~
adventured
Banning home ownership so that landlords benefit is not interesting, it's
extremely regressive and morally wrong.

~~~
themagician
There are other cities around the world that do 99-year leases or where the
state owns the land and it seems to work okay.

~~~
dogma1138
In virtually every case those leases are “customary” only and can and are
extended and renewed often on a rolling basis often without even charge.

------
bcx
It seems that ultimately this just subsidizes the commercial real-estate
owners.

1) Force companies to not have free cafeterias

2) Workers have to buy lunch from local businesses

3) Restaurant Location becomes more valuable given the large number of workers
forced to find lunch and buy it.

4) Raise rents on restaurants because space is now more valuable, since it is
basically subsidized by nearby tech companies.

5) Restaurants pay higher rent, landlords make more $$, due to California
Property Tax policy, landlords do not have to pay proportional additional
property tax on their now more valuable property.

The reason something like this is considered speaks to the power of commercial
real estate to shape policy for their own benefit.

~~~
mertd
Regulations almost always cause some sort of rent seeking behavior. Sometimes
they are negligible in comparison to the greater good gained from the
regulation. I don't think this is the case here.

~~~
thr0waway5678
There would never be rent seeking behavior without regulations. The natural
state of mankind is perfect harmonious cooperation without the spectre of
rules agreed upon by communities.

~~~
carapace
> If Princes and Monarchs could but preserve this simplicity, every creature
> in the world would submit itself to them; Heaven and Earth would be in
> mutual accord, and shower down sweet dew; the people would need no laws, but
> live in harmony of themselves.

------
WallWextra
The bit about local restaurants losing business seems like a pretty thin fig
leaf over a law that's really about taking tech employees down a peg.

I don't live in the bay area, so maybe someone can fill me in. How is it
supposedly so gentrified that nobody but software engineers can survive, yet
local politicians feel comfortable doing things like this? Who actually lives
in the city?

~~~
bsimpson
Rent control has bifurcated housing costs. Those who have lived in the same
spot for 15+ years and/or who own their property have housing costs much lower
than people who have moved this decade. A new lease on a 1 bedroom probably
costs $3500 now, but could be <$1000 if you've been here for a while.

"Progressive" SF politicians like Aaron Peskin pander to low-income renters
and kowtow to NIMBY homeowners who don't want new housing built, while
vilifying newcomers. "These evil techies are gentrifying your neighborhood -
elect me to stop them."

(Of course, the cost of living isn't just housing, but it's also the biggest
factor in your assumption that "nobody but software engineers can survive.")

------
pliny
Banning workplace cafeterias is a good start, but really the solution they
should be discussing is banning workplaces.

The workers at tech companies like Twitter and AirBNB are known to have access
to working in their own buildings, which deprives nearby cafes of the dollars
they could be spending buying a single espresso and then working for 9 hours.

~~~
kangnkodos
Don't joke. Local politicians can decide to take private land and buildings.
See Kelo v. City of New London.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London)

~~~
fiter
Further reading at that Wikipedia link leads to the fact that California has
outlawed such takings covered in the Kelo v. City of New London case.

------
1996
> tech companies like Twitter and Airbnb, which are widely known to have
> access to dining in their own buildings, depriving nearby restaurants of the
> dollars usually spent by nearby worker

Only in Soviet Russia... and Silicon Valley can you see nonsense like that.

~~~
megaman22
It's funny, but sad, watching people trying to kill the golden goose by a
thousand cuts.

~~~
refurb
This is the thing. If they succeed in fixing the "problem" of tech workers, SF
will end up like it did in the 1970's where people were more people moved out
than moved in.

------
clay_the_ripper
Won’t this make it harder for newer businesses to compete for hires? Ie ones
that haven’t already built kitchens in the office? It’s a nice benefit to be
able to grab a free lunch (saving thousands a year) or take a to-go box home.

~~~
dragonwriter
Wouldn't be surprised to find if you dig deep enough you'll find this
motivation behind the scenes promoting the proposal (though it probably
originates in the restaurant industry.)

------
kernoble
Isn't this the same as the Broken Window Fallacy?

They want to force people to use economically inefficient services, small
restaurants versus large cafeteria, to create more economic "activity". Which
would be analogous to celebrating the waste of breaking a perfectly good
window, because fixing/replacing the window generates economic activity. Is
that fair?

This is under the (I think reasonable) assumption that a cafeteria designed
for 500-1000 people is probably more efficient than the dozens of smaller
scale restaurants needed to match that supply.

~~~
bsimpson
I trust that I have access to higher quality, healthier food at work than I
would if I had to buy lunch at a restaurant. Employers have a stronger
incentive to prioritize long-term health in conjunction with short term
satisfaction. Restaurants have an incentive to overuse unhealthy but
addictive/inexpensive ingredients like salt/sugar/fat to maximize short term
pleasure.

------
diebeforei485
Get Aaron Peskin voted out in 2020, and half of this city's problems will go
away.

[https://sfbos.org/sites/default/files/FileCenter/Documents/3...](https://sfbos.org/sites/default/files/FileCenter/Documents/33420-district03_map_lg.pdf)

If you live or work in that district, you should actively support whoever his
opponent is.

~~~
bsimpson
I'm very much looking forward to his departure, but isn't he term-limited
again anyway?

------
bdcravens
Will they also ban ziplock bags, to prevent workers from bringing their own
lunch?

