Latest / From Kitchen to C-Suite™ / Recipe for Ruin: Why Unions Could Cause the Next Great Restaurant Closure

Transcript

Recipe for Ruin: Why Unions Could Cause the Next Great Restaurant Closure · From Kitchen to C-Suite™

• Brad Peters: So To the vision that This is Kitchen to see Sweet. Welcome to the show. So, I want you to think about the last time you went out and bought like a fifteen dollar burger. Yeah. A pretty standard Friday night out, right? Exactly. Just, you know, picture it sitting there on the plate in front of you. You hand over your credit card, you pay your fifteen bucks, and you probably assume, I mean, I always assume, that the person who owns that restaurant is doing pretty well. ⁓ for sure. You figure they're making a killing. Right. Like maybe they're pocketing ⁓ Four or five, maybe six dollars of that transaction. But if we actually strip away the bun, the patty, the lights overhead, the insurance liability, and you know, the credit card processing fee, that owner is keeping about forty five cents. Wow. Less than two quarters. I mean, if the cook drops a side of fries on the floor, the profit for your entire meal literally just goes in the trash. It's completely gone. Gone. And that is the razor's edge we are standing on today. Because the hospitality sector isn't just dealing with a few growing pains right now, it is undergoing a massive structural transformation that is well, it's tearing at the very fabric of how we eat, how people are employed, and whether the neighborhood diner can even exist in five years. We are gonna plunge straight into the absolute bleeding edge of the restaurant industry. And ⁓ before we get into the heavy math, the breakdown of those margins and the real world case studies we're gonna unpack today. I really need to take a very specific moment to address you, the listener, directly. Yeah, this is important. Because today's deep dive covers some highly politically charged territory. We are going to be diving into labor laws, unionization drives, and corporate regulation. And I want to be absolutely unequivocally clear on this point. We are entirely neutral. We are not taking a left wing side, and we are not taking a right wing side. We are not here to endorse the viewpoints of labor advocates who are organizing workers. Nor are we here to champion the perspectives of corporate management trying to protect margins. Our sole unwavering mission today is to impartially report on and synthesize the ideas, the data, and the arguments contained in the material we've gathered. We just want you to fully understand the intricate economic mechanics at play here without any ideological spin. Tight margins, rising food costs, and shifting consumer habits have already put the restaurant industry on edge. Now a growing wave of unionization is hitting kitchens and dining rooms across the nation. Is collective bargaining a necessary evolution for workers? Or is it a recipe for ruin that could spark the next wave of mass restaurant closures? Welcome to From Kitchen to Sea Suite. Today we unpack the razor-thin economics of food service, labor legislation, and what operational leaders must do to navigate the storm. It genuinely is a perfect storm, honestly. I mean we're looking at colliding economic pressures, macroeconomic shifts. And fundamentally changing labor dynamics, all kind of converging on an industry that is incredibly fragile by design. Okay, let's unpack this because I feel like we have to start by completely resetting our expectations of what a successful business actually looks like. Yeah. The optics are really deceiving. Right. Because if I walk past a local spot on a Friday night and you know the patio is packed, the bar is three deep, and there's a forty-five minute wait for a table, my brain immediately thinks, these guys are minting money. ⁓ absolutely. It looks like absolute chaos, but like profitable chaos. Yeah. But it's the grand illusion to the hospitality industry. Revenue does not equal profit, and nowhere is that gap more deceptive than in food service. Not at all. If we look at the overarching financial analysis of the sector, the industry average net profit margin is a mere three percent to five percent. Wait, three to five? That's it. That's it. I mean, even top performers. The absolute unicorns of the industry who control their inventory perfectly, who never have an empty seat, who negotiate brilliant leases, they might hit 10% in a phenomenal year. So to put that in perspective for, you know, anyone running a software company or a consulting firm where margins can be forty or fifty percent. Yeah, a whole different world. A restaurant operator is basically doing backflips if they get to keep ten cents on the dollar. Exactly. And we have to break that down further because those margins They aren't uniform across the board. They fluctuate wildly depending on the operating model. Okay, so like a steakhouse versus a drive-thru. Right. Let's look at full service restaurants first. These are the places where you sit down, a server hands you a menu, takes your order, runs to the kitchen. Pours your wine, all of that. Yeah. A whole team preps the meal, the server brings it out, fills your water, clears your plates. That level of human touch requires immense labor. And because of that, Full service places average an incredibly tight 2% to 4% net margin. Two percent. I mean, I can't even wrap my head around taking on the risk of signing a 10 year commercial lease for a two percent return. It's terrifying. One bad weekend, like a massive snowstorm where nobody leaves their house and you're in the red for the entire quarter. You are. You really are. Now contrast that with quick service restaurants. What the industry calls QSRs. So fast food. Fast food drive thrusts, fast casual models, yeah. They average slightly higher net margins, typically hovering in the six percent to ten percent range. So