Connect with us

California

Celeb chef slams Gavin Newsom's ‘self-congratulatory propaganda’ about California’s $20 fast-food minimum wage

Published

on

Celeb chef slams Gavin Newsom's ‘self-congratulatory propaganda’ about California’s  fast-food minimum wage


Celeb chef slams Gavin Newsom’s ‘self-congratulatory propaganda’ about California’s $20 fast-food minimum wage

California’s $20 minimum wage for fast-food workers took effect on Apr. 1.

While the legislation has faced criticism, Gov. Gavin Newsom is celebrating its impact.

Don’t miss

  • Car insurance premiums in America are through the roof — and only getting worse. But 5 minutes could have you paying as little as $29/month

  • Commercial real estate has beaten the stock market for 25 years — but only the super rich could buy in. Here’s how even ordinary investors can become the landlord of Walmart, Whole Foods or Kroger

  • These 5 magic money moves will boost you up America’s net worth ladder in 2024 — and you can complete each step within minutes. Here’s how

“Since the law was enacted, California has added 11,000 new jobs in the industry. As of July, our state boasts a historic 750,500 fast food jobs,” he wrote in a recent op-ed for Fox News, citing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Advertisement

According to Newsom, California now has more fast food jobs than ever before.

He also highlighted how the legislation has improved conditions for those working in the fast food sector, stating, “Because of California’s compassion for working people, these men and women living paycheck to paycheck now enjoy better working conditions, reduced financial stress and greater opportunities for upward mobility.”

However, not everyone shares Newsom’s enthusiasm. Celebrity chef and restaurant owner Andrew Gruel dismissed the op-ed as “typical Gavin Newsom self congratulatory propaganda based on questionable data.”

“I think it’s a little early to put the book on the shelf and take the victory lap here,” Gruel told Fox Business, cautioning that it may be too soon to fully assess the long-term effects of the wage hike on the industry.

Analyzing the numbers

Gruel raised concerns about the accuracy of Newsom’s claims.

Advertisement

“These aren’t even seasonally adjusted numbers,” he noted, referring to the data cited by the governor.

Experts have echoed Gruel’s concerns about the lack of seasonally adjusted data.

“So the governor is saying that the data shows California has the highest fast food employment it’s ever had. Unfortunately, he’s using a preliminary data set released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics,” Rebecca Paxton, research director at the Employment Policies Institute, told KTLA. “The latest set that the Bureau of Labor Statistics releases is called seasonally adjusted, which is what economists use to measure policy impacts,”

The distinction is significant because seasonally adjusted data accounts for typical seasonal employment fluctuations, such as temporary hiring spikes during holidays or reduced staffing in slower months. Seasonal adjustment provides a clearer picture of underlying trends by smoothing out these predictable variations. Without this adjustment, unadjusted numbers can present a skewed perspective, potentially misleading when assessing long-term policy impacts.

Advertisement

Gruel also questioned the timeframe of Newsom’s analysis.

“He’s using like, nine or 10 months, and really it’s only been three months in this data in which the bill actually took effect,” he explained. “In the grand scheme of 750,000 jobs isn’t a huge number.”

However, Newsom’s breakdown did reveal some promising short-term figures. It showed that in April 2024, California’s fast food industry employed 739,500 workers. This number grew to 743,300 in May, 744,700 in June, and reached 750,500 by July. This means that between April and July — a period of just three months — the state added 11,000 fast food jobs

‘Unintended consequences’

Gruel argued that even if Newsom’s numbers are accurate, they fail to capture the full picture due to the “unintended consequences” of the legislation.

One major consequence, according to Gruel, is the reduction in worker hours, which inflates job creation statistics without genuinely benefiting employees.

Advertisement

“The first thing that these multi-unit restaurants did when they found out about this bill was they took people who were working overtime — so anything over 40 hours — and they cut their hours down to 25 or 30. Those people went and got other jobs,” he explained.

Gruel pointed out that instead of having one person work 55 or 60 hours a week, restaurants now split that position between two employees working 30 to 32 hours each. This appears as job growth on paper.

