Wednesday, July 29, 2015

This is why small businesses go out of business in record numbers!

New York Post July 29, 2015
An Indian waiter in an Indian restaurant — imagine that!
City bureaucrats slapped a $5,000 fine on a Midtown Indian restaurant for trying to hire a server who is Indian, according to official documents.
Following an inquiry by The Post, the city’s Commission on Human Rights — which cited the eatery two years ago — said it’s assessing its practices.
Commission staffers have been trawling Craigslist to ensnare unwary restaurant owners who violate the law for things like seeking a “waitress” instead of a “wait-person.”
That’s gender discrimination by the city’s reckoning and could lead to a four-figure fine.
They hit the jackpot in October 2013, when Shalom Bombay on Lexington Avenue placed an ad for an “experienced Indian waiter or waitress.”
It might be common sense that an Indian restaurant would try to hire a server familiar with its cuisine, but to the city’s enforcers, it was a glaring red flag.
The law doesn’t allow ads that discriminate “based on national origin.”
The commission filed a complaint, eventually scheduling a trial for April 15 at the city’s administrative court.
There was a good reason the owners didn’t appear, according to former manager Raphael Gasner.
He told The Post the business closed in April 2014 — a year earlier.
Even without hearing both sides, a judge took pity on the owners and reduced the commission’s recommended $7,500 fine to $5,000.
“There was no complaint from the public, there was no evidence of how many people viewed the posting, and there was no direct evidence that any qualified applicant was turned away,” according to the documents.
“There was a discriminatory advertisement, but there was no additional proof that respondents refused to hire otherwise qualified applicants.”
A spokesperson for the commission described how new leaders are “assessing” its practices and looking into a change of tactics.
“The commission’s new leadership, as of February 2015, is currently assessing its investigatory strategy to implement more comprehensive and strategic investigations to pro-actively root out systemic discrimination in employment, housing, and public accommodations and expand the commission’s testing programs in these areas,” the spokesperson said.

So this is what it has come to. The regulators comb through the want ads to bring cases against businesses so they can fine them. Of course they go out of business before that can happen because with the taxes and regulations it is just no worth it. Another fool will come along and sink his life savings into this spot and they will try to control everything he does or fine him into oblivion. 
It's sick out there and it is getting sicker.

11 comments:

Titus said...

The owners were dumb posting a job with the title of someone's ethnicity-that is illegal.

Stupid hindus.

bagoh20 said...

Some people just need a nice hard punch in the face.

I think you should be able to discriminate like this, but regardless, “experienced Indian waiter or waitress” could just mean a person familiar and experienced with being a waiter or waitress in an Indian restaurant, regardless of the applicant's national origin. The judge is an idiot, because the meaning of that ad cannot be deemed discriminatory without more evidence, which was not available without rejected applicants or the owners there to indicate their intent.

Why do judges have such trouble with logic and common sense. It's like being a judge is an avant garde artform, or some new age religion.

Amartel said...

"Why do judges have such trouble with logic and common sense"
Because they're busy developing judicial empathy, which is what King Putt sez (in a speech to Planned Parenthood, of course) he wants to see in a judge. They need to understand what it's like to be an Obama supporter, and rule accordingly. Empathy with business owners is not part of the curriculum.

Third Coast said...

Maybe the language barrier was such that the owners just didn't know who to pay off?

ndspinelli said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Leland said...

Why not just make it illegal to operate an ethnic business? If they cannot hire based on ethnicity, why allow them to only cater to an ethnicity? They should be forced to bake wedding cakes too along with the Chicken Marsala. We must stamp out this racism!

Aridog said...

Funny thing to me is that my favorite local "Chinese Restaurant" is actually owned and operated by ethnic Chinese Koreans...which I noticed and asked about one day when I heard the family members talking in their language and I understood them! I was once fluent in Korean, (barely so now..been decades since it was a necessity) never knew a word of Mandarin or Cantonese. I say odd because it is a favorite of the local Chinese population as well as this Gringo. They hire multiple different ethnicities but usually prefer those who can explain the dishes to customers...on 3 different menus: English, Chinese, and Korean...the latter two with the authentic dishes of those ethnicities. I occasionally order from the Korean menu just to get the food I once lived on, but usually order the English version of stuff...American Chinese food is rather different than the originals...and I too have accepted the modified flavors. One thing missing...I never ate in a "Chinese" restaurant in Asia that didn't have Ketchup on the table, but you had to ask for Soy sauce. Here you get Soy on the table and a puzzled glance if you ask for Ketchup...which is quite good on some fried rice dishes that are essentially a fusion of Chinese, Korean, and Japanese versions...the Japanese versions I presume due to the long occupation of Korea by the Japanese...at least that's what the Koreans told me.

Evi L. Bloggerlady said...

Sparks had a waitstaff that is Sicilian. But since they don't advertise the positions, they avoid the BS of this sort of shakedown.

Aridog, a lot of Sushi joints are run by Koreans too (either from South Korea directly or who had a Japanese-Korean background--back when they were "guest workers" --or slaves-- in Japan).

Aridog said...

I'd guess that if Fu Man Chu LLC recruits they could just ask for wait persons and then give respondents menus in the ethnic language or multiple ethnic languages to read and explain in the interview process. That'd weed out most of the inexperienced. Since bureaucrats and Judges can't be trusted to use common sense otherwise. No cure for stupid I guess...I mean someone is offering a job that some one else needs and they block it? Brilliant.

Aridog said...

Evi ... I guess I'd know that about Sushi joints if I ate it...however, in my case they'd be better off running a bait shop for fishermen. :-)

Aridog said...

bagoh20 said...

... regardless, “experienced Indian waiter or waitress” could just mean a person familiar and experienced with being a waiter or waitress in an Indian restaurant, regardless of the applicant's national origin.

Exactly. And that is the concept I cited above with my favorite Asian restaurant. Those who work there must be able to read, at least scantily, English, Chinese, and Korean and explain the menus. It happens to be that most of their wait-staff can do that due to their ethnic backgrounds...hint: Korean is easier than Chinese, closer to English since it is actually a 24 letter alphabet with words composed from symbols (Hangul...the written Korean language) in stacks, so to speak. No one is barred from serving if they can master the menus. Even this cranky old Irish guy can handle two out of three with ease, but need help with the other one (Chinese).