why the jump? Is the food just that much cheaper to make? It's a combination of factors, but fundamentally it's about engineering the labor out of the transaction. ⁓ interesting. In a QSR, you, the customer, are doing part of the work. You stand in line, you punch your order into a kiosk or tell it to a single cashier. You carry your own tray to the table. And you throw your own trash away. Exactly. The restaurant doesn't need to pay a server to check on you three times. High volume, lower labor cost per transaction. But even then, six percent to ten percent leaves almost zero room for error. Wow. So to understand how operators actually manage to keep the doors open on those margins, we need to dive into the absolute lifeblood metric of the industry. Anyone who has ever managed a kitchen knows this term. ⁓ yeah. Imagine never. Break down the mechanics of prime cost for us, because it seems to be like the only number that dictates whether a restaurant lives or dies. It's a very simple formula. Your total cost of goods sold, meaning every ounce of beef, every slice of cheese, every drop of frying oil, and every paper napkin. Literally everything you consume. Literally everything. So that plus your total labor costs. Yeah. The golden rule, the absolute law of restaurant survival. Is that your prime cost must stay between fifty-five percent and sixty-two percent of your total revenue? Okay, let me visualize this. So for every dollar that goes into the cash register, fifty-five to sixty-two cents goes immediately out the back door to pay the food distributor in the step. Precisely, which leaves the operator with thirty-eight to forty-five cents. Now, what does that thirty-eight to forty-five cents have to cover? Literally everything else. But the rent. The commercial lease, which in a prime location is staggering. Electricity, gas, and water. And remember, restaurants consume massive amounts of utilities. ⁓ yeah, those ovens are running all day. General liability insurance. Marketing. The 3% fee the credit card company takes every time a customer swipes. It just keeps adding up. Equipment maintenance. Because commercial dishwashers and fryers break down constantly, repaying the massive small business loan they took out to build the restaurant in the first place. And then only after all of those fixed costs are fed, the owner gets to take home their 3% profit. That's the math. If that prime cost creeps above sixty-eight percent, the restaurant is mathematically entering a death spiral. A death spiral. Just from going over by like six points. Yeah, because there simply isn't enough money left over to cover the fixed overhead. They start missing lease payments, or they stretch out their payments to their food vendors, which is ⁓ usually the first sign a restaurant is going under. And this perfectly sets up the crisis of the post-2019 squeeze. We're seeing data from across the franchising and restaurant spaces showing that the landscape has shifted violently since before the pandemic. It feels like every single input cost has spiked simultaneously. It's a compounding effect that is historically unprecedented, really. Let's look at the mechanics of this macro change. Since twenty nineteen, average hourly earnings for restaurant employees have jumped forty-one percent. Forty-one percent. Yes. That is not a temporary spike. ⁓ that is a massive permanent. structural increase in the labor component of the prime cost. But wait, if labor is up forty one percent, what about the other half of the prime cost equation? The food. At the exact same time, average wholesale food prices rose thirty five percent. ⁓ you have got to be kidding. Nope. So your two biggest expenses, the two things that absolutely cannot exceed sixty two percent of your revenue if you want to survive, both rocketed upward by roughly forty percent. It's like walking a tightrope with a backpack that just gets heavier every single year. That's exactly what it is. But I mean I feel like I have to jump in here and play the role of the frustrated consumer because the obvious economics one ⁓ one solution is just raise the menu prices. Right. Just pass it along. Yeah. If the flour costs more and the baker costs more, the bread should cost more. Why not just charge forty percent more for the meal to cover the forty one percent wage hike and the thirty five percent food cost hike? Why is the industry acting like their hands are tied here? It's the most logical question to ask, and honestly, for a couple of years after the pandemic, that's exactly what they did. But that raise menu prices lever is now broken? The mechanism has snapped. Why? What changed? The primary issue is consumer exhaustion. Think about the broader economy. Consumers have experienced severe price hikes at the grocery store, at the gas pump, and in their housing costs. Dining out at the end of the day is a discretionary expense. You have to buy groceries. You do not have to buy a blooming onion on a Tuesday night. That's a really fair point. I mean, I can make a sandwich at home if the local burger joint gets too expensive. And that's exactly what the data shows is happening. Quick service foot traffic has already suffered significantly as lower income and middle income consumers get priced out. Furthermore, we are seeing the collapse of the pricing architecture. What does that mean, the pricing architecture? Think about the psychological tiers of dining out. You expect fast food to be cheap, right? Right. You expect casual dining, a sit down place with laminated menus, to be moderate. And you expect fine dining to be expensive. But because casual dining places have had to raise their prices so aggressively to cover these massive new costs, a basic burger and a beer at a neighborhood tavern is now pushing thirty dollars. Yeah, I've definitely felt that. You get the bill for two people and it's eighty dollars for what felt like a very