He shared insights from his own experience as a restaurant owner, observing a noticeable increase in fast food workers seeking additional employment since the law took effect.

“I know that because starting in at roughly April, we got flooded on the full-service side with people who were looking for a second job because they weren’t allowed to work overtime anymore, and this was in our restaurants, and we still are getting flooded from fast food workers looking for another job,” he recounted.

Read more: Rich, young Americans are ditching the stormy stock market — here are the alternative assets they’re banking on instead

Advertisement

Some restaurants have closed

Gruel’s concerns align with classical economic theory, which suggests that setting a wage floor above the market equilibrium can lead to unintended consequences. Employers, faced with higher labor costs, may reduce hiring, cut workers’ hours, or even eliminate positions altogether to maintain profitability. This is especially problematic for low-wage workers with less experience or skills, who are more vulnerable to these changes.

California has seen a consistent and significant increase in its minimum wage over the past decade. In 2014, the state’s minimum wage was $9.00 an hour. Today, it’s set at $16 an hour, rising to $20 an hour for fast food workers. For some business owners, this increase has forced difficult decisions.

A Fosters Freeze outlet in Lemoore shut down on April 1, leaving its workers without jobs. Its owner, Loren Wright, said in a text to KMPH that the substantial rise in minimum wage has made it challenging for small businesses to stay afloat.

Lawrence Cheng, whose family owns seven Wendy’s locations south of Los Angeles, admitted to cutting his staff’s hours due to the minimum wage increase.

“We kind of just cut where we can,” Cheng told the Associated Press. “I schedule one less person, and then I come in for that time that I didn’t schedule and I work that hour.”

Advertisement

However, there are alternative economic theories, such as the efficiency wage theory, which argue that higher minimum wages can boost worker productivity and reduce turnover, as better-compensated employees may be more motivated and loyal. Additionally, increased wages can boost consumer spending, as low-income workers have more disposable income, potentially stimulating economic growth.

What to read next

This article provides information only and should not be construed as advice. It is provided without warranty of any kind.



Source link

California

How Trump’s tariffs ricochet through a Southern California business park 

Published

on

How Trump’s tariffs ricochet through a Southern California business park 


  • Tariffs impact businesses in Rye Canyon differently
  • Supreme Court may rule on Trump’s emergency tariffs soon
  • Some businesses adapt, others struggle with tariff costs

VALENCIA, California, Jan 9 (Reuters) – America’s trade wars forced Robert Luna to hike prices on the rustic wooden Mexican furniture he sells from a crowded warehouse here, while down the street, Eddie Cole scrambled to design new products to make up for lost sales on his Chinese-made motorcycle accessories.

Farther down the block, Luis Ruiz curbed plans to add two imported molding machines to his small plastics factory.

Sign up here.

“I voted for him,” said Ruiz, CEO of Valencia Plastics, referring to President Donald Trump. “But I didn’t vote for this.”

All three businesses are nestled in the epitome of a globalized American economy: A lushly landscaped California business park called Rye Canyon. Tariffs are a hot topic here – but experiences vary as much as the businesses that fill the 3.1 million square feet of offices, warehouses, and factories.

Advertisement

Tenants include a company that provides specially equipped cars to film crews for movies and commercials, a dance school, and a company that sells Chinese-made LED lights. There’s even a Walmart Supercenter. Some have lost business while others have flourished under the tariff regime.

Rye Canyon is roughly an hour-and-a-half drive from the sprawling Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. And until now, it was a prime locale for globally connected businesses like these. But these days, sitting on the frontlines of global trade is precarious.

The average effective tariff rate on imports to the U.S. now stands at almost 17%–up from 2.5% before Trump took office and the highest level since 1935. Few countries have been spared from the onslaught, such as Cuba, but mainly because existing barriers make meaningful trade with them unlikely.

White House spokesman Kush Desai said President Trump was leveling the playing field for large and small businesses by addressing unfair trading practices through tariffs and reducing cumbersome regulations.

