>Kel, the point is, whether they're good citizens or no, the mom and pop
>shop owners ARE members of the community. If nothing else (and there's
>lots more) it means we have more influence with them, right?
no, we don't. i worked for mom and pops for much of my life. they mistreat their employees a great deal. in the restaurant business you can skip getting breaks or lunch hours at a mom and pop. at a chain, they sometimes actually have to conform to those standards because they get inspected by uppers, because there is a place to turn if you want to complain. and the workplace health and safety issues... don't get me started.
i remember one place, you've probably seen it, the Rusty Nail. they used to demand that you came in for two hours. if there wasn't any business, you got sent home and they didn't pay you. nevermind but that by law in NY you are to be paid for at least three hours, even if you go home after one. never worked for or heard of a chain that would dare do such a thing -- because there is a complaint process to go through. and they tend to utilize a rationalized system-- that can be good and bad. but one of the benefits of it is that h.r. folks sometimes actually think it's important that employees are given adequate breaks, that safety rules are followed. when there is a division of labor between those who do the books, those who make up the rules and those who implement them at the store level, there is sometimes a good result insofar as the manager at the store level isn't so driven by profits to the degree moms and pops are.
or consider the jazz club. the mom at that mom and pop actually took us out and shopped for our clothes. we had to wear street clothes for bartending, something dressy. well, if we didn't wear what she thought appropriate, she took us to a boutique where we were bought some dresses at $80 a pop. now, this was nice but... there is something a little patronizing about that kind of practice. and she could lord it over you in important ways. she was also fond of doling out the worst tippers to you if you didn't look at her the right way -- totally on her whim.
one guy i worked for paid everyone under the table for a considerable chunk of their wages. on thurs if i wandered into the bookeeping section of the back office, there they sat with piles and piles of cash, placing it in envelopes. as "mgmt" i got to work 55hrs a week for $180. the cash was nice and all but when it came time to get laid off or fired for no good reason, then you were SOL with unemployment since you get half your paycheck. if you made $300 total b/t cash and check, but showed $150 on the books, you collected $75 instead of $150 in unemployment compensation.
consider the tattered cover in Denver. it's an indie book store that people love to patronize and glory over their independence from the chains. nice. but the employees are paid shite wages and treated pretty poorly. it would be nice if locals would come out for a union drive or picket them until they raised wages and the tattered cover might just cave in pretty quick. somehow i doubt that will happen.
at any rate, i have *never* seen anyone put pressure on a locally owned mom and pops. the small business association in a town is enough to keep their petty bourg class consciousness intact and safe from the criticisms of locals since the rest of the mom and pops ain't gonna want to change their practices either.
walmart hires people for wages and they are locals, too. they often provide benefits that mom and pops don't and can't.
what is needed is democratic workplaces, not small is beautiful sentiments that don't address the problem all the time or that are inefficient ways of distributing goods sometimes. what is needed is nationalized health care, not mom and pops that pay none or big corps that provide it to keep unions out.
i get friendly familiar faces at my local chain grocery stores and pharmacy, so i don't see that as any sort of advantage.
kelley