Saigon Saga Continues

Written by

While you were basking in the end of the first day of exams, a ton of your classmates were downtown at a swanky Vietnamese restaurant…yelling their lungs out and shutting it down.

Bwog stopped by a Saigon Grill protest earlier, but it was only a small picket, part of an ongoing two-month protest by delivery workers who had been locked out and fired after being paid $1.60 an hour. Today, at least sixty Columbia students and thirty or so other reps from schools including Hunter, CUNY, the New School, Sarah Lawrence and a few others went down to the Union Square branch of the establishment to stage a sit-in and sidewalk protest.

This is how it went down. Columbia kids gathered at 116th right after their CC and LitHum finals finished, then travelled en masse to Union Square to meet up with the larger group and get situated. From there, small groups of incognito kids moseyed down to the Grill, where they were met by a picket line of delivery workers who cried “Shame on you!” as they entered the restaurant. Once all the students had filled the place, they sat and politely declined to order, much to the confusion of the staff. Then, at 5:30, after some clandestine signals had been thrown around the room, the room stood up at once, ripped off their top layers of clothes, revealed a sea of uniformly red shirts, and started chanting. Once the chanting died down, a Jesuit priest blessed the effort and representatives from AAA and other student groups explained why they were sitting in on the restaurant. Once everyone chanted in unison, the roof just about blew off, and when it died down, participators started making percussive beats on the tables.

It was all love and red-tinged excitement– until, of course, the cops showed up, informing everyone that they had better get out unless they “wanted to be sitting in jail on Monday.” As planned, coordinators shuffled students out, who then joined in more chanting with the picketers who remained outside, a rally that went on unflaggingly for more than an hour and a half. Several of the delivery workers led chants in Chinese- many of them don’t speak English- and students joined in once they picked up on it. Various students likewise took the stand, with one declaring, “It’s a beautiful thing… when the workers and students are united!” The crowd booed people entering the restaurant, the cops stood by with expressionless faces, and the fun stopped soon after the police came to set up a virtual wooden pen around the picketers and students. Anyways, look at these pictures if you don’t have time to read all that.




  1. what makes  

    it even better is it is in union square

  2. that's  

    some good old-fashioned protesting. whatever, the folks who work there should at least be paid minimum wage. this must be hurting them with no delivery service.

    although, the food is really great there. i'd hate to see the place go.

  3. dominican  

    did anyone else catch that crowd outside Lerner Hall? They were all huddled around these people yelling about Dominican oppression and for a brief moment, I thought that Fruit Paunch's 24 hour show had taken a very militant turn.

  4. thanks  

    Fruit Paunch, for the plug

    well played

  5. Anonymous

    Two Dollars?
    NO WAY!
    What do we want?

  6. You should know  

    since when is Saigon Grill swanky? Get your facts straight.

    • apparently  

      you've never seen our local 90th St. Grill's downtown cousin...The lighting was about 5 times dimmer, there were random, giant Chinese characters displayed on the walls, and vaguely Oriental mood music played over the speakers. I would never have guessed that they were under the same management.

  7. Excellent!  

    That's really great! Way to go everyone who participated!

  8. why  

    do those people still want to work there? i dont understand? are they trying to get reimbursed for the hours which they were not given fair pay, or do they want to start fresh and get paid the right amount going forward?

    • you overprivileged  

      (1)if they don't start striking for fair wages, then the next batch of people will get less than minimum wage
      (2)when you're desperate for money, you take what you can get. for many of these workers...they can't afford to drop this job and look for another.

      it's not like they have a nestegg saved up so that they can have a mid-life crisis career change

  9. to change the sub  

    why hasnt bwog covered the large scale cheating on the lit hum test? could be an addition to "class of 2010 is a disgrace"

  10. CML  

    ID answers got leaked


  11. ahem  

    may we suggest you email info to bwgossip? that's what it's there for.

  12. To be fair  

    Saigon Grill's food is basically ace.

    I'd have the curry ga every day of the week.

  13. The End  

    I must admit, I'm still dumbfounded by the fall of Saigon.

  14. umm  

    If those workers think they're note being paid enough money, they don't have to work at Saigon. No one is forcing them to work there.

    If Saigon were a monopsonist (i.e., the only employer of delivery workers in the city), they would have some sort of legitimate case. However, as it stands, if these workers don't like working at Saigon, they are free to seek out a higher-paying job elsewhere.

    • ughhh  

      #21, you make me ashamed to be an econ major!