basic meal. Exactly. And when casual dining prices push so close to traditional sit-down fine dining thresholds, the consumer does a mental calculus. They think, well, if I'm gonna spend eighty dollars at this casual place, I'm gonna as well spend ninety-five and go to a really nice steakhouse. Or they just stay home. Or, more likely, they just don't go out at all. If an operator raises prices any further, they risk destroying their foot traffic entirely. I mean, you can charge $25 for a fast, casual chicken sandwich to protect your margin, but if nobody buys it, Your revenue drops to zero and you close anyway. Which makes certain types of restaurants uniquely vulnerable to these specific pressures. We're seeing a hyper focus on what analysts call the sub twenty dollar check vulnerability. Walk me through why a lower ticket price is so dangerous right now. Restaurants operating with an average check under $20. So your drive thrusts, your fast casual salad places, your neighborhood diners, their entire model relies on high volume. They have to process hundreds of customers a day. Just to make a dent. Right. For these operations, labor typically represents twenty-eight percent to thirty-five percent of their total revenue. It takes a lot of humans to make and hand out that many small items quickly. So a huge chunk of that fifteen dollar ticket is just paying the person standing at the register and the person working the grill. Yes. And because their net margins are already razor thin, any forced wage floor, any structured overtime scale, Or any mandatory benefit package introduced by collective bargaining simply cannot be easily absorbed. They don't have a massive profit cushion to dip into. So they just break. Exactly. When your average transaction is small, a sudden 20% spike in your single largest controllable expense labor can literally turn a profitable location into a money loser overnight. And this brings us to the core tension of this deep dive. The escalating conflict between union mandates and operational flexibility. We have two very distinct competing perspectives here. Let's start by laying out the perspective of the labor advocates who are driving this wave of unionization. The labor advocate argument is rooted in addressing systemic historical issues within the hospitality industry. For decades, restaurant work has been characterized by severe burnout, notoriously high turnover rates, unpredictable scheduling, and wages that often fail to keep pace with the cost of living. Right, from their perspective, this isn't just about demanding a few extra dollars an hour. It's about establishing fundamental protections for a very vulnerable workforce. Exactly. They point out that a worker who doesn't know if they are working fifteen hours next week or forty hours, can't plan their life, can't secure stable housing, and lives in a state of constant financial anxiety. That's the core of their position. Yeah. And they argue that collective bargaining actually benefits the business in the long run. The logic is that when workers are well compensated, when they have guaranteed schedules and healthcare benefits, they stay. Which makes sense. Right. You drastically lower your recruitment and training costs, which are incredibly high in restaurants, and you get better, more experienced staff. Better staff means better service, which drives customer loyalty. A stable workforce is an investment that pays off on the floor. That makes logical sense. So what is the counter argument from the operators and the business analysts? Their perspective is grounded entirely in the brutal math we just went through. They argue that applying industrial era collective bargaining models to independent low margin restaurants is like trying to fit a square peg into a microscopic roundhole. Industrial era models, meaning unions were originally designed for massive factories, auto plants, or utility companies, places with predictable, steady output, and huge economies of scale. Precisely. If you are building cars, you know exactly how many cars are coming down the line on a Tuesday in November. You can schedule your labor months in advance. But a restaurant isn't a factory. No, a restaurant is fundamentally unpredictable. The business analysts argue that union contracts introduce severe operational friction, specifically by destroying agility. What's fascinating here is, and I don't think most people understand what operational friction actually looks like on a Friday night line. It's not just the hourly wage rate going up, it's the work rules themselves. It is the work rules, yes. What's fascinating here is how collective bargaining agreements frequently mandate rigid requirements. For example, they might stipulate strict minimum shift lengths. Like you have to pay them for a certain amount of time no matter what. Exactly. If an employee is called in, they might be guaranteed four or six hours of pay, period, regardless of how busy the restaurant actually is. They also often impose strict rules and financial penalties. Around last minute schedule changes. Let's run a scenario on this because anyone who has ever waited tables knows that agility is everything. Say it's a Friday evening in July. The restaurant has a massive outdoor patio. Okay, setting the scene. Right. They are fully staffed up, expecting a blockbuster night. At 5 30 p.m., the sky turns black and a massive thunderstorm rolls in. The patio is flooded, half the reservations cancel. In a non-union traditional environment, the manager immediately goes to the floor and makes cuts. They send three servers, a busser, and two line cooks home early. Which stinks for the workers. It's a harsh reality for those workers who lose out on expected income and tips, yes, but mechanically, it is how the restaurant protects its prime cost. They match the labor expense to the sudden drop in revenue. But if they are operating