THE GREAT SERVICE DIVIDE

THE GREAT

SERVICE DIVIDE

Occupational Segregation, Inequality,

and the Promise of a Living Wage

in the Seattle Restaurant Industry

2020

RESTAURANT OPPORTUNITIES CENTERS UNITED

RESTAURANT OPPORTUNITIES CENTER OF SEATTLE

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

TERMINOLOGY

INTRODUCTION & METHODOLOGY

RESTAURANT INDUSTRY: SEGMENTS AND STRUCTURE

OCCUPATIONAL SEGREGATION IN SEATTLE

MATCHED PAIR AUDIT TESTS

WORKERS’ VOICES

POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

CONCLUSION

APPENDIX: ADDITIONAL STORIES

END NOTES

The restaurant industry employs nearly

300,000 workers in Washington, and over

150,000 workers in the Seattle region.

In the coming years, this rapidly expanding sector stands to be-

come the fourth largest employer, providing not only the largest

source of minimum and subminimum wage jobs, but also well-pay-

ing professional careers. Currently, 22 percent of the restaurant

workforce in Seattle earns a livable wage.

As one of the largest

and fastest growing industries with an expanding supply of life-

sustaining jobs, restaurants could offer a sustainable career ladder

to thousands of people living in an increasingly precarious econo-

my. This begs the question: sustainable jobs for whom?

With 40 percent of the Washington restaurant workforce

composed of workers of color, restaurant professions could provide real pathways to living-

wage professions for Black, Latinx, Asian, and Indigenous workers.

However, the current

structure of the industry denies living-wage opportunities to a large percentage of this

diverse workforce.

In order to determine the role of passive or implicit, and active discrimination in hiring

practices in Seattle’s restaurant industry, the Restaurant Opportunities Centers (ROC)

United has partnered with the Seattle Ofﬁce for Civil Rights to examine restaurant hiring

practices and the experiences of workers of color. Utilizing census data to analyze segrega-

tion patterns within the industry, matched pair audit tests of job seekers, and interviews

and focus groups with restaurant workers, we examined patterns of discrimination in the

industry in order to craft proposals to support and encourage the adoption of racial equity

practices by employers and the industry at large.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

KEY FINDINGS

DEFINING THE PROBLEM

OF RACIAL SEGREGATION

IN SEATTLE RESTAURANTS

◆ Racial diversity deﬁnes the restaurant industry and its workforce. While workers of color

represent 30 percent of the employed population in Seattle as a whole, they represent

46 percent of the employed restaurant workforce.

◆ Positions throughout both the “Front of House” (FOH, dining ﬂoor) and the “Back of

House” (BOH, kitchen) are highly segregated by race and ethnicity. Although workers of

color account for 46 percent of the industry’s workforce, workers of color are concentrat-

ed in less visible, lower-wage jobs, and are underrepresented in the coveted, highest-paid

FOH positions. Only 18 percent of bartenders in Seattle are workers of color.

◆ The distribution of workers of color among different positions based on earnings does

not reﬂect the diversity of the industry’s workforce, suggesting inequitable systems of

hiring and promotion into higher-paying positions. Twenty-six percent of white bartend-

ers and servers earn a livable wage, compared to 15 percent of bartenders and servers

of color in Seattle.

◆ Matched pair audit tests of 105 ﬁne dining establishments were conducted, with a total

of 100 valid completed audits. Of these, there was no statistical difference in hiring out-

comes based on interactions with hosts and management, however evidence of bias in

social interactions favoring in-group, or white testers was found in 49 percent of audits,

evidence of equal treatment was found in 34 percent of audits, and evidence of treat-

ment favoring out-group, or Black and Latinx testers was found in 17 percent of audits.

