“Breaks will no longer be paid. A 9 hour shift will be paid for 8 hours and 20 minutes.”
“These changes are due to the increase of wages to $14.00 minimum wage on January 1, 2018, then $15.00 per hour on January 1, 2019, as well as the lack of assistance and financial help from our Head Office and from the Government.”
“Besides losing paid breaks, the document states workers with more than five years of service will have to pay 50 per cent of the cost of benefits, and employees with between six months and five years service will have to pay 75 per cent.”
An employee with more than five years service told CBC News that prior to this, their benefits were covered 100 per cent by the company."
The letter is signed “Sincerely, Jeri, Ron and Lisa.”
Tim Hortons is a subsidiary of the Oakville-based holding company Restaurant Brands International on December 15, 2014, which is majority-owned by Brazilian investment firm 3G Capital. (From Wikipedia)
Seems to be a petty political reaction to the new provincial minimum wage change (from $13/hr to $14/hr) that only hurts the little guy.
I agree it’s bullshit, but it’s not clear to me which locations are doing this and how far up the chain the decision goes. It looks like it’s the owners of one Ontario franchise.
This is not a head office initiative, it was at a single location in Ontario. It’s just that the franchisees at this particular restaurant, apart from being stupid enough to write a “justification” letter to their employees, happen to be relatives of the founder (Tim Horton, a hockey player from long ago).
For Canadians (including Québécois), a boycott of Tim Hortons restaurants is almost as silly as a boycott of petrol stations. The chain will lose some goodwill because of this, but their domination of the market will remain.
Exactly.
Each Tim Hortons is owned by the franchisee. The corporation isn’t involved in daily management of each location.
No organized boycott will ever be effective. And from what I can tell, at this particular location, labour laws are not being circumvented.
Sure, maybe. But there won’t be an organized boycott of the whole chain, and if there is, it will last about five minutes until the participants click on another outrage-of-the-day on their Facebook feeds.
Remember when people were outraged!!! at United Airlines because some guy was beaten by a cop on their franchisee’s plane? Nobody cared about the fact that it wasn’t a United plane or crew (which is fine, IMO, as the brand ultimately has to take responsibility for what’s done under its logo), but there was a mass call for a boycott…and it never happened. People stopped talking about it within a week and it didn’t make a dent in their revenue. And someone got beaten up.
While discussing topics in the news is certainly welcome (and encouraged) on this board, we don’t allow calls to action here.
As the thread title and subsequent posts fit that description, I am closing this thread. Again, you’re welcome to discuss what’s happening and your opinion of it, but please don’t attempt to incite people in this manner.