under a union contract with rigid work rules, the manager loses that lever entirely. If the contract guarantees those shift hours, the manager cannot send them home. Or if they do, they still have to pay them for the full shift anyway. ⁓ wow. So now the restaurant is paying a full Friday night labor bill while generating a Tuesday afternoon revenue stream. In an industry with a three percent margin, absorbing that kind of hit a few times a month will bankrupt the location. The loss of scheduling agility directly erodes operating capital. It's what analysts often call death by a thousand cuts. The direct wages are one thing, but the hidden costs of operational friction really drag a restaurant under. Let's look at how this impacts the actual food and the guest experience. If a restaurant is forced to cut overall staff hours to afford higher union mandated hourly rates, say they're trying to keep that prime cost below 62%, they might try to run with a leaner crew. Right, fewer people on the floor. But if that leaner crew is overwhelmed during a rush, or if management is forced to hire less experienced cooks to fit the new budget, mistakes skyrocket. Like an inexperienced cook burns a forty dollar steak. And that steak goes straight into the garbage. That hits the food cost side of the prime cost equation. Or because the kitchen is understaffed, ticket times drag. A table waits an hour for their entrees. So the manager has to comp their drinks or offer free desserts to apologize. Which eats into the margin again, and more importantly, the guest satisfaction plummets. They leave a bad Yelp review and they never come back. It's a vicious cycle. Exactly. An operator might sit in their back office, look at a spreadsheet and think, okay, I balanced the budget at this new twenty-two dollar an hour union wage. But they aren't accounting for the operational friction. The food waste, the comp meals, the lost repeat business. It is quietly destroying their margin behind the scenes. Now, to bring in a broader economic perspective, Morningstar, the financial services firm, has done some fascinating extrapolation on this dynamic. They look at this from an investor standpoint, analyzing how shareholders view the risk of unionization in large chains. Morningstar acknowledges the immediate fear. Labor is over thirty percent of operating costs, so any upward pressure terrifies shareholders. But they also introduce a compelling counter theory. Which is they note empirical research indicating that while collective bargaining undeniably increases short term fixed costs, it might actually reduce long term volatility. How does that work? How does increasing costs create stability? The theory is predictability. Once a union contract is negotiated and signed, you have a locked in labor expense structure for a set period, usually three to four years. You aren't guessing what wages will be next month. ⁓ I see. Furthermore, if the contract does succeed in reducing turnover, you eliminate the massive, chaotic costs of constantly recruiting, hiring, and training new staff. You replace chaos with a higher but fixed cost. Short-term pain for long-term stability, that makes sense on paper. But the burning crucian is, do independent restaurants or even small franchisees operating on a microscopic 3% margin actually have the cash reserves to survive the short-term pain to ever see that long term stabilization? That is the existential question. Can a business with almost no financial cushion weather the immense cost of the transition itself? To explore that, we have to look at some very sobering real world case studies. of recent closures and labor disputes. Yeah, these are tough. Let's start with a high profile example. Chef Ann Kim's restaurant, Kim's in Minneapolis. This case blew my mind because it challenges the assumption that only failing or poorly managed restaurants face these crises. Chef Ann Kim is a James Beard award winning chef. This wasn't some struggling diner on the side of a highway. No, it was a very well regarded spot. It was a celebrated high-end spot. The workers there decided to organize and they successfully voted to unionize. But here is the terrifying part for operators. Just two mass later, the restaurant permanently closed its doors, citing insurmountable ongoing financial losses. Two months. That timeline is incredibly revealing, and we need to unpack the mechanics of what actually happens during those eight weeks. Yeah, walk me through that. When a staff successfully votes to unionize, that is not the end of the process. It is merely the starting gun. The next step is negotiating the first collective bargaining agreement. And I imagine the restaurant ownership doesn't just sit down at a booth with the staff and hash it out over a cup of coffee. None at all. It triggers a massive legal and administrative apparatus. Management has to hire specialized labor attorneys who understand the intricacies of the National Labor Relations Act. And while this is happening, the management team's focus is entirely diverted away from actually running the restaurant. Because they're in meetings all day. Exactly. They aren't focusing on menu development or local marketing. Or guest relations, they are trapped in endless strategy meetings and collective bargaining prep. Let's talk about the cost of those attorneys. Because if a restaurant is already skating on a five percent margin, dropping a retainer for a corporate labor law firm has to be devastating. It is often fatal. Specialized legal counsel can cost hundreds of dollars an hour. If a business is making a few thousand dollars a month in net profit and suddenly they have a thirty thousand dollar legal bill just to prepare for negotiations. That 5% margin vanishes overnight. Just from the prep work. The cash reserves of the business are completely drained by the friction and the legal overhead before a contract is even