Sick surcharge signs brew up controversy at local coffee shops
»Play Video
SEATTLE - Controversy is brewing at a chain of local coffee shops after a new paid sick leave policy hit the books in Seattle.
Business owners say the new policy costs them money - and one coffee shop owner passed that cost on to customers, then posted signs explaining the sick leave surcharge.
Ali Ghambari, owner of Cherry Street coffee houses, says he loves his customers, and the last thing he wants is negativity. That's why he pulled those signs after only a few days.
Customers say the local coffee shops add flavor to the community. They often make time in their busy days to stop in.
"This is my neighborhood hangout, for sure, I would not stop coming here for sure," says customer Stephanie Cummings - even if it means paying a few extra cents for a cup of coffee.
"You don't need to give us an itemized list of where all of your proceeds are going," she says.
But Cherry Street Coffee's owner wanted people to know. He says he wanted to be transparent.
"Because that's the way I am - as real as that 'good morning' I just shared with you. It's that simple," says Ghambari.
So last week, he posted a sign right by the cash register. It said: "Sick leave surcharge: To help offset the cost of the city of Seattle's sick leave policy, we're adding a 1.5 percent surcharge to all orders. We appreciate your understanding and your continued patronage."
But some customers say they found the signs offensive.
"Actually, yes a little bit," says Cummings. "It almost sounds like they're disagreeing with the city of Seattle's paid sick leave policy."
Cummings says it was the wording of the sign. This is how she interpreted it:
"We don't agree with this. These are costs that are coming from your pockets, not necessarily something we agree with. But because of the city of Seattle doing this for you, we're going to raise our prices," she says.
But that's not what the owner says he meant at all.
"It's a fantastic policy," he says, then he adds that he doesn't have the $25,000 extra in his budget to fund the city's new law.
But, he says, so many people were reading the wrong message between the lines - and blogging negatively about it - that he pulled all the signs after three days.
Not every customer was upset about the signs.
"I'm kind of surprised that people around here would have gotten mad about that," says customer Dana Johnson.
There is now an empty space by Cherry Street's cash registers where the signs used to be.
"I didn't even dwell on it," says Ghambari.
He still has to add 3 cents to the price of a 12-ounce cup of coffee. You just won't read about it at the register.
The city's sick leave law went into effect last September.
Business owners say the new policy costs them money - and one coffee shop owner passed that cost on to customers, then posted signs explaining the sick leave surcharge.
Ali Ghambari, owner of Cherry Street coffee houses, says he loves his customers, and the last thing he wants is negativity. That's why he pulled those signs after only a few days.
Customers say the local coffee shops add flavor to the community. They often make time in their busy days to stop in.
"This is my neighborhood hangout, for sure, I would not stop coming here for sure," says customer Stephanie Cummings - even if it means paying a few extra cents for a cup of coffee.
"You don't need to give us an itemized list of where all of your proceeds are going," she says.
But Cherry Street Coffee's owner wanted people to know. He says he wanted to be transparent.
"Because that's the way I am - as real as that 'good morning' I just shared with you. It's that simple," says Ghambari.
So last week, he posted a sign right by the cash register. It said: "Sick leave surcharge: To help offset the cost of the city of Seattle's sick leave policy, we're adding a 1.5 percent surcharge to all orders. We appreciate your understanding and your continued patronage."
But some customers say they found the signs offensive.
"Actually, yes a little bit," says Cummings. "It almost sounds like they're disagreeing with the city of Seattle's paid sick leave policy."
Cummings says it was the wording of the sign. This is how she interpreted it:
"We don't agree with this. These are costs that are coming from your pockets, not necessarily something we agree with. But because of the city of Seattle doing this for you, we're going to raise our prices," she says.
But that's not what the owner says he meant at all.
"It's a fantastic policy," he says, then he adds that he doesn't have the $25,000 extra in his budget to fund the city's new law.
But, he says, so many people were reading the wrong message between the lines - and blogging negatively about it - that he pulled all the signs after three days.
Not every customer was upset about the signs.
"I'm kind of surprised that people around here would have gotten mad about that," says customer Dana Johnson.
There is now an empty space by Cherry Street's cash registers where the signs used to be.
"I didn't even dwell on it," says Ghambari.
He still has to add 3 cents to the price of a 12-ounce cup of coffee. You just won't read about it at the register.
The city's sick leave law went into effect last September.
I feel that a lot of people are missing the point on this. Perhaps readers should go to the original story posted by the Stranger's SLOG.
