[greedo]

When I was younger, I worked at a McDonalds in SoCal. Almost all the employees were white teenagers. The managers were white as well. We didn't make much, just a bit above minimum wage, but we were all mostly high-school students or college students working in the summer to pay tuition.

This went on until around 1984 or so, when it became much harder to hire this demographic. It wasn't as cool to work at fast food, and the area was becoming more affluent.

Fast forward five years, and 99% of the staff was now Hispanic, including several illegal immigrants. The restaurant had to do what it could to make money and stay in biz.

I don't know how high wages would have to be to attract the previous demographic to that type of work. The area is far more affluent than when I was growing up, and house prices start at over $700K and go higher easily.

I do think something is missing though when kids don't learn what it's like to hold a retail type job dealing with the public. You learn hard work, humility, and often an appreciation for higher education.

[diogenescynic]

There are plenty of white teenagers who work at every In-N-Out I've ever been to--because they pay better. Otherwise those kids, in nicer areas like you point to, have better alternatives for minimum wage like retail. The reason the jobs you describe are being replaced by immigrants is because the wages have been stagnant or not kept up with inflation. Unskilled immigrants take labor jobs that Americans aren't really willing to do, like being a janitor or emptying septic tanks or pouring concrete in Bakersfield.

[derrickdirge]

To the parent's point, it's probably generally considered slightly 'cooler' to work at In-N-Out than at McDonald's. In-N-Out certainly seems to be trendier amongst young people than most other fast food restaurants.

Anecdotally, it seems that as general affluence within a community rises, so does the value placed on social standing. So your compensation package has to cover increased lifestyle expenses, adjusted for the position's impact on your status in the community.

If wages stagnated, but somehow McDonald's just kept getting trendier, I expect they would retain more of their original demographic than if McDonald's was increasingly seen as a place that only employs losers and morons.

[mc32]

Where I live in SF, there is a coffee shop owner who hires your regular high school/college student, next door there is a grocery store which mostly hires spanish speakers. One seems to make the choice to hire young kids, the other hires cheap labor.

[greedo]

Agreed. When In-N-Out opened up near our franchise, the managers were in a panic because they were paying 75% higher hourly rates not to mention what they paid their managers.

Plus, fast-food jobs developed a stigma as loser/dead-end jobs. Teenagers needed spending money, but not at the cost of being "uncool."

[cylinder]

In n Out pays $11-$12/he with good benefits - much more than McD. McDonalds are also franchises so the individual owners are much more concerned with weekly cash flow than corporate In N Out who can decide to invest in higher wages for lower turnover and better staff which are longer term investments.

[CalChris]

Minimum wage in that era had much stronger purchasing power. 1980 saw its decline.

https://oregonstate.edu/instruct/anth484/minwage.html

[candiodari]

Wages saw a decline since the 1980s. Minimum wage just as well as almost any other. Hell, by a reasonable PCE measure, even the president is making substantially less.

The government has of course solved this problem.

One, the actual amounts didn't go down, they simply didn't keep pace with inflation. And as actual measures (ie. "Big Mac index" type indices) kept going down, they were systematically removed from tracking by the FED. So the government can claim that they didn't in fact go down by a factor of 3.

In reality nobody has lost any wages you see, and the fact that a fast food worker's (esp. immigrant ones) "apartment" (room is a more apt description generally) today is tiny, looks barren and has absolutely nothing in it worth anything, or the issue that their cars are invariably beaters. Well that was the case for lowest-level jobs in the 1980s as well, wasn't it ?

Wait ... no it wasn't. First of all, they owned houses and cars.

But you see, according to the fed's measures of inflation everything is about the same. And of course it is. You see, people today only use about a third of the housing as people of the 1980s. That must be because people now ... euhm ... are about 1/3rd the size of back then ? They also only use 1/3rd transport (fuel, public transport, ...) ... now there's some small justification for that, as a gallon of gasoline goes a lot further now, but still.