‘WE HAD TO GET CREATIVE’ TO OFFSET TRUMP’S TARIFFS

Rye Canyon’s tenants may receive some clarity soon. The U.S. Supreme Court could rule as early as Friday on the constitutionality of President Trump’s emergency tariffs. The U.S. has so far taken in nearly $150 billion under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. If struck down, the administration may be forced to refund all or part of that to importers.

Advertisement

For some, the impact of tariffs was painful – but mercifully short. Harlan Kirschner, who imports about 30% of the beauty products he distributes to salons and retailers from an office here, said prices spiked during the first months of the Trump administration’s push to levy the taxes.

“It’s now baked into the cake,” he said. “The price increases went through when the tariffs were being done.” No one talks about those price increases any more, he said.

For Ruiz, the plastics manufacturer, the impact of tariffs is more drawn out. Valencia makes large-mouth containers for protein powders sold at health food stores across the U.S. and Canada. Before Trump’s trade war, Ruiz planned to add two machines costing over half a million dollars to allow him to churn out more containers and new sizes.

But the machines are made in China and tariffs suddenly made them unaffordable. He’s spent the last few months negotiating with the Chinese machine maker—settling on a plan that offsets the added tariff cost by substituting smaller machines and a discount based on his willingness to let the Chinese producer use his factory as an occasional showcase for their products.

“We had to get creative,” he said. “We can’t wait for (Trump) to leave. I’m not going to let the guy decide how we’re going to grow.”

Advertisement

‘I’M MAD AT HIM NOW’

To be sure, there are winners in these trade battles. Ruiz’s former next-door neighbor, Greg Waugh, said tariffs are helping his small padlock factory. He was already planning to move before the trade war erupted, as Rye Canyon wanted his space for the expansion of another larger tenant, a backlot repair shop for Universal Studios. But he’s now glad he moved into a much larger space about two miles away outside the park, because as his competitors announced price increases on imported locks, he’s started getting more inquiries from U.S. buyers looking to buy domestic.

“I think tariffs give us a cushion we need to finally grow and compete,” said Waugh, president and CEO of Pacific Lock.

For Cole, a former pro motorcycle racer turned entrepreneur, there have only been downsides to the new taxes.

He started his motorcycle accessories company in his garage in 1976 and built a factory in the area in the early 1980s. He later sold that business and – as many industries shifted to cheaper production from Asia – reestablished himself later as an importer of motorcycle gear with Chinese business partners, with an office and warehouse in Rye Canyon.

“Ninety-five percent of our products come from China,” he said. Cole estimates he’s paid “hundreds of thousands” in tariffs so far. He declined to disclose his sales.

Advertisement

Cole said he voted for Trump three times in a row, “but I’m mad at him now.”

Cole even wrote to the White House, asking for more consideration of how tariffs disrupt small businesses. He included a photo of a motorcycle stand the company had made for Eric Trump’s family, which has an interest in motorcycles.

“I said, ‘Look Donald, I’m sure there’s a lot of reasons you think tariffs are good for America,” but as a small business owner he doesn’t have the ability to suddenly shift production around the world to contain costs like big corporations. He’s created new products, such as branded tents, to make up for some of the business he’s lost in his traditional lines as prices spiked.

He pulls out his phone to show the response he got back from the White House, via email. “It’s a form letter,” he said, noting that it talks about how the taxes make sense.

Meanwhile, Robert Luna isn’t waiting to see if tariffs will go away or be refunded. His company, DeMejico, started by his Mexican immigrant parents, makes traditional-style furniture including hefty dining tables that sell for up to $8,000. He’s paying 25% tariffs on wooden furniture and 50% on steel accents like hinges, made in his own plant in Mexico. He’s raised prices on some items by 20%.

Advertisement

Fearing further price hikes from tariffs and other rising costs will continue to curb demand, he’s working with a Vietnamese producer on a new line of inexpensive furniture he can sell under a different brand name. Vietnam has tariffs, he said, but also a much lower cost base.

“My thing is mere survival,” he said, “that’s the goal.”