◆ Of audits showing evidence favoring in-group testers, 6.1 percent resulted in job offers

to in-group testers, 18.4 percent resulted in call-backs for in-group testers, 36.7 percent

showed strong evidence of bias against out-group auditors, 28.6 percent showed evi-

dence of implicit bias against out-group testers, and 10.2 percent resulted in out-group

testers being told to apply elsewhere, either far out of town or in ethnic-themed res-

taurants.

◆ In interviews and focus groups, restaurant workers described ﬁrsthand experiences of

discrimination from managers, customers, and co-workers, leading to patterns of self-

selection bias. Although workers of color experienced overt discrimination, including

being asked to consider lower-paying positions other than server or bartender, these

experiences ultimately led workers of color to not apply for top-tier positions because

management and/or clientele behavior make them uncomfortable, or because they feel

they do not match the image of workers in that profession.

INGROUP

TESTERS

6.1%

RECEIVED

JOB OFFERS

18.4%

RECEIVED

CALLBACKS

OUTGROUP

TESTERS

28.6%

SHOWED

IMPLICIT BIAS

10.2%

TOLD TO

APPLY

ELSEWHERE

Discrimination: Unfair differences in employment treatment or employ-

ment outcomes (such as hiring, promotions, earnings) that negatively

impact certain race/ethnic groups or genders. These differences may re-

ﬂect explicit (conscious) bias or implicit (unconscious) stereotypes.

Occupational Segregation: Disproportionate rates of representation of

race, ethnic and/or gender-based groups in different job titles.

“White” and “Workers of Color”: “White” is shorthand for non-Hispanic

whites, and “workers of color” refers to categories of African Americans/

Blacks, Latinos, Asians, American Indians, Native Hawaiians and Paciﬁc

Islanders, as well as to mixed race individuals, and other categories, used

by the Current Population Survey and American Community Survey.

Livable Wage: A livable wage is deﬁned here as the income needed for an

individual to live at four times the poverty level or higher. The median res-

taurant worker in Seattle earning a livable wage is single with no children,

and the average is single with less than one child. For this report, we can

estimate the livable hourly wage to be $26 per hour in the city of Seattle.

Normally, a living wage is deﬁned as the minimum level of earnings needed

to support a typical worker.

Matched Pair Audit Testing: A research methodology that measures the

extent of discriminatory treatment exhibited by an employer of two equal-

ly qualiﬁed job applicants. Applicants (auditors) are matched on as many

characteristics as possible, varying only on the observable characteristics

being tested, such as race or gender.

Auditor: An individual trained to apply for employment, housing, etc. in

order to test an establishment’s hiring or related practices and ascertain

if there is evidence of discrimination.

Dyad: A pair of auditors with matching qualiﬁcations that visibly differ in

only one demographic characteristic, such as race or ethnicity/national

origin.

TERMINOLOGY

MATCHED PAIR AUDIT

TESTS OF SEATTLE

RESTAURANTS

Results of 100 matched

pair audit tests of ﬁne

dining restaurants in

the city of Seattle.

← TREATMENT

FAVORING OUT

GROUP TESTERS

17%

EQUAL

TREATMENT

34%

TREATMENT

FAVORING INGROUP

TESTERS

49%

“In-Group” and “Out-Group” Tester: An in-group tester, in this case a white tester is

the auditor representing the in-group characteristics that are the beneﬁciaries of dis-

criminatory behavior. An out-group tester, in this case a Black or Latinx tester is the

auditor outwardly representing the characteristics that are the subject of discrimina-

tion. Characteristics tested can include race, gender, national origin, age, religion, sexual

orientation, and so forth.

Occupational Structure: The relationship between restaurant occupations and the physical

location where those occupations are situated within a restaurant, that largely dictate an

employee’s ability to earn a livable wage.

“Front-of-the-House” (or FOH) and “Back-of-the-House” (or BOH): Restaurant

industry terms for placement and function of workers in a restaurant setting. Front-

of-the-house generally represents those interacting with customers in the front of the

restaurant, including hosts, waitstaff, bussers, and runners. Back-of-the-house gener-

ally refers to kitchen staff, including chefs, cooks, food preparation staff, dishwashers,

and cleaners.