drafted. The business simply bleeds out financially during the preparation phase. It's wild to think that the sheer administrative weight of the process itself can kill a business, regardless of what the final contract would have mandated. But the legal risks get even more complex, as we see in our second case study. The Chipotle location in Augusta, Maine. This case is a masterclass in the legal and retaliatory risks involved in labor disputes. The Augusta location was historic. It was the very first Chipotle restaurant in the country to file a petition for unionization. A massive milestone for labor organizers nationwide. All eyes were on this one store. Yes. But shortly after the petition was filed, Chipotle Corporate permanently closed the location. They cited severe staffing and operational issues. As the reason for the shutdown. I can imagine how the labor organizers reacted to that. The fallout was immediate. The workers, backed by their advocates, filed formal complaints with the National Labor Relations Board, the NLRB. They alleged that the closure was illegal retaliation, that Chipotle deliberately shut down the store to bust the union organizing effort and send a chilling message to other locations. How does the NLRB even handle a claim like that? Proving why a massive corporation closed a specific store seems like trying to prove a negative. How do they separate a genuine operational failure from illegal union busting? It involves an incredibly complex and litigious discovery process. The NLRB will demand internal emails, financial records, staffing logs, and manager communications. Wow, they dig into everything. Everything. They try to determine if the operational issues cited by the company were genuine and insurmountable, or if they were a pretext. But for the company, fighting this battle in court takes years and costs a fortune in legal fees. Not to mention the ongoing public relations nightmare. So how did Chipotle resolve it? They ultimately decided not to fight it out to the bitter end. They agreed to a settlement, paying two hundred and forty thousand dollars to resolve the claims with the former workers. A quarter of a million dollars just to close a restaurant. Exactly. And this perfectly illustrates the immense paralyzing risk for operators. If you try to close a failing location that happens to be in the middle of a union drive, you are immediately exposed to allegations of illegal retaliation. Even if you were legitimately just losing money. Even if your motives are purely financial, defending against the claim carries massive financial penalties. It traps management in a scenario where keeping the store open loses money, but closing the store triggers a six-figure legal settlement. This dynamic creates a very specific, agonizing situation for one type of operator in particular. The data outlines a scenario called the franchise trap. Let's dig into this, because I think a lot of people confuse franchisees. The giant corporations whose logos are on the building. This is a crucial distinction to make. Franchisees are independent local business owners. They take out the loans, they sign the lease, and they hire the local staff. But they operate under incredibly strict, inflexible corporate guidelines. Right. If you own a franchise burger spot, you can't just wake up one morning and decide to start selling tacos or change the color of the uniforms. More importantly, you usually can't change the national pricing architecture or the fundamental business model. You are contractually obligated to use specific, approved suppliers, participate in national promotional pricing like a five-dollar meal deal, and maintain specific operational standards. So you're basically stuck playing by someone else's rules. Yes. You have all the financial risk of a small business owner, but very little of the autonomous control. So what happens when a union drive targets a franchised location? The local owner is caught in an impossible bind. On one side, they face union demands for higher wages and expanded benefits, which violently pushes their prime costs up. On the other side, they have the corporate franchiser demanding they maintain the $5 meal deal and buy their ingredients from the approved expensive corporate vendor. ⁓ that's brutal. The franchiser restricts their ability to pull the only levers available to cover the new labor costs. They are completely boxed in. They are. A franchise can't invent a new higher margin business model overnight to absorb a twenty percent spike in labor costs. They don't have the legal authority under their franchise agreement. So, faced with the prospect of operating at a permanent structural loss because they can't raise prices, many choose the only option left. They close their doors and hand the keys back to the bank. The tragic irony here is staggering. The workers might successfully organize, vote, and negotiate a fantastic contract on paper. But because the franchisees' business model is broken by the inflexibility of the corporate structure, the restaurant goes under and the workers lose their jobs in reality. It's a hollow victory. Exactly. Without corporate participation in the bargaining to allow for pricing and operational flexibility, union victories at the individual franchise level often prove completely hollow. It is a lose-lose scenario driven by the rigid math of the franchise agreement, colliding with the realities of modern labor costs. We're going to pivot in just a moment to look at how executive leadership is actively strategizing to survive this incredibly hostile environment. We have some fascinating survey data from across the franchise ecosystem that reveals exactly what CEOs and frontline managers are planning for the next six months. But first, let's take a quick pause here. This podcast is supported by the generous commitment of our sponsors, and we extend a special thank you to HRB