      • umm  

        I'm ashamed that you are an econ major.

        • Proud Econ major  

          can you guys stop ducking a valid question? I'm sure this has been going on for long enough to find another job, so I'm curious to know why they're still there. Is it because they're illegal immigrants? But then why would they try attention to themselves like this?

          Or is it a language issue? I hope they get what they want though. 1.60/hr is a joke

          • Anonymous  

            It's part of a city-wide effort movement being coordinated by the Chinese Staff and Workers Association and the 318 Restaurant Workers Union. They have the legal backing of (NYT article): "the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund, the Urban Justice Center and prestigious law firms like Shearman and Sterling."
            Apparently, in 2003 a judge awarded @2.9 Million in back wages to 17 workers in a suit against a now closed Chinatown restaurant and in February, 11 workers won a $700,000 suit against another Chinatown restaurant.

            Maybe that (a coordinated, well-organized and well-supported city-wide campaign to change the system + the realistic prospect of receiving back wages) sheds some light on why they protest?


            Actually the delivery workers where documented immigrants. Also Whenever or not the minimum wage should exist is irrelevant to the question. Workers should be allowed to fight for increased pay, think about it if they couldn't then nobody would pay anything or a few cents! Also ever heard of Cartels?

  15. Anonymous  

    The allegations against Saigon Grill claim that the wages were illegally low, below Federal and State minimum wages. BS monopolist arguments need not apply.

    Bring the free market arguments when the wages are legal.

  16. There is

    There is shit in that Indo-Chinese food. But then, that's what Nuc-noc is really made of. poop.

  17. student  

    awesome awesome awesome

  18. uhh  

    Look, if these people don't want to work at Saigon Grill for $1.60/hour, they don't have to.

    Instead of protesting, they should just go out and get a new job.

    -Econ major

    • WJD  

      God, you are a giant dick. i hope you choke on your next meal, snob.

    • Anonymous  

      Someone has to work delivery jobs. Someone will always work delivery jobs. Did you somehow major in Econ w/o taking Principles? A minimum wage is a hard floor on salary. No one should be paid less than the minimum wage (public policy/Fed+State law > econ).
      Why rally against the delivery workers who simply want to see legal salaries in their industry? Also, the political pressure applied to these businesses helps them get Pro Bono legal representation to win back all of that back pay.
      Econ major, you're wrong from an economics front (they have incentive to protest if they feel it likely they'll win back wages), from a legal perspective (they have the right to stop work and return to their jobs if they stop to blow the whistle on criminal activity), and from a moral perspective (they're fight against Saigon Grill helps workers at hundreds, if not thousands, of other delivery places across the city).
      Bring better arguments.

      • Grammar Police  

        "(they're fight against Saigon Grill helps workers at hundreds, if not thousands, of other delivery places across the city)"

        THEIR / they're / there
        Bring better grammar.

      • the problem  

        here is that nobody posting has ever worked in the food service industry. I've worked 9-10 hour days as a waiter and made 20 bucks from my employer because it's a job where the majority of income comes from tips. These are DELIVERYMEN. If they make 3 deliveries an hour they're making $1.90 and at least $1.50 a tip. Do the math, that's $6.40 and only 50 cents or so off NY's min wage - nevermind the national- and that's just 3 deliveries. Moreover, they're not slaves. As econ folks pointed out, there are tons of delivery places in this neighborhood alone - they're free to go work there.

        So if you really want to help, stop protesting and order in.

        *sigh* and i'm not even an econ major

  19. Thank you

    You make articulate arguments with which I wholeheartedly agree.

  20. sakib fan  

    Dear Grammar Police,
    It's a typo. I''m sure you've done the same thing by accident. Look, I just accidentally typed two apostrophes instead of one!

    And how can anyone complain about or rag on protestors trying to stop a restaurant from paying people less than two dollars per hour?

    Bring me a bucket, because I'm going to vomit.