Â
Nobody is complaining about an extra three cents on a cup of coffee, let's be real. In my oppinion it's not about "transparency" either. I feel it's mostly about treating employees with basic respect and decency. Small and big buisiness alike should offer a few paid sick leave days per year, regardless if it is enforced by law or not. The fact that the owner of this establishment feels so negatively about it, as to post a "surcharge" sign disgusts me. One could bet that he has no health insurance offerings and pays minimum wage too. With that being said, put yourself in the shoes of one of his employees. Get sick once or twice a year and come to work sick, potentially spreading your germs to co-workers and customers, or stay at home without pay (when you make minimum wage) and worst case senario, need to visit the doctor and pay out of pocket. Sounds like fun either way right!?
Â
With a business doing as well as this one does (just oppened up two new locations), he might consider showing some of that "love" to not only his customers who are making him rich, but his employees who are making him rich as well.
Â
Â
 @bowleggeddog  "I feel it's mostly about treating employees with basic respect and decency."
Â
Does basic respect and decency have to include sick pay? Â Not for me it doesn't, I'm fine without it. Â My problem is that they are forcing these employers to provide it, give them the choice. Â A lot of union trades in construction don't get sick pay, you don't work you don't get paid.
@oledawg Are we really going to compare the rights of union trade workers to that of food industry workers? Don't get me wrong, I'm all for and pro union, but the large majority of food workers are not unionized and have very few rights and benefits. Wish it wasn't the case but it is.
Â
 The law was in part aimed at targeting the food industry to help compensate for some of the inequities in the industry. If a minimum wage food worker gets sick and has no financial alternative but to go to work sick, they are going to go to work sick! These laws not only protect the low-earning worker, but the consumer as well, as I'm sure you don't want your next burger flipped by a feverish, sneezing cook. Â
Business expenses and business profits are paid for by the customer. If anyone thinks that the Sick Leave policies are going to be paid from the business owner's pocket, you are mistaken. Increased costs to the business = increased cost to the consumer. How hard is this?
 @ETSubmariner For a lot of people on the left who think all good things flow from the government, and corporations are evil, it's a VERY hard concept to grasp.
 @RN1  @ETSubmariner That has nothing to do with the left. It's any idiot who doesn't understand how money works. It's exactly the same as the folks you see on the right with "government out of my medicare" signs.
 @RN1  @quidproquo  @ETSubmariner I never said anything against the guy putting up the signs. In fact I used to print the menus for Cherry Street when I worked for fedex office. The owner is a cool dude and extremely nice.  I've never had a bad experience at Cherry Street.
 @quidproquo  @ETSubmariner Corporate welfare... You eman like giving a solar company in Nevada (Senator Reid's state) a loan guarantee worth more than $700 million to create 45 new jobs, when the company is connected to Pelosi's brother-in-law? http://hotair.com/archives/2011/09/29/737-million-in-green-tech-loan-to-company-connected-to-pelosi-family/
Yeah, I'd be OK with getting rid of that. Most of the other ag subsides, tax look holes, general welfare, etc., etc., etc. Proof that the left doesn't understand money is everywhere - no budget from the Senate in almost 4 years, while borrowing a trillion-plus per year, assuming that a government program will make health-care cost less, when all the incentives are totally screwed up, thinking that just because the Fed is printing money to by most of the new debt issued and keeping interest rates artificially low that inflation isn't a problem, etc., etc., etc. But, those are all essays in their own right.
In *this* case, it's simply a matter or letting customers know why prices are going up, and informed customers are good, IMO.
 @RN1  @ETSubmariner Sorry man, you are just seeing way different people than I am. Most folks on the political left, as I am know exactly where our money is going and why.  In fact, most folks on the left have a better grasp of how much of our money is going to farm subsidies, oil subsidies, and the plethora of other things that make this country a corporate welfare wonderland.
 @quidproquo  @ETSubmariner True, but in my experience, those on the political left do not understand money and capital nearly as well as those on the right (though many of them know a lot about various *theories* about money and capital, most of which don't work well in the real world).
(side note: I'd like to see the government out of medicare, too, meaning yes I'd like to see it get pitched in the dustbin, along with a bunch of other government programs that didn't work out as hoped for, but DID work out about as expected)
I personally would be happy to pay a little more if it means that I won't catch a cold from the person who made my coffee and had their hands all over my cup.Â
It's the cost of doing business. People would be surprised to find out what they're actually paying for when they get that super latte venti whatever in the morning. 2 cents of that is going towards the toilet paper in the bathroom. Personally I don't think putting up the sign was really an appropriate thing to do.
I will gladly pay the $0.03 per cup of coffee to let sick barristas stay home and save myself and hundreds of others from being infected by their colds, etc...