Reporting by Timothy Aeppel; additional reporting by David Lawder
Editing by Anna Driver and Dan Burns

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab



Source link

Continue Reading

California

Up to 20 billionaires may leave California over tax threat | Fox Business Video

Published

on

Up to 20 billionaires may leave California over tax threat | Fox Business Video




Source link

Continue Reading

California

California’s exodus isn’t just billionaires — it’s regular people renting U-Hauls, too

Published

on

California’s exodus isn’t just billionaires — it’s regular people renting U-Hauls, too


It isn’t just billionaires leaving California.

Anecdotal data suggest there is also an exodus of regular people who load their belongings into rental trucks and lug them to another state.

U-Haul’s survey of the more than 2.5 million one-way trips using its vehicles in the U.S. last year showed that the gap between the number of people leaving and the number arriving was higher in California than in any other state.

While the Golden State also attracts a large number of newcomers, it has had the biggest net outflow for six years in a row.

Advertisement

Generally, the defectors don’t go far. The top five destinations for the diaspora using U-Haul’s trucks, trailers and boxes last year were Arizona, Nevada, Oregon, Washington and Texas.

California experienced a net outflow of U-Haul users with an in-migration of 49.4%, and those leaving of 50.6%. Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey and Illinois also rank among the bottom five on the index.

U-Haul didn’t speculate on the reasons California continues to top the ranking.

“We continue to find that life circumstances — marriage, children, a death in the family, college, jobs and other events — dictate the need for most moves,” John Taylor, U-Haul International president, said in a press statement.

While California’s exodus was greater than any other state, the silver lining was that the state lost fewer residents to out-of-state migration in 2025 than in 2024.

Advertisement

U-Haul said that broadly the hotly debated issue of blue-to-red state migration, which became more pronounced after the pandemic of 2020, continues to be a discernible trend.

Though U-Haul did not specify the reasons for the exodus, California demographers tracking the trend point to the cost of living and housing affordability as the top reasons for leaving.

“Over the last dozen years or so, on a net basis, the flow out of the state because of housing [affordability] far exceeds other reasons people cite [including] jobs or family,” said Hans Johnson, senior fellow at the Public Policy Institute of California.

“This net out migration from California is a more than two-decade-long trend. And again, we’re a big state, so the net out numbers are big,” he said.

U-Haul data showed that there was a pretty even split between arrivals and departures. While the company declined to share absolute numbers, it said that 50.6% of its one-way customers in California were leaving, while 49.4% were arriving.

Advertisement

U-Haul’s network of 24,000 rental locations across the U.S. provides a near-real-time view of domestic migration dynamics, while official data on population movements often lags.

California’s population grew by a marginal 0.05% in the year ending July 2025, reaching 39.5 million people, according to the California Department of Finance.

After two consecutive years of population decline following the 2020 pandemic, California recorded its third year of population growth in 2025. While international migration has rebounded, the number of California residents moving out increased to 216,000, consistent with levels in 2018 and 2019.

Eric McGhee, senior fellow at the Public Policy Institute of California, who researches the challenges facing California, said there’s growing evidence of political leanings shaping the state’s migration patterns, with those moving out of state more likely to be Republican and those moving in likely to be Democratic.

“Partisanship probably is not the most significant of these considerations, but it may be just the last straw that broke the camel’s back, on top of the other things that are more traditional drivers of migration … cost of living and family and friends and jobs,” McGhee said.

Advertisement

Living in California costs 12.6% more than the national average, according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. One of the biggest pain points in the state is housing, which is 57.8% more expensive than what the average American pays.

The U-Haul study across all 50 states found that 7 of the top 10 growth states where people moved to have Republican governors. Nine of the states with the biggest net outflows had Democrat governors.

Texas, Florida and North Carolina were the top three growth states for U-Haul customers, with Dallas, Houston and Austin bagging the top spots for growth in metro regions.

A notable exception in California was San Diego and San Francisco, which were the only California cities in the top 25 metros with a net inflow of one-way U-Haul customers.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending