I'm an Unemployed Waitress. Don't Dine Out at All | Hacker News Reader

I'm an Unemployed Waitress. Don't Dine Out at All

noraeberman.com

I fail to understand this article. It seems to wobble between "don't eat out, you'll propagate infection to others," which, yes, social distance good, disease transmission bad.

But most of the article seems to suggest something like: "when you eat out, you put us, your service staff, at risk." Uhm... quit?

Normally I'd say something like, "most people can't afford to just quit," but no one can afford to pay you to stay home, either, so what exactly is the author proposing?

AFAIK: If no-one is eating out, the restaurants can't be open, and the staff can be on unemployment. If the restaurants are open and the staff "choose" not to work, they can't get unemployment.

Most people cannot afford to quit because they would not get unemployment benefits. Being laid off is a different story.

Aren't you disqualified for unemployment benefits if you quit instead of being fired?

“fired” means being terminated for cause, such as you stole something. “laid off” is the term used for no longer being employed for other reasons, like the company can’t afford to keep your position around.

> “fired” means being terminated for cause, such as you stole something."

Ugh. All 50 states have At-will employment:

"At-will employment is a term used in U.S. labor law for contractual relationships in which an employee can be dismissed by an employer for any reason (that is, without having to establish "just cause" for termination), and without warning,[1] as long as the reason is not illegal (e.g. firing because of the employee's race, religion or sexuality)." [1]

Being 'fired' has a negative stigma, despite the fact you can be terminated for _any_ reason, including 'employee just didn't fit in'. Many companies are also very savvy about the process. Have a "negative" performance review, with a warning, then some time later be fired. Thus documenting a "cause" other than your ugly sweater.

What's interesting is when employers mistakenly believe they can disqualify you for unemployment because they fired you. This is not the case.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will_employment

Thanks for the legal clarification, but that's not what the point is. Many people, especially those new to the workforce, seem to like to use the word "fired" to mean "lost my job" because they've heard it in TV shows or whatever, and they don't realize that it has very negative connotations (only that it sounds forceful).

I see a lot of people saying things like "my company ran out of money and they fired me", which does not accurately describe what happened. If you went into a job interview and told them you were "fired" when you were really "laid off", that could dramatically impact whether or not you get the job, so it is important to know what language people use, regardless of the legal definitions.

"...they don't realize that ['fired'] has very negative connotations"

?! Really?

"important to know what language people use"

Thats exactly what I'm saying. There are three terms recognized by your state department of labor: Quit, Fired, Laid Off.

You can be "fired" both in legal terminology, and in common language use, for no fault of your own, but the word has a negative connotation.

What am I saying? It sucks! It's a failure of language. Socially 'fired' has a negative 'connotation' (which is commonly applied at a personal level), and in both real-world practice and in legal terms 'fired' has the 'denotation' of 'termination' where termination can be all of these things (at a relationship level), and the employee is not necessarily 'at fault'.

The meaning of 'fired' is so unpredictable I can't imagine anyone using it as you say, because they don't know how someone is going to take it.

However, your next employer can call your previous employer to verify employment and there is no federal law preventing the old employer from describing your termination as 'fired'. That sucks.

Unemployment insurance is $600 a week now, I think, even if you’re working partial hours in some states.

Before I was in software I spent many years in the restaurant industry and I can't imagine how tough it must be for those employees.

The article mentions that her boss told her not to come to work if she feels sick. In the industry, I never received anything but pushback for banging out, even when I was deathly ill. The opposite can be true with managers issuing repercussions for calling in sick.

In NYC you can't even dine indoors. Is there really a big risk of eating maskless at a table, outdoors, separated by plexiglass (or 6 feet apart), in a city where the COVID infection rate is so low? Or serving those customers?

The reality of NYC dining is more like this.

https://ny.eater.com/2020/7/21/21302310/outdoor-dining-reser...

https://www.6sqft.com/best-outdoor-dining-restaurants-nyc/

The tables are next to each other; in many cases, with just enough room for one person to squeeze through. Plexiglass between each table is a rare luxury.

Yes there is.

When did we forget how to cook for ourselves? I am perplexed by the large number of articles-- including this one-- the seem to assume that the options are eat-in or take-out.

It seems disturbingly common among the college-to-30 demographic. Among my coworkers at a FAANG company, many of whom had gone straight from parents' home to college dorm to a corporate campus with multiple cafes serving more-than-decent food, the switch to WFH caused no small amount of angst. Many others in tech and finance become "foodies" addicted to meals better than they can cook themselves, and since they also have the means to afford it they make it a habit. Still others, families with two working parents under constant time pressure, succumb to the appeal of five minutes managing takeout vs. twenty for even the simplest kind of meal. (That includes cleaning; one of my pet peeves is people who discount the time/effort involved in cooking because they always dump everything but over-the-flame time on other household members.)

Some of the reasons are good and some are bad. While I also view this development with some dismay, I'm hesitant to criticize people who are merely making different tradeoffs in a different time/context than I am.

Indeed, a tradeoff could easily make sense for someone.

That a person's chosen tradeoff might not change in a time of widescale pandemic and massive unemployment surprises me. And that a lot of articles take it granted that people will continue to eat out perplexes me.

We ate out a fair bit before covid19 cases took off but haven't once since March... wasn't even something that we considered at any point.

TBH food at home has been more enjoyable than what we were getting out, the time suck in cleanup is real-- but it isn't like we're going anywhere. :)

I too am surprised at people who continue to eat take out. I don't trust restaurant workers to stay home when not sick and take precautions with the food to make sure it's not contaminated. It's hard enough dealing with food delivery every few weeks. Most people won't change unless they are forced to. I hope indoor restaurants and bars are shut down again soon. Completely unnecessary services. Everything that can be should be curbside service.

What’s wrong with one person prep and cook, one person clean?

Nothing, when done right. But not when "prep and cook" means minimal prep and using twice as many dishes/utensils as were really necessary, while "clean" means putting away ingredients/appliances and bringing food to the table and dealing with leftovers as well as actually cleaning. If we're talking about total time, we also have to consider who buys the groceries, who sharpens the knives, and a bunch of other things.

The point is that "it only takes ten minutes" is inaccurate in the sense that it doesn't properly represent the labor that's replaced by choosing take-out instead. It's something usually said by people who are already enjoying the privilege of having someone else do most of the work.

I am not the author but I think you can read it as "If you want restaurant food, get it to go". i think it goes without saying that cooking is always an option.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com