[gmarx]

This change occurred in my town as well at about the same time. How do you know you are getting cause and effect right? I always assumed that after the amnesty in the first Bush administration it was just easier/cheaper/better attitude to get mexicans and the restaurants stopped hiring the high school kids. I don't think those jobs were ever considered cool for the high school kids but money is useful

[dragonwriter]

> I always assumed that after the amnesty in the first Bush administration

A minor nitpick, but you are probably referring to the amnesty component of the 1986 immigration reform law, which was during the Reagan Administration, not the first Bush Administration.

[gmarx]

Thanks

[greedo]

Well, having worked there, and knowing how racist the owners/upper mgmt were, they would have preferred to hire only whites. Any productivity gains by hiring immigrants who "might" have worked harder were lost at least initially with communication issues until we had enough Spanish speakers to make things operate smoothly. And while we did have a few slacker white kids who just wanted an easy paycheck, I can't say that was true of the majority of white teens we employed.

[rm_-rf_slash]

Nothing helped me appreciate education and hard work like working as a produce clerk at a second rate grocery store, seeing day in, day out, the same customers buying the same horrible processed foods, and the same burnout co-workers showing up stoned out of their minds to deal with the shit jobs they work to afford their weed to help them deal with their shit jobs.

Taught me more about life than any class or book ever could.

[externalities88]

Here I am working for one poorly run tech company after another, jumping to the next as they die, hoping my salary won't go down as cost of living goes up, dealing with the same kludgy tools and frameworks and short sighted management.

That degree and hard work got me more money. The rest is all the same

[hkmurakami]

Any insight into what does In n' Out does differently? They seem to continue to attract that demographic.

[masonic]

One key factor is that they require English fluency, since every employee is in a position to be customer-facing.

The progression with most other fast food chains in CA was that once you start hiring employees who don't speak English, then you have to have all shift managers be Spanish-speaking, leaving no upward path for line employees who aren't bilingual. Before long, most of the kitchen crew is non-English-speaking.

[rogerbinns]

They don't have franchises like the other chains. That is also why their rollout seems slow. This means the boss is the company, not a franchisee who will have their own way of doing things. They then make a reasonable effort of benefits for their employees: http://www.in-n-out.com/employment/restaurant.aspx

[amorphid]

There rollouts are also slower for a couple reasons:

- every In-N-Out must be within 500 miles of a beef distribution center [1]

- In-N-Out tries to buy it's land [2]

My impression is that they grow the business from cash flow, not debt, and they move slowly so they can keep up quality. They are a privately held company, so hard to verify some information.

[1] http://www.ocregister.com/articles/accelerates-291670-expans...

[2] http://www.innoutrealestate.com/

[masonic]

  They don't have franchises like the other chains. 

I don't think that's a factor. Both corporate-owned stores and franchisees use the same employee demographics, generally. Sometimes you'll find a franchisee who is an immigrant from outside the Americas and find a lot of family members and their friends making up the crew. (For example, there's a local Taco Bell that has more South-Asian employees than not.)

[rogerbinns]

The franchising is a factor because franchisees have latitude in setting their own policies for employees. eg one franchisee could offer education credits while another doesn't. Or one could pay more than another, beyond just local circumstances.

[mahyarm]

Do affluent teenagers care about benefits although when their parents very likely have benefits for them already?

[greedo]

My fellow teens only cared about how much money they made, if the uniforms made them look like idiots to the opposite sex, and what their schedule was.

[temp-dude-87844]

Elsewhere in the States, Panera, Starbucks, Chick fil-A, Tropical Smoothie, and likely some others tend to have staff that fits the same visual archetype.

Some of it is likely due to "organic" stratification and segregation of society, which is a less-nice way of saying people keep to their own circles. Some of it may be deliberate discrimination due to factors such as attractiveness and access to resources, often obscured by information asymmetry in the hiring process. Some of it may be that these businesses tend to be located in more prosperous areas that are both distant and difficult to access to by people who lack reliable transportation.

Several of these factors, while alone may not be significant, can occur together to striking effect.

[67726e]

I would love to know what exactly it is Chic-fil-a does. Right now I less than a block from one, but it's all chipper teenagers and, yes, mostly white. This is despite the fact that the neighborhood I live in is majority black, and lower income. I have neighbors who work at McDonalds, but not Chic-fil-a. I can't imagine Chic-fil-a outright discriminates, but every one I visit has polite, probably affluent, teens.