“Tier I” and “Tier II”: Tier I is a term we use to describe the higher-paid positions in

both the front and back-of-the-house; Tier II is the term we use to describe the low-

er-paid positions in both the front and back-of-the-house. Tier I positions offer the

highest wages, opportunities for advancement, access to beneﬁts, and clear career

paths. Upward mobility from a Tier II position to a Tier I position is the most natural

and meaningful form of advancement in this industry. This report primarily focuses on

Tier I FOH positions.

Restaurant Segment: The North American Industry Classiﬁcation System (NAICS) catego-

rizes the restaurant industry (“Food Services and Drinking Places”) into four segments:

full-service, limited service, special food services, such as catering, and drinking places, or

bars which serve drinks but not food.

Casual restaurants: Also described as “casual dining” or “family style” restaurants, are

moderately priced full-service restaurants. They include franchise or chain restaurants,

such as Olive Garden or Applebee’s, as well as independently owned establishments.

Casual ﬁne-dining refers not to a casual restaurant, rather a ﬁne-dining establishment

with a less formal environment.

Fine Dining: These are full-service restaurants with a price point per guest of $40 or

more, including beverages but excluding gratuities. Fine-dining restaurants are com-

monly referred to as “upscale” restaurants, and it is common for ﬁne dining restaurants

to have a unique concept (the name, menu, and decor of a restaurant).

Full service: These restaurants have table service where the seated consumer orders

from a menu.

The signiﬁcance of the restaurant industry as a prin-

cipal driver of the economy continues to grow. In the

Seattle region, the restaurant industry employs nearly

150,000 workers and is on pace to supplant manufac-

turing as the fourth largest employer in the coming

years (see Figure 1).

Although the industry is the larg-

est source of minimum wage jobs, it also provides

high-earning jobs to 22 percent of its workforce and

has the potential to provide a sustainable career ladder

to thousands more workers.

Moreover, Seattle’s restaurant industry is a key node

in regional tourism and hospitality sectors, attracting

visitors and multiplying the ﬂow of dollars into the lo-

cal economy. Both Seattle residents and visitors enjoy

eating out, and the restaurant industry reﬂects the re-

gion’s vibrant culinary culture. As such, the restaurant

industry is a key component of the city’s vitality, diver-

sity, and promise.

The restaurant sector is projected to grow by 15 per-

cent over the coming decade.

As of the last Economic

Census, the industry generated $4.7 billion in revenue,

accounting for an estimated $303 million in sales tax

for the state and $140 million for the city.

Seattle de-

pends heavily on the restaurant industry’s contribution

to the economy and tax base.

Throughout the state, the restaurant industry is a pri-

mary employer for hundreds of thousands of workers

and a portal of opportunity to immigrants, who often

ﬁnd their ﬁrst jobs in restaurants and eventually make

a career in the industry. This opportunity is of particu-

lar importance to the economy of low-wage workers,

and can be a source of promise fulfilled or promise

denied. The reality is that white workers in Seattle

are nearly twice as likely as workers of color to earn

a livable wage. Workers of color have over twice the

odds as white workers of working in the lower wage

occupation of dining room helper (busser and runner),

and less than one quarter the odds of working in the

higher wage occupation of bartender, compared to

white workers.

The restaurant industry could provide

livable wage jobs to a proportionate number of women

and workers of color, yet it disproportionately relegates

workers of color and women to poverty level wages and

denies them the opportunity to advance into higher

earning positions. The restaurant industry has the po-

tential to provide viable opportunities for all.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE RESTAURANT INDUSTRY

INTRODUCTION &

METHODOLOGY

III

FIGURE 1

LARGEST PRIVATE

SECTOR EMPLOYERS

IN SEATTLE AREA

All employees in major

private industries for

all establishment sizes

in Seattle-Tacoma-

Bellevue, WA MSA,

NSA, 2013-2017. Bureau

of Labor Statistics.