  21. umm  

    Dear Sakib,

    - No one *has* to work delivery jobs. What? Are you going to force them or something?
    - I'm an econ major, and I took Principles of Econ. A minimum wage is indeed a hard floor on salary. But just because the government enacted a minimum wage law, doesn't mean I can't argue against it. The government enacts many immoral laws, such as the PATRIOT Act.
    - I'm "rallying against the delivery workers" because I believe that if they're unhappy with being paid $1.60/hour, they should seek jobs elsewhere rather than taking the $1.60/hour jobs and complaining about it.
    - I'm not "wrong from an economics front". Minimum wage laws are bad because they deny jobs to people whose services are worth less than the minimum wage. (If Joe's services are worth $0.50/hour, but the minimum wage is $5/hour, no one will hire him. That's unfair. Why do you want to prevent Joe from being able to get a job?)
    - I admit that I'm wrong "from a legal perspective". But as I mentioned before, the law can be wrong. For example, I don't believe there should be laws against the possession of marijuana.
    - I'm not wrong "from a moral perspective". My morals are based on the non-aggression principle. In this case, the delivery workers should not be allowed to force Saigon Grill into paying them higher wages. If the workers don't want to work for $1.60/hour, they have every right not to work for Saigon Grill.

    Bring better arguments.

    -Econ major

    • Viva le revolution?  

      Dude, are you listening to yourself?

      I could go into deep depth on the problems with your argument, but I'm already procrastinating

      First and foremost, you seem to be saying that because you can argue against minimum wage laws, therefore you can violate them as well and just fuck other people over. The law is the law, and even if you think marijuana should be legal, there's a huge difference between you lighting up the reefer you bought off of a guy whose stash came from a Colombian druglord and paying delivery workers less in a day than one of your joints cost you. I think both are immoral, but regardless, you obey the law, and if you don't and are caught, you pay the legal penalty. Surely something from CC made it into your skull, or perhaps you were too busy fixated on the way your screensaver's colors seemed to come alive to do the reading.

      And, speaking of CC, while I'm not entirely sure what you mean by the non-aggression principle, surely it might have something to do with the Harm Principle, which says that you can do whatever as long as you don't hurt other people, which I think you might agree is the case here. Taking advantage of new immigrants who arrived here with only the hope of making a better life in America, which we're told is supposed to be possible, is immoral and unconscionable. These people probably didn't come from China with stacks of resumes and a three-piece suit, and they took whatever job they could get. These aren't 8 hour days either. The woman who works at Pinnacle on weekdays works 6 days a week from 6 to 5, and she probably get's paid minimum wage. You think she wants to work that hard?

      At any rate, the point is that the law is the law, and equating that doobie you have to pay extra for with salary needed to feed your family is the most fucking moronic thing I've heard in quite some time.

      Hey, that was kinda fun

      • umm  

        You are wrong in so many ways. I'll just list them:

        I *do* believe you can violate unjust laws. I don't believe you can "fuck other people over". Saigon Grill didn't fuck anyone over. "The law is the law" is a tautology, idiot. I've never done any drugs in my life. I've never even smoked anything. I just believe others should have the right to do so. I've never even bought drugs. Doing drugs is not immoral. Paying delivery workers less than some arbitrary amount is not immoral. People who disobey the law don't necessarily pay the legal penalty (see jury nullification). I learned many things from CC. I don't have a screen saver; the only screen saver I've ever set is a black screen. I read every single word of the books in CC. The non-aggression principle is different from the harm principle; look it up. The entire world doesn't revolve around CC; there are other philosophers out there. Saigon Grill is not "taking advantage of new immigrants". The restaurant is paying workers money in exchange for their services. Voluntary exchanges like this are not "immoral" or "unconscionable". I don't care what jobs, what pay, or what hours immigrants choose to work. That's their choice. I don't care whether "the woman who works at Pinnacle on weekdays" is working too "hard". It's her choice. If she doesn't want to work that hard, she doesn't have to. I worked 75 hour weeks for a year before coming to Columbia so that I'd have the money to pay for it. Do you think I wanted to work that hard? It was my choice. Oh, and stop repeating that "the law is the law". Of course the law is the fucking law. But just because it's the law, doesn't mean I can't argue against it. Also, I've never bought or consumed a "doobie". Nor have I ever compared the cost of a "doobie" to anyone's salary.

  22. eekon  

    Wow, you're right. It's so easy finding sweet jobs when you come from a poor area in China and don't speak English, much less have a bachelor's degree. They can just work somewhere else and never seek back wages!

    Oh, no, actually, I think I see your point. They should just get a high-paying job and hire lawyers! God, someone tell them that.

    The point is that Saigon Grill cannot pay people less than legal minimum wage just because the people they hire might not be aware of how much they are entitled to get paid.

