Slashdot Mirror
Tech is Killing Street Food (theatlantic.com)
In San Francisco and Bangalore, street-vendor unions and nonprofits are helping informal food workers eke out a living -- but their future is still uncertain. From a report: Bangalore and the Bay Area have a lot in common. They are the tech centers of the world's second- and third-most-populous countries, respectively, and they both sometimes feel like they're bursting at the seams. Some economists argue that when tech companies move to cities with rigid housing markets, the value of real wages goes down as the cost of living jumps. [...] In both places, many street vendors are migrants -- Bangalore's come from other parts of India, while in the Bay Area many hail from Latin America. They and their livelihoods offer a warning about the fate of immigrant service labor in the tech economy: When space is at a premium, the high-profile, high-margin industries tend to take it up, while the low-paid, already precarious jobs that keep them humming are threatened.
Bangalore is full of food vendors like Sukumar N. T. According to Aditi Surie, a sociologist at the Indian Institute for Human Settlements who specializes in the gig economy, Bangalore has limited licensed areas for people to ply food, so "across income groups" in the city, "informal food vending is valuable to all." But near the International Tech Park Bangalore in Whitefield, you won't see street vendors. Plenty are stationed immediately outside the ITPB's gates, however, which has led to some tension. Earlier this year, The Times of India called the street vendors near the office park "a huge menace" because they impede ITPB employees' passage in and out of the complex. Whitefield "is really illogically planned," Vinay Sreenivasa told me from his dusty office. Sreenivasa is a member of both the Alternative Law Forum, a legal-advocacy organization, and Bengaluru Jilla Beedhi Vyaapari Sanghatanegala Okkuta, a street-vendor union. "They planned only for tech parks and hotels," he explained. "In a way, those [informal] livelihoods are created by the poor planning." That generally doesn't bother rank-and-file IT workers -- they need to eat, too -- but according to Sreenivasa, some managers and officials think that the informal businesses undermine the area's air of modern enterprise.
Back in California, some of the Bay Area's massive tech campuses have become mini cities, complete with their own closed food systems. This is an understandable move for companies in remote suburban enclaves, perhaps, but less so for urban headquarters, where abundant free or subsidized food can allow tech employees to avoid engaging with local restaurants or vendors. Some tech offices do hire small catering businesses. And companies such as Zendesk choose not to offer free food, to encourage their employees to frequent local businesses. But many technology headquarters isolate themselves from the local food culture, and the people whose livelihoods depend on it.
Bangalore is full of food vendors like Sukumar N. T. According to Aditi Surie, a sociologist at the Indian Institute for Human Settlements who specializes in the gig economy, Bangalore has limited licensed areas for people to ply food, so "across income groups" in the city, "informal food vending is valuable to all." But near the International Tech Park Bangalore in Whitefield, you won't see street vendors. Plenty are stationed immediately outside the ITPB's gates, however, which has led to some tension. Earlier this year, The Times of India called the street vendors near the office park "a huge menace" because they impede ITPB employees' passage in and out of the complex. Whitefield "is really illogically planned," Vinay Sreenivasa told me from his dusty office. Sreenivasa is a member of both the Alternative Law Forum, a legal-advocacy organization, and Bengaluru Jilla Beedhi Vyaapari Sanghatanegala Okkuta, a street-vendor union. "They planned only for tech parks and hotels," he explained. "In a way, those [informal] livelihoods are created by the poor planning." That generally doesn't bother rank-and-file IT workers -- they need to eat, too -- but according to Sreenivasa, some managers and officials think that the informal businesses undermine the area's air of modern enterprise.
Back in California, some of the Bay Area's massive tech campuses have become mini cities, complete with their own closed food systems. This is an understandable move for companies in remote suburban enclaves, perhaps, but less so for urban headquarters, where abundant free or subsidized food can allow tech employees to avoid engaging with local restaurants or vendors. Some tech offices do hire small catering businesses. And companies such as Zendesk choose not to offer free food, to encourage their employees to frequent local businesses. But many technology headquarters isolate themselves from the local food culture, and the people whose livelihoods depend on it.
After a forest burns they count birds. What they find typcially is like 80% of more loss of both birds and bird species. Sad. But not as sad as it sounds. The birds did not die. They moved. And while there was a huge ecosystem impact it wasn't like the birds were all killed off.
The street food vendors are not gone. THey just move to the next sweet spot in the food chain where there's an urban lower middle class that is being lifted up and is glad to have street vendors moving into their neighbor hoods finally.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
The more likely explanation in San Francisco is that people are crapping on the sidewalk. There's nothing like the smell of human feces out in the sun to build up an appetite.
There's a part of the tech press (or perhaps just the press in general) that is merely content to complain about anything as clickbait sees just as much (if not more) consumption than anything requiring significant journalistic undertaking while consuming far less effort to produce. You can almost rest assured that if Apple had not included a cafeteria (or other form of food service) that the same writers would be complaining about the added traffic or how the tech employees are overcrowding the local eateries and pushing locals out.
Occasionally you can even find articles from one of those perpetuate whiners that are at complete odds with each other and argue the opposite sides of some problem. It's almost as though they start with the conclusion and then fill in the remaining bits of their articles.
Americans are often way too cautious on the cleanliness of food.
An E. Coli outbreak every year or two, like in the romaine lettuce outbreak, tells me that Americans are rightfully cautious of the cleanliness of their food.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
I'm not really sure what your issue with this actually is. If you're trying to complain that the company cafeteria jobs harm the food service jobs outside of the company, I'm not sure how that works. If the company just moved in and brought all of those employees, the extra mouths to feed weren't there previously and unless the company captures 100% of employee meals, the outside providers get some added business. Even if the company does capture 100% of employee meals, they still need to hire additional food service job positions to supply all of those meals, which does create some additional low skill positions.
Now, unless the company set up shop in a wheat field, abandoned lot, or something similar they probably replaced some people who were previously patronizing local food providers, so there is a chance for them to see decreased business. However, in order to provide food services (whether in a cafeteria, or other form) the company has to hire people to fill those positions. If someone previously working at Lou's Diner moves over to the kitchen at Mega Corp. does anything really change from their perspective? They might even see a pay bump if Mega Corp. wants to staff the positions quickly.
Also, if the jobs are closer to where the workers are, how is that a bad thing either. That means less driving (and the traffic and pollution that accompany it) and doesn't necessarily mean that local business has to suffer either. I've seen a few companies that have local restaurants do catering once in a while. Even with all of that, there's nothing that prevents employees from going out for lunch either. This overwrought concern just comes across as you looking for some way to construe this a problem when there isn't one there.
most of the life threatening cases of E. Coli in our food supply are the strain found in humans, not cattle. The sanitation on the farm site and processing facility is the issue.
This seems really stupid. If restaurant owners deserve to be subsidized by the taxpayer, why not just do it directly by giving them money? That way they wouldn't even have to make any food. They could just collect their subsidy checks while relaxing at home in front of the TV, and the tech workers could eat at the cantina which they obviously prefer. So everybody wins.
Doing it indirectly via vouchers just adds a lot of unnecessary bureaucracy, while giving everyone a suboptimal outcome.