[masonic]

In my experience, there are many black employees at fast food places in Oakland and southeastern S.F. (Bayview).

[chiefalchemist]

What does Starbucks pay? Or are their employees just naturally unhappy, if not grumpy?

[dropit_sphere]

Also, to piggyback: does anyone know if In-N-Out has a Disney-type dress/grooming code? Every time I go (about once a year, so I'm a bit fuzzy) I get the impression that everyone is cleancut.

[rhizome]

~1984 was around the time of the explosion of malls, so there were a lot more non-food jobs for teens after that.

[Kluny]

I'm not in the states, but if I had a high school age kid I think I'd do anything I could to get them a better summer job than McD's. The money isn't the point - they're going to end up competing with adults for real jobs at some point, and the more high quality items they can get on a resume, the better their chances. Middle class kids legit can't afford to work in fast food because they need to spend their school years doing something more valuable than that.

I would probably advise my kids to shadow a tradesman, volunteer at a hospital or for a political campaign, plant trees, lead at a summer camp, or any other thing that will lead to better opportunities than fast food. Even working in a high end restaurant would be better.

[sand500]

>Middle class kids legit can't afford to work in fast food because they need to spend their school years doing something more valuable than that.

I agree fully. Especially once you get to college, you need to start looking for internships and having more things on your resume makes you that more competitive.

[kashkhan]

it's better to let teenagers invest in future job skills than past job skills. Sure grape picking would build character, resourcefulness, obedience to bosses and teamwork, but it's got no future. Same thing with fast food jobs.

[nradov]

Knowing how to show up on time, follow instructions, and be polite to customers is a future job skill.

[rm_-rf_slash]

Interpersonal skills are future job skills.

Technical skills are only useful if they command a salary lucrative enough to live on but not so lucrative that you find yourself on the automation chopping block.

[faster]

Non-cognitive skills like those are very important. I've seen a few papers lately that show that it's more valuable to long-term earning to learn non-cognitive skills than cognitive skills in a child's early years.

http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/16164/1/16164.pdf

[masonic]

Working in fast food means responsibility and planning: time clock, rules, clean uniform, proper shoes, standards for behavior, etc. Some millenials aren't held to such basic standards elsewhere in life yet.

[dmode]

I didn't grow up in the US, but is this because parenting changed around this time ? Where I grew up, we would hear stories about kids in the US leaving their homes at 15 and trying to figure things out. But when I moved here, i have never seen it. All the families I know take good care of their kids throughout college and even after. So there is no need for them to work at low paying fast food jobs. Their parents can cover their expenses. Savvier parents are even investing their kids future by helping them build startups, participating in hackathons etc. Far cry from a job at McDonad's.

[wavefunction]

Given your description of folks here in the US (which is positive and flattering) I think you're overlooking most of the population of the country, for which your description of college or building startups is not true.

[dmode]

I was referring specifically to what OP was hinting at - changing demographic at fast food stores in wealthy areas.

[pasquinelli]

Well, really the seem to be talking about an area that became more wealthy, right?

[DrScump]

  we would hear stories about kids in the US leaving their homes at 15 and trying to figure things out

I think that's a pre-WW2 concept at best. With the advent of child labor laws, a child has restraints on numbers of hours and time of day, especially during the school year.

When I was 16, we needed school-issued Work Permits to work at all and were limited to 4 hour shifts on "school nights" with a 10PM limit.

[cylinder]

In Australia McDonalds are still generally staffed by young teens, not immigrants, and often white. This is because there are lower minimum wages for minors (staggered by age).

I think this is a matter of costs (wages) and not much else.

[late2part]

My impression is that a similar issue occurred in the military a few years later.

[da02]

What jobs did the teens from affluent families get instead of fast food service?

[dragonwriter]

> What jobs did the teens from affluent families get instead of fast food service?

Probably either none or things (paid or not) connected with their career plans and aspirations, often through personal networks jump started from their parents networks. Same as teens and young adults from affluent families now.

