Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Chick Fil-A and its boss are welcome to their personal beliefs. But I find issue when governmental authority tries to damage a company because of those beliefs. Consumers, including Rahm Emanuel, are welcome not to go to Chick Fil-A if they find the boss's personal beliefs to be that important. But why should any governmental authority have ANY rights to limit ANY company for those reasons whatsoever?
Obviously Rahm doesn't want the tax dollars and jobs Chick-Fil-A will generate for the nearly bankrupt City of Chicago. Obviously Rahm also doesn't like the job opportunities for youth to work at Chick-Fil-A.
Hey Rahm, its the ECONOMY stupid and your city cannot afford to turn away new business! I hope Chick-Fil-A flourishes in the close-in suburbs to Chicago and pulls revenue from the city proper.
A fast food chain with a corrupt moral standing and minimum wage jobs replacing a local bar is not good for the city, period.
Just wanted to note that Chik-Fil-A pays more than minimum wage. They also provide a lot of scholarships to their employees to go to school or to get advanced degrees. A friend of mine was an assistant manager there and they paid for him to get an MBA and then gave him a management position that pays much higher than the average fast food joint.
Chik-Fil-A is known to be a company that treats their employees well and if I were a person out of work in any city and they opened a restaurant, I would be in line to put in an application and do my best to talk them into hiring me.
Obviously Rahm doesn't want the tax dollars and jobs Chick-Fil-A will generate for the nearly bankrupt City of Chicago. Obviously Rahm also doesn't like the job opportunities for youth to work at Chick-Fil-A.
Hey Rahm, its the ECONOMY stupid and your city cannot afford to turn away new business! I hope Chick-Fil-A flourishes in the close-in suburbs to Chicago and pulls revenue from the city proper.
Atlanta (where the HQ of CFA is located) has an 11% unemployment rate. Chicago is 9%. Boston is winning out at 5.7%. Maybe CFA should focus at home rather than introducing more minimum wage jobs to a company that siphons funds out of the states?
I suspect there are executives and public relations people affiliated with Chik-fil-A that see this whole controversy as a nightmare.
Big businesses don't like their brand to be embroiled in controversy, discord, and heated emotions.
If I had to make a prediction, I expect the "powers" at Chik will hatch some kind of damage control in the next several days. My guess it will be some sort of lame announcement that they do not discriminate against LGBT customers or employees and they respect all people.
Despite all the discussion pro and con, this is not a good experience for Chik. They wish this thing did not blow up. It is possible they will rethink which organizations they will contribute millions to in the future, or at least figure out a way to donate in a more discrete way.
Just wanted to note that Chik-Fil-A pays more than minimum wage. They also provide a lot of scholarships to their employees to go to school or to get advanced degrees. A friend of mine was an assistant manager there and they paid for him to get an MBA and then gave him a management position that pays much higher than the average fast food joint.
Chik-Fil-A is known to be a company that treats their employees well and if I were a person out of work in any city and they opened a restaurant, I would be in line to put in an application and do my best to talk them into hiring me.
It paid close to minimum wage in my hometown in GA. When I applied in 2010 with a college degree before I got a professional job in Boston, the going rate was about $6. I assume that was a bit higher than they would have paid the high school kids. That's not quite minimum wage, but significantly less than Massachusetts' minimum wage.
And when you consider that (at least in Boston), the proposed site is a locally owned bar, there is nothing positive for the Boston economic fabric in adding a CFA regardless of their giving practices. They are open less hours, produce less revenue/tax dollars (no liquor license), revenue does not stay locally, and they are closed on a peak weekend tourist day in the heart of the Boston tourist center. Even before news of their immoral giving practices came out, I'm certain that mayors with a focus on local business were not thrilled. At least in Boston, CFA's stance on gay marriage is a convenient way of using public opinion to bar an undesirable business.
It paid close to minimum wage in my hometown in GA. When I applied in 2010 with a college degree before I got a professional job in Boston, the going rate was about $6. I assume that was a bit higher than they would have paid the high school kids. That's not quite minimum wage, but significantly less than Massachusetts' minimum wage.
And when you consider that (at least in Boston), the proposed site is a locally owned bar, there is nothing positive for the Boston economic fabric in adding a CFA regardless of their giving practices. They are open less hours, produce less revenue/tax dollars (no liquor license), and are closed on a peak weekend tourist day in the heart of the Boston tourist center. Even before news of their immoral giving practices came out, I'm certain that mayors with a focus on local business were not thrilled. At least in Boston, CFA's stance on gay marriage is a convenient way of using public opinion to bar an undesirable business.
Immoral giving practices? Really? So now supporting Christian marriage between a man and a woman is immoral but enabling alcoholism (see you local bar comments) is not?
Immoral giving practices? Really? So now supporting Christian marriage between a man and a woman is immoral but enabling alcoholism (see you local bar comments) is not?
I'm not asking you to subscribe to my morals. Don't like gay marriage? Don't have one. Don't like drinking? Don't. I ask you to respect others enough to allow them to follow their own faith and traditions, rather than forcing your own. Since gay marriage does not impact your life one iota, I must conclude that those who support legislation banning it are morally bankrupt, selfish, and lack respect for their fellow man.
I don't demand that CFA remove dairy from their menu because mixing meat and dairy is not Biblical. I do not rally to ban hog farms. Why is it your business who gets married, when it is none of my business that you do not follow the Torah?
It paid close to minimum wage in my hometown in GA. When I applied in 2010 with a college degree before I got a professional job in Boston, the going rate was about $6. I assume that was a bit higher than they would have paid the high school kids. That's not quite minimum wage, but significantly less than Massachusetts' minimum wage.
And when you consider that (at least in Boston), the proposed site is a locally owned bar, there is nothing positive for the Boston economic fabric in adding a CFA regardless of their giving practices. They are open less hours, produce less revenue/tax dollars (no liquor license), revenue does not stay locally, and they are closed on a peak weekend tourist day in the heart of the Boston tourist center. Even before news of their immoral giving practices came out, I'm certain that mayors with a focus on local business were not thrilled. At least in Boston, CFA's stance on gay marriage is a convenient way of using public opinion to bar an undesirable business.
The federal minimum wage for covered nonexempt employees is $7.25 per hour effective July 24, 2009. The federal minimum wage provisions are contained in the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Many states also have minimum wage laws. In cases where an employee is subject to both the state and federal minimum wage laws, the employee is entitled to the higher of the two minimum wages.
2)I don't believe the government has any business giving ANY adult a license to marry. It's none of their business. I'm against straight marriage and gay marriage and all other kinds of marriage that need a license. We should all....gay and straight...be united against that.
3)Everyone has a right to their opinion on homosexuality and heterosexuality. No one is going to be convinced with all the yelling and opining.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Really? So now supporting Christian marriage between a man and a woman is immoral but enabling alcoholism (see you local bar comments) is not? 