Universal. Their dedication to providing comprehensive resources and promoting excellence is key to empowering professionals across the culinary and hospitality industries. We also want to acknowledge the Plate and Poor Collective Equity Partner Program. This initiative exemplifies a true commitment to fostering shared success and equitable growth within the food and beverage sector, helping entrepreneurs build a more inclusive and thriving future. The journey to the C-suite is fueled by innovation, relentless dedication, and the right network. We encourage you to engage with the resources and support offered by our sponsors. For details on how to connect with HRB Universal and the Plate and Poor Collective Equity Partner Program, visit HRBUNI dot com or just Google HRB Universal. Okay, we've gone through the terrifying math of the three percent margin, we've dissected the operational friction of work rules, and we've looked at the brutal reality of these recent closures in the franchise trap. So what does this all mean for the future? That's the big question. How are the people actually running these massive franchise systems preparing for what comes next? To answer that, we need to dive into the 2024 Fran Data Annual Franchiser Survey. And I want to highlight the scope of this data because this isn't just a small sample size. ⁓ not at all. The scope is massive. You're looking at empirical data from 215 different franchise brands representing 26 different industries, encompassing over 112,780. individual franchise units. Wow, that's huge. It gives us a sweeping panoramic view of executive anxiety, operational planning, and the tactical shifts happening on the ground right now. Let's start with the headline number that jumps off the page. 34% of these franchise businesses cite the cost and quality of labor as their absolute number one overall business challenge. It remains the dominant issue keeping executives awake at night. And when you drill down into the operational reality behind that percentage, It's genuinely staggering. Eighty percent of respondents reported that their franchises currently have unfulfilled job vacancies. Eight out of ten businesses are trying to run a restaurant without a full staff. Yep. I mean that explains so much of what we experience as consumers. The closed dining rooms, the long lines, the stressed out workers. It directly feeds into the burnout and service issues that labor advocates are protesting. Exactly. However, the survey also points to some fascinating macroeconomic shifts. While labor remains the primary challenge, it is actually easing slightly compared to the panic of 2023. We are beginning to see concrete signs of a cooling job market. How does that cooling show up in the numbers? Are they stopping the wage hikes? The wage growth data is the clearest indicator. The survey reveals that 81% of respondents increased wages in the past six months, which was a reaction to the absolute peak of the labor shortage. But looking forward, only 61% are planning to increase wages in the next six months. A twenty-point drop. The frantic reactive pace of mandatory wage hikes is starting to slow down simply because operators have run out of money. They cannot sustain the trajectory. And this cooling labor panic is coinciding with another major shift in executive concerns. Last year, everyone was terrified of inflation. But this year, the fear of inflation dropped significantly. Falling from twenty percent of respondents citing it as their primary concern down to only nine percent. You would think that inflation softening would be a massive relief for these operators. It is a relief, but it's being immediately replaced by two massive emerging fears that were barely on the radar a year ago. The skyrocketing cost of financing and a severe slowdown in consumer demand. So on one hand, interest rates are high, meaning the loans they need to buy new equipment or remodel stores are incredible. Incredibly expensive. Exactly. And on the other hand, the consumer is finally pushing back. Precisely. The report explicitly states that as consumer demand weakens, franchises are experiencing a severe slowdown in their ability to increase prices to offset any remaining cost pressures. The lever is officially broken. There are a cop between expensive capital and a tapped out customer. But beyond these macroeconomic shifts, there is a massive regulatory threat looming over the entire franchise model. Executives are watching this closely, and it revolves around the NLRB joint employer final rule. Walk us through the mechanics of this because it sounds incredibly dry, but it could fundamentally alter how every fast food chain in America operates. If we connect this to the bigger picture, this regulatory change is an existential threat to the concept of franchising as we know it. Historically, the legal framework has been very clear. The franchiser, the massive corporate entity, and the franchisee, the local owner, Are legally separate entities. Right. The local owner is the sole direct employer of the staff in their specific restaurant. So if I work the Fry Station at a franchise burger place in Ohio, my boss is the local owner who hired me, not the multinational corporation headquartered in Chicago. Exactly. But the impending NLRB joint employer rule threatens to upend that separation. It aims to classify franchisers as direct joint employers of the franchisee's staff simply because the corporate entity exercises indirect control over the brand standards. Wait, so the multinational corporation in Chicago would suddenly be legally responsible for the fry cook in Ohio? Yes. This means the corporate entity could be held legally and financially liable for labor disputes, unfair labor practice claims, union negotiations, and basic employment practices at every single local franchise location. That is a staggering amount of liability to take on