A hell of a way to lose your job - Bennigan's goes under

Enigma · Post by **Enigma** » 2008-07-30 06:18pm

weemadando wrote:On a similar note - Starbucks have just pulled the same thing in Australia. Doors shut, and don't open again. What a way to go eh?

I heard on the radio that Starbucks is in the process of "restructuring". They plan to close about 600 shops and cut about 1,000 jobs.

Post by **Broomstick** » 2008-07-30 06:57pm

600 shops is a lot more than just 1,000 jobs.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2008-07-30 07:23pm

Broomstick wrote:600 shops is a lot more than just 1,000 jobs.

They may be finding jobs for a many employees in other stores.

Questor · Post by **Questor** » 2008-07-30 07:24pm

Broomstick wrote:600 shops is a lot more than just 1,000 jobs.

The explanation they gave for that is that those that are not fired (have more seniority, I guess) will be moved to other shops.

Post by **Broomstick** » 2008-07-30 07:41pm

Color me skeptical.

The Duchess of Zeon · Post by **The Duchess of Zeon** » 2008-07-30 10:03pm

Broomstick wrote:Color me skeptical.

You can easily close 600 stores and only release 1,000 people when you reduce thousands of others to part-time status, and then you can save even more money by eliminating their benefits since they're part time.

Post by **Broomstick** » 2008-07-30 10:37pm

Starbucks offers benefits to ALL their employees including part time employees and have done so for years. Whether that will continue or not I don't know, but the current CEO has a bug up his ass about making sure everyone has healthcare coverage.

And a lot of their staff are already part time.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2008-07-30 10:48pm

phongn wrote:
Broomstick wrote:600 shops is a lot more than just 1,000 jobs.
They may be finding jobs for a many employees in other stores.

They are, in fact Starbucks said at the same time they announced the cuts that they also plan to continue opening new stores this year in prime locations, most of the outlets being closed simply never did well even at the best of times.

Pelranius · Post by **Pelranius** » 2008-07-31 12:45am

If you really want to eat lobster, it's probably better just to buy it from a supermarket and have them boil it for you (at least with the ones on the West Coast. Chinese supermarkets, despite their other failings, are good for that at least).

The Starbucks one doesn't really surprise me. Whose idea was it to build three stores on the same fucking block?

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2008-07-31 12:49am

Pelranius wrote:The Starbucks one doesn't really surprise me. Whose idea was it to build three stores on the same fucking block?

From what I've read, in certain regions they discovered that they actually could put two stores in close proximity to each other and still have net gain in profit. IIRC, they found it out when they built a temporary Starbuck's when they had to close another location and there were a few weeks over operational overlap.

Unfortunately, Starbucks then overexpanded tremendously, forcing them to close many locations now that their first CEO has returned and is trying to reign in the company.

Lusankya · Post by **Lusankya** » 2008-07-31 12:54am

Part of Starbucks' problem in Australia was that we could buy better coffee for cheaper at all of the local places. The local places also offered better cakes to go with said cheaper better coffee. The ones in Adelaide, at least, only ever seemed to have international students and tourists in them - never any locals.

Saxtonite · Post by **Saxtonite** » 2008-07-31 01:08am

Pelranius wrote:The Starbucks one doesn't really surprise me. Whose idea was it to build three stores on the same fucking block?

as phongn said, it can work in some areas; if it's in the city center of a major city or something similar where many people live nearby or work nearby, they might be more willing to go to one if it won't be as crowded due to several of them/they being closer/etc.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2008-07-31 01:21am

Saxtonite wrote:
Pelranius wrote:The Starbucks one doesn't really surprise me. Whose idea was it to build three stores on the same fucking block?
as phongn said, it can work in some areas; if it's in the city center of a major city or something similar where many people live nearby or work nearby, they might be more willing to go to one if it won't be as crowded due to several of them/they being closer/etc.

In downtown Denver alone there's about 20 Starbucks within a mile and a half radius.

Post by **Broomstick** » 2008-07-31 06:41am

Sea Skimmer wrote:
phongn wrote:
Broomstick wrote:600 shops is a lot more than just 1,000 jobs.
They may be finding jobs for a many employees in other stores.
They are, in fact Starbucks said at the same time they announced the cuts that they also plan to continue opening new stores this year in prime locations, most of the outlets being closed simply never did well even at the best of times.

Alright... but what if you're a Starbucks employee who doesn't live near a "prime location" and now has no means to move to where the new job is? What if that means you have to choose between working the coffee bar at Starbucks at a new location far from where you currently live and your spouse's higher-paying job where you're already at.

The number of jobs may only drop by 1,000 but that doesn't mean there won't be a massive turnover in the remainder. I saw with the auto industry growing up "Oh, well we're moving the factory but we'll still employ the same number of people! We're not losing any jobs!" Uh, yeah, right - but how many people in Flint, Michigan do you think moved down to Tennessee or Mexico or wherever the new plant was located?

Adrian Laguna · Post by **Adrian Laguna** » 2008-07-31 07:23pm

Broomstick wrote:Starbucks offers benefits to ALL their employees including part time employees and have done so for years. Whether that will continue or not I don't know, but the current CEO has a bug up his ass about making sure everyone has healthcare coverage.

You know, the phrase "bug up his ass" would tend to imply that giving all employees health care coverage is a bad thing.

Post by **Broomstick** » 2008-07-31 07:50pm

Yeah, poor phrasing.

The CEO, Howard Schultz, wrote a book called Pour Your Heart Into It which is a history of Starbucks (and yes, biased as it is from Schultz's viewpoint) where he mentions that he felt it was VERY important that even part-time employees have benefits like health insurance and this came from an experience with his own father's circumstances late in life.

It's a personal thing with Schultz, and likely to continue as long as he is CEO. If he steps down that could very well change.

Alan Bolte · Post by **Alan Bolte** » 2008-07-31 09:03pm

A decent steak will cost you that much?! And all this time I thought I just didn't like steak.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2008-07-31 10:36pm

salm wrote:A lot of Americans who think that social wellfare is the manifestation of communist evil are losing their jobs and falling into poverty. While i'm sorry for the ones who don't think like that it's really funny to watch from the outside how the ones who do think like that are becoming victims of their own laissez faire.
I wonder if they're going to learn something or if that mindset is going to stick with them.

A lot of the dumb ones won't learn but if Teddy Roosevelt's Square Deal and FDR's New Deal are any example then people who have been through it will at least be a lot sharper about what these policies really mean. It wasn't until the Baby Boomers were the force in politics that you got some the truly egregious behavior and Generation X really is driving this. If they get whacked with the clue bat, it will probably stick, personal experience tends to.

Saxtonite · Post by **Saxtonite** » 2008-07-31 10:46pm

Adrian Laguna wrote: You know, the phrase "bug up his ass" would tend to imply that giving all employees health care coverage is a bad thing.

She said "make sure all employees have health care" (semi-quote, after reading it I thought he was aggressive in making sure it happens

General Zod wrote:In downtown Denver alone there's about 20 Starbucks within a mile and a half radius.

hmm..the city center is pretty big based off wiki. It is possible to be 20 Starbucks based off the picture. I've been to Denver in the past, isn't it ~5 minutes from the mountains or hills in the south of denver to the city center? (taking the interstate from the south?)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denver,_Colorado