    From an "economics front", whose work is worth 50 cents an hour? People are compensated for the time they put into their jobs, and firing Joe because he's sitting on his ass all day and not earning those six dollars every hour IS legal. People need to earn enough money to live, and even with minimum wage, they often don't. Assuming delivery men don't all live on the Upper West Side, they have to commute via public transportation. In order to be compensated for going to and from work on the bus or subway, at the rate of 1.60/hr, one must work over two hours. That's a quarter of the standard work day, and no one has eaten yet or started paying rent.

    [It's amazing what people are willing to give up in exchange for the thrill of continuing to think they're right. Usually, human compassion and understanding of the daily reality of others go first. You think that there are people working are "worth" less than an income that allows them to eat??]

    The government should force Saigon Grill to pay workers higher wages, but it has not. Who will let people know?

    The workers aren't forcing anything. They're attempting to inform the people who eat at that business about the place's illegal practices. I also don't believe that there should be laws against the possession of marijuana, but that doesn't mean I shouldn't expect backlash if I carry it with me in clear plastic bags.

    Also, I'd imagine that while they were getting paid 1.60/hr they didn't really have the time to investigate whether their wages were fair or legal in this country. It's hard to search Craigslist and update your resume when you can't feed your family or afford to take the bus to work or have conversations in English. Delivery jobs involve physical exertion that would presumably not allow for that kind of free time, as "getting home" would probably involve passing out on an uncomfortable surface until it's time to go back to work.

  23. huh  

    I think your point has dissolved. Now your point is that you can say whatever you want about the law? Because, yeah, you can. But you oh-so-eloquently said that minimum wage laws are "bad" and keep spewing defenses for their illegal actions and seeing nothing wrong about paying people practically nothing for their services. People are going to disagree, and calling people who disagree "idiot" or "retarded" makes me wonder what you think the stakes are in this comment thread, and how you think reading books means you absorbed them at all.

  24. better econ major!  

    The US is not a pure free-market economy. In addition to a minimum wage, we have laws limiting child labor, laws that require fire alarms to be installed in work places, laws preventing discrimination, and other labor standards and employment protection laws limiting exploitation & dangerous work conditions. Are all of those a terrible mistake that are preventing us from maximizing efficiency?

  25. #1 Econ Major!!  

    Actually, I am correct. The US is a REGULATED free-market economy. We are basically a free market, but we have some regulations to (somewhat) limit exploitation and prevent EXTERNALITIES (another good econ word for you)! Sometimes we assume that these things do not exist to make simplified econ models that Columbia students can understand! Not that it is really relevant, but I have above a 4.0 in econ.

  26. Econ major

    Where did you learn that the US is "basically a free market" (it's nothing like it) and that the goal of regulations is to "prevent externalities" (hello inaccurate generalization)? Do not disgrace the major and the professors here to make your point.

  27. Fools  

    You guys are missing the point. Free-marketers, they can't just "go and find another job". That assumes there's a labor shortage and/or new restaurants are poppign up all over the place. But if there was a labor shortage, places like Saigon, Ollies, etc would not be paying their workers like they do. And I don't see new restaurants popping up everyday, certainly not in the Upper West Side. While this doesn't tell the whole story (I'm sure their lack of employability + possible illegal immigrant status figures in), I can't believe the economists missed such a basic point. Theory is naive without common sense.
    I look forward to TAing you next semester.

  28. I am also TA'ing  

    Maybe we can TA each other!

  29. I would  

    ike that :)

  30. dsz  

    can we PLEASE stop calling Saigon Grill a Vietnamese restaurant? the owners are Cambodian, the food is shit, the waiters are Chinese, the busboys are Mexican, and the only vaguely Viet thing about it are the sometimes correctly spelled words on the menu.

    (and it's ca ri ga, not curry ga.)

    • if the shoe fits  

      If the cuisine they think they're serving is Vietnamese, its a Vietnamese restaurant.

    • To be fair  

      The menu says "curry ga."

      As a result, when I reference which dish I like from Saigon Grill, it becomes practical to use the spelling embraced by the restaurant, not by some Viet Cong enthusiast posting on the Internet.

      Also, you seem like a bit of a moron. Unlucky.

  31. choi

    How the hell did they get away with that in the first place? tar and feather them. then burn them. What I really mean is we should show them God's grace. And maybe a bit of God's wrath.

  32. learn the truth

    As it normally would be, there are always two sides to every argument. However, people need to learn and wait for the truth and the facts before they make judgments and act on them by destroying property when they are oblivious to why they are doing so. What's even more ridiculous is that these people are representing themselves in a very degrading way and disturbing not only the restaurant business itself, but the people of the communities. People need to understand that there are two sides to this argument, and so far the truth has not come out so they should not act impulsively on the ALLEGATIONS that are reported.