~~~
snerbles
It is plastic waste, after all.

------
UnFleshedOne
So, can a company buy/open a restaurant nearby and provide free food for
employees while also being technically open to the public?..

------
Analemma_
Do they think that workplace cafeterias summon fully-prepared meals from the
aether? Those places employ cooks and purchase wholesale food just like
restaurants do. FFS, San Francisco.

------
tweedledee
Fist they came for the plastic straws and I said nothing because I don’t use
straws...

------
djohnston
also an effort to fuck catering companies or contingent workers who work in
these large cafeterias. what an idiotic and arbitrary restriction of the
fundamental human right to eat where/what we want

~~~
masterleep
Who cares about them when we can vigorously virtue-signal by shitting on tech
workers?

------
rm_-rf_slash
Maybe San Francisco should consider banning restaurants to protect the jobs of
cafeteria workers.

------
keeganjw
This reminds me of the recent op-ed where the guy suggested replacing
libraries with Amazon. Just a really dumb idea that is needlessly
protectionist.

------
RestlessMind
I really wish someone challenges this all the way to the Supreme Court.
Current composition of the court gives me hope that such stupid laws are
struck down.

Because if this ban is allowed to stand, what is to stop the government from
banning other perks - gyms, shuttles, massages etc.

------
loco5niner
Sounds like a great way to drive businesses away from your city. Penny wise,
pound foolish.

------
a-dub
I never understood the point of an on-site cafeteria in a centrally located
urban office anyway. It makes loads of sense in the spread-out suburban 20m to
the nearest Chili's hellscape that is the ever pleasant south bay, but you
really don't need it in SF. I feel like a lot of it was a sort of "us too"
copying of Google/Oracle without fully understanding why it was done in the
first place.

------
diogenescynic
This is an awful idea. This will just hurt blue collar workers employed in
those cafeterias. Why is our city government so ineffective and asinine?

------
fcbrooklyn
I wonder if they'll be allowed to order a pizza.

------
bahmboo
What if I make my own lunch and bring it to work?

------
dogma1138
They should just tax employees like any other benefit, most countries do that
if you have subsidized meals you pay the value of the meal in tax.

E.G. if you ate $400 worth of meals in a month and you have an income tax of
25% you pay $100 in additional income tax. It shouldn’t be any different than
getting a company car or any other material benefit.

------
purplezooey
Soon there won't be any housing here for restaurant employees anyway, so it
won't matter. We've kind of already crossed that point with most folks
commuting huge distances.

------
bitL
When city's crab mentality meets corporate crab mentality...

~~~
lele0108
Hey! I've been trying to get in touch with you (I'm doing some research on
Retail). Can you drop me an email? My email: jimmyliu@berkeley.edu, thanks!

------
ckrusk
Can't wait until they want to build a new hospital and they are barred from
adding a cafeteria.

------
forgotmysn
from what I understand, there is a similar measure underway in Mountain View
as well

~~~
dmitrygr
Slightly different. MV measure bans cafeterias from being free, not from
existing, They are just limited to subsidizing food cost to 50%. SF just
outright bans cafeterias.

------
ap3
Seems absurd - Can I still bring my own lunch?

------
ncr100
Peskin is indirectly blaming "techies" for the fall of Retail.

This proposal reminds me of nationalism, in the way he talked about, "...the
rest of us[.]"

We're seeing Trump trying to use protectionism, smothered with a thick gravy
of nationalism, to solve the macroeconomic woes of the US industrial sector.
Trump's foolish effort is failing.

Peskin also clearly does not have a viable solution. Someone needs to help
him, and the City, get a grip on reality.

------
mc32
WTF, I hope Breed nixes this nonsense. What next, ban me from bringing in my
home cooked meal because it deprives some hole in the wall which uses subpar
ingredients from making a living?

Ban buses, it deprives Uber and taxi drivers a job.

This is utter socialist nonsense.

------
mkempe
What are the effective limits on these local tyrants?

I've heard many people watch movies at home instead of going to the theaters.
Surely these home screens could be eliminated with some clever zoning
restrictions.

~~~
thr0waway5678
You're totally right. All of those movie theaters that were heavily subsidized
by billions in public money or tax cuts based on the promise of providing foot
traffic and value to adjoining businesses should have their day!

------
masterleep
Incredible... a meaningful risk of doing business in SF is the exposure to
socialist / progressive extremists in the city government.

~~~
jonny_eh
Mountain View is doing the same.

------
thr0waway5678
The responses to this are genuinely some of the funniest posts I've seen on
this website. The amount of gymnastics people are doing to avoid mentioning
that these large companies have gotten millions/billions of handouts from the
state and city and are therefore in a different class/category of business
than your average brick and mortar shop.

So I'll clarify 90% of the detractors comments here: "To the people of San
Francisco: Fuck you, got mine. The fact that i lied about the nature and value
of our economic contribution to the community and you bought it puts you at
fault. I won my ivory tower through any means necessary, and therefore it's
immoral to suggest that I in any demonstrable way cooperate to improve
anything outside if it. Again. Fuck you. Got mine. "

You can skip all the comments now! :)

------
jensvdh
But London Breed is amazing... right, .. guys?

~~~
dragonwriter
What does London Breed have to do with this? It's like if in 2009, forty
Republican senators proposed something and you blamed Obama for it.