It's really kinda sad there isn't a national sick-leave policy already in place.
People need to learn how to interpret what they read instead of always looking for something from which to invent drama where there is none.Â
If a small business has 5 employees that are paid $10/hr and they use all of their 40 hours of sick pay in a year, the cost is $2,000 plus 7.65% FICA and little bit more for unemployment taxes. And that's only IF the employees take all 40 hours during the year, which isn't likely. If a business can't afford an extra $2,000-3000 per year, perhaps they need to review their business plan, because they are not doing well overall. Employees also have the option to swap shifts to make up for the sick day instead of staying home and getting paid for it.
Â
It is better to encourage a sick employee to stay home, than to spread whatever they might have. All in all, this is new sick & safe leave policy is a good thing!
Â
If a business owner wants to charge a few extra cents to make up the extra cost, I don't see anything wrong with that. I just think some employers are a little ridiculous for acting like this is the end of the world.
 @seattle acct You have never run a business, have you? An extra $2k-$3k per year *per employee* is HUGE if you have 20 employees. That means the owner might be going from $50k (a modest living for a lot of work) to ZERO.
@RN1Â It is an extra $2-3k per year for ALL employees if you have 5 employees, which makes it $400-600 per employee.
 @seattle acct Sorry. Read too fast and misread what you said; you are correct, assuming only 5 employees. Given the nature of sick leave, most will use it, and considering the story says it must roll over and accumulate, that means when the leave they'll either get paid for it, or else "use it" all up (and get paid for it) just before the move on. It'll get used, and the cost will be there. And, again, this is just one more thing on top of many.
AND that's only IF each one takes all 40 hours of sick time.
I know I'm sure sick of my local corner coffeeshop owners driving around in their Bentleys. They should damn well share some of their overseas wealth locked up in Bermuda-based business operations and Swiss bank accounts.
I wonder how Seattle is dealing with the prevailing wage Union jobs of which most do not have sick leave, yet alone paid sick leave?
Â
non-story
Then post elsewhere.....
It's okay to pass along those costs...just a bad idea by the business owner to put up a sign.
 @Larry Bernandez It's called freedom of speech.
 @Larry Bernandez So you are against informing customers of the consequences of local laws they helped enact? You'd prefer that when they force someones costs up, they remain blissfully ignorant?
 @RN1 Does the owner bother to break down his property taxes at the point of purchase also?
 @sims I'd find it very interesting, personally, if a small business owner chose to give on a receipt (or post on a wall) what the breakdown of his costs were, so that his customers had a better feel for what is actually needed for a business to operate. It might also change the choices the customers make, as well as possibly giving them business opportunities. If a CPA sees their favorite store spends 4 cents of every dollar in sales on accounting, they might look things over and offer to do it for 3 cents, thereby saving the company money, while expanding the biz of the accountant.
More information is almost always better in this context - you can always choose to ignore it if you don't care.
 @RN1  @Larry Bernandez Damned if you do, damned if you don't.  I agree with you, let the people know why but most of the idiots can't handle it, same as the credit card fee.  How many people freak out and claim they won't shop at a store that passes on the charge this way, but don't stop to think about why this has happened.
If you think small businesses are going to "eat" this new tax, think again. Of course they are going to pass it along to their customers, the very people who voted in the yahoos who made this law. I would do the same thing. Good job Seattle; way to move small business out of your community.
 @Bianca I'm happy to pay a bit more for my food and drinks to make sure every person has a safety net. Â
@Bianca This isn't a tax... Employers just have to pay their employees for sick days taken. This encourages employees to stay home and not get everyone else sick. I'm pretty sure it's a good idea to encourage employees to stay home if they really are sick, instead of spreading it around. Of course there will probably be employees who will take advantage of a sick day without being sick, but this really isn't hurting small employers all that much. It's a day's pay plus 7.65% FICA taxes and maybe a few extra dollars for unemployment etc.
 @seattle acct  @Bianca Not a tax in the technical sense, but a government mandate that incurs a cost that must be paid and therefore accounted for by the business. It either comes out of profits, wages, or cutting costs elsewhere, unless it's picked up in higher costs of the product they sell. Not a tax, but the costs/effects are essentially indistinguishable.
 @seattle acct  @RN1 "Not that much..." A bit of "not that much" here, and a bit of "minor marginal cost" there, and pretty soon a guy is out of business, or at least struggling to not raise costs more than his customers find comfortable. And, it's a good thing you know more about his business and what his costs are than HE does. That way, you can tell him how to run it, just like the other Big Government Nanny-staters do (which in less polite company I refer to as socialists, fascists, commies, etc), and not feel bad about it.