  33. Anonymous

    These delivery men made $45-80 lunch hour(11:45am-2:45pm)and $80-180 dinner hour(5:45pm-9:45pm) in tips. However, for the gamblers enough is never enough, so they tried to extort
    multi-millions dollars.

    • well...  

      the owners created mechanisms for tip stealing, like making their delivery service workers pay out of their own pocket for orders that were outside the radius of places that got delivery free of charge, if the workers were robbed they would pay for orders, if they got beat up they were forced to pay for their own medical expenses - the employers had not regard for their health and safety, exorbitant fines for shutting the door too loudly. even with tips, the base pay to fulfill nyc minimum wage laws = $5.60.

      AND PEOPLE... please refrain from using such racist language OKAY? "VIET CONG" and comments denouncing all asian restaurants wholesale and ignoring how much shit goes on in the restaurant industry in general and pinning it down to an owners' ethnicity to suggest an inclination towards the abuse of service workers is NOT COOL, ya dig? it undermines of what folks try to tell the public - that these are issues of basic human dignity and not solely of race and immigration status or what have you.

    • original econ major  

      See! This is what I've been saying.

      The delivery workers don't have to work for Saigon Grill. No one forced them to work for that particular employer. So they have no automatic right to higher salaries. They accepted what they were paid, and if they don't like it, they can go work elsewhere.

      Now it seems like there was a reason they worked for Saigon Grill...

      Let's assume a worker only works the less profitable period of the day, from roughly 11am to 6pm. Over these 7 hours, he can earn $1.60 * 7, plus at least $45 in tips over the lunch period. That's $5.62 per hour at a minimum. If he works any longer, he starts to make the more profitable tips over the dinner period. So if he is "exploited" and made to work a 12 hour day, he can earn $1.60 * 12, plus a minimum of $125 in tips. That amounts to $12 per hour.

      • Anonymous

        how do you know they make at least $45 over the lunch period? how do you know that they can find other jobs?
        if i work in south bronx, do you think i can make at $45 over the lunch period?
        if the boss tells me that "hey bro i can't hire illegal spics and chinks but i got a 50cents job for you" do you seriously think that i have a choice to say "hey screw you, i can work in the Wendy's?"

        forget your text books and work as a illegal worker... see if you can say the samething

      • Anonymous  

        1) New York state law says that tipped workers must receive $4.60 per hour (time and a half if over 40 hours) before tips (
        2) When workers organized and prepared a lawsuit with Pro Bono legal aid to recover unpaid wages.
        3) When Saigon Grill owner got wind of the impending lawsuit, he asked all of the workers to sign a statement saying they had been paid what they were owed in accordance with New York state labor law.
        4) When the deliverymen refused to sign, they were told not to come back to work.

        The case that Saigon Grill should pay workers what is owed to them in accordance with the law is not really up for debate. If the law should change, Saigon Grill is not making any headway in changing it by targeting delivery personnel. Construing failure to pay the legal minimum wage as civil disobedience (which is what you do when you start talking about what the law should be instead of what it is) is a laughable stretch.

      • consider

        yea i totally i agree. in addition to the fact that these delivery guys get hundreds of dollars in tips each day, their tax is not deducted from their salary either. All of these factors mount to an hourly wage that is three times the minimum. I also agree that many of these delivery guys are just greedy and eager for more money because they wasted all of the money they made on gambling.

  34. Anonymous

    A lot of innocent dumb people are used by bad people to hurt good people.

  35. Anonymous  

    From "Minimum Wage Order for Restaurant Industry" (Article 19 of the New York State Labor Law):

    § 137-1.1 Application.

    Every employer in the restaurant industry shall pay to each employee, as defined
    in this Part, not less than the minimum wage rates provided in this Part

    § 137-1.5 Tip allowance for food service worker.
    (d) On or after January 1, 2007, a food service worker shall receive a cash wage
    of at least $4.60 per hour, provided that the tips of such worker, when added
    to such cash wage, ***are equal to or exceed*** $7.15 per hour.

  36. original econ major  


    Should we follow the law or not?

    On the one hand, you're saying these workers should be paid $x per hour because the law says so.

    But on the other hand, you're saying that they're illegals.

    Well I certainly don't think illegals have any right to make even a penny in this country. Send them back home!