overnight. How are corporate franchisers reacting to this threat? They are terrified. And they outline a stark binary choice if this rule takes permanent effect. Corporate entities will be forced to do one of two things. Option A. They exert unprecedented total control over local operators to mitigate their new legal risk. Meaning what? Meaning they would dictate hiring, firing, scheduling, and wages directly, effectively stripping the local owner of their autonomy and turning franchisees into glorified middle managers. Which defeats the entire purpose of owning your own business. And option B option B is the opposite extreme. Corporate franchisers withdraw operational support entirely. They distance themselves completely from providing HR guidance, training materials, or operational advice to avoid any appearance of control that could trigger liability. Wow. This deprives the local owner of the very support and expertise they paid a massive franchise fee to receive. It fundamentally breaks the value proposition of the franchise model. Either you lose your independence or you lose your support network. It does. Which is exactly why trade groups like the National Restaurant Association are aggressively lobbying for legislation like the Save Local Business Act. This act is designed to permanently codify the traditional pre 2020 standard, maintaining the clear legal firewall between franchiser and franchisee. They argue that operators and employees need a predictable, workable legal standard, not constant regulatory whiplash depending on which administration is in power. Okay, let's bring us down to the ground level. Imagine I am a frontline manager or a local franchisee listening to this deep dive. I am looking at shrinking margins, a consumer base that refuses to pay higher prices, the threat of union drives, and looming regulatory chaos. I am sweating. ⁓ absolutely, it's a lot. How do you survive this? How do you build a competitive employee-centric workplace before a union drive even starts? And how do you protect that 3% margin when all your fixed costs are rising? The focus has to pivot from analyzing the macro problem to executing ruthless operational strategies. And the central theme for survival in the next decade is absolute unyielding operational efficiency. Since you cannot raise prices and you cannot easily lower hourly wages in a competitive market, efficiency is the only release valve you have left. Let's get into the weeds here. What are the best operators actually doing today to find that efficiency? The first major strategy is a hyper focus on cross-training employees. Historically, kitchens were very siloed. You had one person who only prepped vegetables, another who only worked the grill, and another who only expedited the food. Right. Everyone had their one specific job. Today, operators are investing heavily in training staff to handle multiple diverse roles. How does that impact the bottom line? It increases productivity per labor hour. If your grill cook can also jump on the prep station during a lull or jump on the register during a rush, You drastically reduce the need to schedule extra specialized staff during transitional periods. It builds the agility back into the system that we were talking about earlier without necessarily cutting someone's hourly wage. It makes the team leaner but more capable. What's the second strategy? The second strategy is surgically precise schedule optimization. Operators are using advanced analytics to align their labor matrix perfectly with peak and slow periods. So no more guessing. Exactly. They are monitoring sales metrics in real time, sometimes down to 15-minute increments. It is no longer acceptable to have three servers standing around folding napkins for an hour waiting for the dinner rush to start. Scheduling has to match revenue output almost perfectly. And the third strategy, which I know is a painful one for a lot of chefs, is the menu audit. It is painful, but it is critical. Restaurants are aggressively cutting unprofitable, complex, or low-selling menu items. Let's say you have a specific seafood dish on the menu. It requires three unique ingredients that have a short shelf life and often spoil. It takes a cook 15 minutes of active prep time to make, disrupting the flow of the kitchen. But you only sell two of them a week. It has to go, even if it's the chef's favorite dish. It has to go. Simplifying the menu reduces food waste, speeds up ticket times for the entire dining room, and lowers the cognitive and physical complexity of the labor required in the kitchen. It's about streamlining the manufacturing process of the food. But cross-training, scheduling, and menu audits can only take you so far. You are eventually going to hit a wall on human efficiency. Here's where it gets really interesting, and frankly, a little sci-fi. The FRAN data survey reveals a massive industry-wide pivot that is going to fundamentally change the way we interact with restaurants forever. This is undoubtedly the most striking statistic in the entire report. Of the franchises that anticipate a decrease in their employment headcount over the next six months, an overwhelming 79% are actively implementing technology to improve efficiency. 