[RussianCow]

Not the OP, but likely many of them didn't get jobs at all because they didn't need to.

[sand500]

Gotta get those extracurriculars and community service that colleges look for on top of getting good grades.

[edblarney]

"It wasn't as cool to work at fast food, and the area was becoming more affluent."

If you walk into a 7-11 in Scandinavia (yes, they have some there) - esp. in a small town - you'll sometimes see a drop-dead '10' Swedish model working behind the counter.

Why? Because 'it's normal' for people to do such jobs - as you say - 'when you were young' it was normal.

When those jobs are done by non-citizens, especially of a different ethnicity, then there is a 'stigma' associated with that work, and the social value drops quite a lot.

The notion that 'the area became more affluent' and kids wouldn't do those jobs is a total misrepresentation of reality.

A) If the social context didn't change, then kids would do those jobs.

B) 'They had to hire illegal migrants' is again another lie. As the area becomes more wealthy - guess what - wages are supposed to rise. Yes, that means the price of burgers should rise a little bit as well. But it's again, a total misrepresentation, borderline lie to imply that the 'only way to have service workers is to hire illegal workers'. This is beyond false.

The anecdote you described provides the fundamental basis for the rise of inequality in America.

The notion that 'illegal workers' must be used to support economic activity is obviously unfeasible in the long-term, that somehow growth depends on a class of workers who'll work below the real prevailing wage - and who cannot organize, collect social security, healthcare etc.

No - it's completely upside down.

There are so many places in the world where 'regular kids' continue to work at McDonald's. Wages and benefits are higher, and there is no real social stigma. (Of course, working at McD's is never going to be considered a choice job, but you did it :) )

"I do think something is missing though when kids don't learn what it's like to hold a retail type job dealing with the public."

Yes - I fully agree. Been there.

But a bifurcated society creates stigma and deep 'social class signalling' in these jobs and it destroys the social compact.

Imagine this for a moment: that Obama or Trump gives all illegal migrants instant citizenship with full rights, healthcare, the right to organize labour, social security.

Then guess what happens by the 'illegals are necessary economic logic': McDonald's has to 'fire the new citizens' and 'hire actual, new illegals'!

It's a destructive, unsustainable Ponzi scheme.

Local wages should rise until the jobs are filled.

Some farming jobs just won't work out - those crops can be grown elsewhere.

Yes - we need to treat people with humanity and dignity and there'll always be some people who 'fall through the cracks' - but the systematic importation of illegal workers on a large scale is inhuman.

[virtuabhi]

I am appalled by the casual sexism and racism of the parent comment. "esp. in a small town - you'll sometimes see a drop-dead '10' Swedish model working behind the counter" --> Is it okay to refer to a person by a sexist score? Does the HN community condones this and at the same time rally against sexual harassment at statups? How is this comment not dead yet?

[postsantum]

There is no mention of gender or race in the parent comment. Here is only your opinion implying only females can be models and that being an illegal immigrant is somehow tied to a race.

[lohi]

I think in Sweden, were this has been changing in big cities in recent years, it's mostly because you can't support yourself in many areas on a 7-11 salary anymore. If you can't get an apartment you can't stay in the area, so there's no young temporary workforce left and people with options aren't going to commute long for a 7-11 job.

[ysavir]

The parent comment addresses that:

> As the area becomes more wealthy - guess what - wages are supposed to rise. Yes, that means the price of burgers should rise a little bit as well.

[lohi]

There's just no way salaries can keep up with social changes. Housing prices have doubled in the last 10 years. Salaries are already high and hamburgers expensive in Sweden.

A 19 year old in Sweden would make $14/hour at 7-11. That's around $1900/month after taxes. To double that with progressive taxes you would have to make roughly as much as a fairly well paid software developer here. A rental unit could easily be $1200-1400 and to buy a 330 square feet apartment would cost you around $300k, which is essentially the same as SF. Say you save $500/month then it still takes you more than 7 years just to get the cash contribution. It's not happening.

http://www.valueguard.se/index http://www.economist.com/content/big-mac-index