Actually twelve employees is incorrect, he would have to employ 40-50 people to take a $25k hit, if they were making minimum wage.Â
@RN1 I agree it will cost a little more to pay for sick days, but it's not that much in the grand scheme of things. I highly doubt it's really costing the guy in the story $25k, unless he has over twelve employees and they all use all of their allowed sick days in a year.
Â
I think it is okay to raise prices a little to make up for the potential added cost. I just think some of the business owners are being overly dramatic. Â
@Bianca if they are all subject to the law and passing the cost on to consumers that means they are all still on a level playing field and not hurt in the least. Unless you witness consumers walking away. See any of that? Â
 @Seattleisaslew Yes you are right when it comes to a business competing with other local business. However there are many businesses within the Seattle city limits that have to compete outside the city, state or even country. They will be less competitive as the city increases their costs. At some point they will decide to move to a place where they can be more competitive.
Not a comparable business model. Why did Russel Investments move from Tacoma to Seattle? Same logic....not comparable to the part time sick leave argument.
 @Seattleisaslew There was an uptick in business leasing last year, it was however in large part due to Amazon's growth. The Port issue is comparable, it illustrates my point that the cost of doing business is cheaper in Tacoma. Competition has been the key point of my comments.
@Alert Eagle Actually business vacancies in Seattle are way down. Moving in not out. And the ports, with full time union jobs and benefits, out bidding each other for contracts is not comparable to small minimum wage no benefit businesses such as coffee shops.
 @Seattleisaslew I am referring to businesses that are located in the city, but do not rely on 100% on local traffic. Many businesses have already relocated to other places that are more business friendly. Every time a municipality raises the cost of doing business, those businesses will evaluate these costs. One good example of losing good paying jobs: Port of Seattle lost several shipping companies to Tacoma.
@Alert Eagle Taxes aren't equal already from city to city, county to county or state to state. However, in Seattle they have access to a large pool of well off comsumers.
Good grief, People complain when prices go up.... he was simply explaining WHY he raised the prices.Â
@fedup23 I wonder if he posts signs when his suppliers raise prices to make more profits when he thinks the market will pay it? It is definitely a one-sided political statement.
This comment has been deleted
 @donner there is a verb missing: "...that I don't think the new policy ...." think what? makes sense? is good? is bad?
Maybe there should be an exemption to the law. You do not have to pay sick leave as long as each employee is interrogated every day and any reporting to work sick means you post a sign warning your customers. Caught not posting is a ten grand fine.
Free education for those that don't understand that every fee, tax and toll that is imposed by government, eventually gets paid for by the consumer. You would be surprised how many are so ignorant.
@Alert Eagle You do understand why we have worker rights laws don't you? Most actually save the govt (we the people) money in the long run. If you don't agree then send your kids over. I'll pay them ten cents an hour for a 16 hour day digging ditches....NO BENEFITS.
 @Seattleisaslew Really not my point.Â
 @Alert Eagle Donner called BS, so I said I'd stick around, but he never replied.  I cannot stick around any longer, I have to get ready and go to work so I can pay all these taxes..  L8R!
 @Seattleisaslew I do not think he was making any judgement calls, he was just mentioning how the consumer pays the tax.
@RN1 I'm not stupid enough to open a coffee shop in a way over saturated market.
 @Seattleisaslew It's a good thing you are not in business, because you'd lose your shirt in a heartbeat.
@K. Coleman And I was refuting that. I really have no respect for businesses that pay the minimum and keep part time only to avoid paying benefits. The Walmart approach expecting the taxpayer to pick up that healthcare/retirement tab. A much larger cost to we the people. If they fail good riddance but in the mean time stop crying. The laws are heavily weighted to your side.
 @Alert Eagle Yeah, a basic concept, over looked by so many.  The plain truth is BUSINESSES DO NOT PAY TAXES, you, the consumer pay the TAX for them every time you buy their product. It's called a 'HIDDEN TAX', and it's always passed on to the consumer.
Â
This is also another reason why some DOMESTIC products cost much more than imported products, that only pay a small import tax. Â
 @K. Coleman  @Alert EagleÂ
Â
Â
Well I'm glad that got cleared up! Now I can stop writing all those checks to the city and state every quarter!! WOOHOO!
Â
I think your statement is better worded as the customer funds the taxes levied on them... I still have to send in that check to pay them...
 @K. Coleman  @Alert Eagle I call BS on this!
 @donner Which part don't you understand?
  @Alert Eagle Really?  Please explain your reasoning and I'll reply.  I have a 1/2 hour before I have to get ready for work.