79%. They aren't just cutting staff and hoping the remaining workers run faster. They are permanently replacing those lost labor hours with automation. Because they have exhausted every other option. This is the industry's ultimate structural release valve. If you cannot charge the customer more for the product and you are mandated by market forces or unions to pay more for the labor, the only mathematical solution left to balance the prime cost equation is to use significantly less human labor. Walk me through what this technology actually looks like on the ground. Are we talking about robot chefs flipping burgers? We are getting closer to that, but the immediate implementation is less flashy and more insidious. We're talking about advanced POS systems. That seamlessly integrate inventory management and predictive ordering, eliminating the need for a manager to spend hours counting stock. ⁓ so back-of-house stuff. Yes, but front-of-house too. We are talking about the ubiquitous self-serve kiosks in the dining room. When the customer inputs their own order and swipes their own card, you completely eliminate the need for a front-counter cashier. I see this everywhere now. Half the fast food places I walk into don't even have a register open. It's just a wall of touch screens. And it extends beyond the store. There is a massive push toward proprietary digital ordering apps. The customer orders on their phone from their couch, walks in, and grabs a bag off a rack without ever speaking to a human being. Behind the scenes, operators are using AI-driven staff scheduling tools that analyze historical weather patterns, local events, and past sales data to predict demand with terrifying accuracy, scheduling labor down to the minute. It's a complete paradigm shift. The human element, the actual hospitality part of the transaction, is being systematically engineered out of the high volume model to protect the margin. They're utilizing automation to solve the labor cost crisis permanently. That is exactly what is happening. And this brings us to a really stark projection for the macroeconomic outcome of all these colliding forces. If the margin squeeze continues, if labor costs remain rigid and the automation pivot accelerates, What does the restaurant landscape look like in five, 10, or 15 years? Paint that picture for us because it feels like we are on the precipice of something entirely new. The analysis projects a future that is starkly aggressively bifurcated. We are looking at a barbell economy for dining out. On one extreme end of the spectrum, you'll have high-end luxury dining establishments. These are places with massive average check sizes where patrons are willing to pay $150, $200, or $300 ahead. Because at that price point, the restaurant actually has the margin padding to absorb high labor costs. Exactly. They can afford the union contracts, they can afford the premium ingredient prices, and they can afford to pay a sommelier and a maitre day. They will continue to offer highly attentive, deeply human centric service because their wealthy clientele demands it as part of the experience, and crucially, they can afford to pay for it. And on the other extreme end of the spectrum. On the other end, You will have fully automated labor light chains, QSRs, fast casual spots, and drive thrusts where you might literally never interact with a human being. You order on your phone, you pull up to a window, a mechanical arm or conveyor belt, hands you your food from a heated cubby, and the food itself is prepared with heavy assistance from automated fryers and robotic grills. The labor cost is engineered down to the absolute mathematical minimum to keep the sub twenty dollar check viable. It's a fascinating and somewhat dystopian vision. It's a world driven entirely by the unforgiving mathematics of a 3% margin. But what about the middle? What about the local tavern, the family diner, the casual sit-down spot where you know the waitress's name, but the burger only costs $18? That is the tragedy of this economic shift. It is the inevitable outcome of these colliding forces. If the middle falls out, the traditional neighborhood restaurant, the casual sit-down place with moderate prices, high labor needs, and friendly table service. might simply cease to exist as a viable business model, they cannot charge luxury prices, and they cannot afford to fully automate, they are trapped in the squeeze. That is an immense amount to process. We've gone from the granular penny pinching details of a profit and loss statement through the complex legal web of the NLRB all the way to a fundamental restructuring of how society eats and interacts. I want to thank you for guiding us through this incredibly complex landscape today. My pleasure entirely. It's vital to pull back the curtain and understand the mechanical forces Driving the headlines we see every day. And as we wrap up, I want to leave our listeners with one final broader thought to mull over, building on this idea of a bifurcated future. We've spent this entire deep dive talking about the economic math, the prime cost, and the legal liabilities, but what about a social impact? If the neighborhood restaurant vanishes, replaced by exclusive luxury dining on one side and silent touchscreens on the other, what happens to the concept of hospitality itself? Well, the simple fundamental human act Of someone handing you a plate of food, asking how your day was, and pouring you a cup of coffee become a luxury good reserved only for the wealthy, while the rest of us interact exclusively with kiosks and algorithms. It's a profound shift in our culture, and it's being driven entirely by a few percentage points on a spreadsheet. We look forward to having you join us for our next episode of From Kitchen to C-Suite, where we will continue to explore captivating topics designed to elevate your career and entrepreneurial drive. Don't miss a beat. Whether you're commuting or chilling on the couch, we've got you covered. On the go. Subscribe and listen via Riverside and from kitchendosuite.com or our website, hrbueni.com. You can also search for us on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, Amazon Music, Audible, iHeartRadio, Deezer, or wherever you get your daily audio fix. Take HRB Network wherever you go. Download the new mobile web app at hrbuni.com after 20 APP. Fur on the big screen. Level up your experience by watching the From Kitchen the Sea Suite podcast on the HRB Network on Roku or Fire TV. Until our next broadcast, continue to innovate and strive for superior achievement.