    • Anonymous  

      1) I never said these workers are illegal. I have no valid reason to believe that they are illegal.
      2) Even if they are working illegally, that does not absolve them from recovering wages for work completed. Courts have always ruled that way, so its functionally the law. I also believe that the right to be paid for work completed should supersede the government's prerogative on regulating who is able to work.
      You and I probably disagree on that, but we don't disagree that people who can legally work (for all we know, these deliverymen are legal) should be paid legally, even if we then disagree on what the law should be.
      3) Using the term "Viet Cong" to refer to some (most likely) unknown to you Cambodian immigrant is highly racist. If I referred to a random white person as a "Republican", you'd be the first to accuse me of racism.
      4) Von Miguel was, in someways to quote Jung, a "radical motherfucker" until he sold out. Alas, the Gilded Age was not ready for progressive New Deal era government, and Von Miguel didn't have the heart to stick it out. Before 1890, he totally would have supported raising the minimum wage.

  37. Johannes von Miquel  

    I'm not sure what's racist about the term, "Viet Cong."

    That's like saying accusing someone of being a "Republican" is a racial slur.

  38. yup

    this is def realistic. i was walking down the block a few days ago and the strikers were there and one of them was trying to hand me a flyer and i didn't take one just because my hands were full. then when i refused, the union woman shouted and cursed at me?! this just shows that some unions are not as virtuous and legit as they say--they are disrespectful and inconsiderate. wouldn't they at least respect the people if they wanted people to side with them?

  39. yisichen

    I personally knew and worked for Simon Nget. He takes very good care of his workers. He said to the workers "I want to see each one of you make as much money as possible in a right and good way because the more you make means the more I make and we are like brothers and sisters that work together for all these years. He didn't look like or act like a boss. He respects every good workers. I think these students(protesters) should learn more about him by asking the inside workers. They should not be misled by the propaganda of the union people and the delivery men to hurt a good man and his life time business built with a tons of his times, risks,hardworks.

  40. Paracite

    Haha. Yisichen is funny. He takes good care of his workers? Stop begging the question with just statements of how well he treats his workers. If you can exact quote him, you know him and don't really care for the workers. The students and the delivery workers who got fired illegally are not misled by propaganda, they're led by the workers. We're not union people, we're an organization.

    This good man went through the Khmer Rouge, so did my family and I had two family members that died during this time. However, many Chinese Cambodians, like myself, experience horrible work conditions. It's just the case that Simon Nget now gets to beable to exploit people. His life time business is most likely not even life time.

    The delivery workers took a physical risk, rather than Simon Nget making only financial risks. Which is stronger? Which side are you on?


  41. uh no

    Well paracite, are you saying that you know the delivery workers so well as to believe that they are the most good hearted hardworking virtuous people? you don't and that's a fact. NO ONE knows the facts and so the union and workers can be led by no other than propaganda. and if you say you know the facts, please entertain me with them.

    • learn

      I agree that before anyone points fingers and goes destroying people's property, people should learn the truth. All the union and its "supporters" know are the delivery worker's stories, and some supporters don't know anything at all. These people are jumping to conclusions and do that consider the entire situation.

  42. haha

    haha. paracite says,"we're not union people, we're an organization"? HA. yea, jumping on tables, shouting, yelling, cursing at the public, disrespecting and disturbing the community as a whole is definitely an organization.

  43. Anonymous

    I can ask the same thing. Are restaurant owners are good hearted people? Yes and no. what will those delivery guys get out of when they deceive the students? If I am going to get the same treatments when I move to other jobs, why not do something about it? Yes you are right that no one knows the fact. But the thing is so what if we don’t know a s*** about what had happened. Have you worked as a delivery guy? Have you worked a heavy duty job? If you had actually worked a job before, you know what it is like and you probably do want higher pay. Did you organize the sit-in? how did you know that it was a union?

  44. Goolie

    Yes, it seems reasonable that workers in two seperate locations would all come up with the EXACT same problems just so that they could get fired and locked out of jobs that they rely on to live, and so that they could wage a long protracted battle that may not end favorably to them.

    Anyone who has worked a real job in their life knows that bosses are out to get as much work out of every worker for as little money as possible.. after all, wouldn't want to cut into their profits!

    And for those trashing unions, keep in mind that unions won us the 8 hour work day, equal pay, overtime pay, job safety rules, the right to organize, etc.

    Victory to the Saigon Grill workers!!

© 2006-2015 Blue and White Publishing Inc.