Quarterly Census of

Employment and Wages.

Professional and business services

Education and health services

Manufacturing

Food services and drinking places

Construction

Information

Financial activities

Trade, transportation, and utilities

2013

400,000

200,000

100,000

300,000

2014 2015 2016 2017

Previous research examining the ﬁne dining restau-

rant industry in New York, Chicago, Detroit, and New

Orleans has found that the industry’s advancement

opportunities are inaccessible to many workers, and

that discrimination and inequality plague the in-

dustry, particularly for immigrants, workers of color,

and women.

Building on these ﬁndings, this study

provides a deeper analysis of apparent and not-so-

apparent inequalities in ﬁne-dining establishments

in Seattle. Using both qualitative and quantitative

methodologies, this study demonstrates that al-

though discrimination continues to impact multiple

phases of restaurant employment, from when a

worker ﬁrst seeks entry into a workplace (hiring and

placement phase), to how they are treated while work-

ing (workplace conditions), and the worker’s future in

that workplace (promotion or advancement), em-

ployers have also made strides in promoting greater

racial equity. A concerted effort by the city, industry,

and the public can further encourage, promote, and

solidify gains in racial equity and personal dignity. We

employed several research methods to capture the

complexities and subtleties with which discrimination

adversely affects the opportunities and employment

conditions in restaurants for workers of color and

women.

MATCHED PAIR TESTING

To test directly whether discrimination exists in the

upscale restaurant industry, we analyzed the results

of matched pair audit tests of 105 ﬁne-dining es-

tablishments within the city of Seattle conducted

by the Seattle Ofﬁce for Civil Rights (SOCR) as part

of their Civil Rights Testing program. Matched pair

testing allows observation of employers’ hiring prac-

tices when they are not aware of being observed. In

this procedure, dyads or pairs of auditors (“testers”)

applied simultaneously for employment as servers.

Within these pairs, the testers differed in only one

demographic characteristic, that of race or ethnicity/

national origin. Otherwise, the testers had matching

qualiﬁcations. Hence, a controlled environment was

created to observe the effect of a protected class on

differences in employment outcomes — who is hired

and what position they are hired for. Between August

2017 and November 2018, seven testers arrayed in four

dyads completed 105 tests on ﬁne-dining restaurants

within Seattle city limits. Tests were all conducted on

the same day, on average two hours and 32 minutes

apart, with a minimum of 11 minutes, and a maximum

of nine hours and 54 minutes difference. All testers

were professional actors.

Testing allows for closer examination of the indus-

try and provides both statistical and anecdotal data.

Other methodologies employed in this study also

illuminate the attitudes, behaviors, and practices that

underlie occupational segregation and discrimination.

Vignettes of social interactions that occurred during

the matched pair audits illustrating the bias encoun-

tered by workers of color are interspersed throughout

this report.

CENSUS ANALYSIS

We examined race and occupational demographics,

earnings, and poverty data for currently employed

restaurant workers in Seattle derived from the most

recently available merged ﬁve-year sample (2013-2017)

from the American Community Survey to provide the

most accurate picture of the existent demographics

of opportunity within the industry. We also examined

Bureau of Labor Statistics’ data for the Seattle-

Tacoma-Bellevue metropolitan statistical area and

other data sets to understand employment and wage

dynamics in the industry.

FOCUS GROUPS

We conducted four focus groups with a total of ﬁf-

teen restaurant workers in Seattle to examine issues

of racial equity facing workers in this industry. The

focus group guide was developed based on the les-

sons learned in a previous report — “Ending Jim Crow

in America’s Restaurants: Racial and Gender Occupa-

tional Segregation in the Restaurant Industry” — and

in conjunction with a recent report on racial equity and

implicit bias — Building the High Road to Racial Equity:

Addressing Implicit Bias in the San Francisco Bay Area

Restaurant Industry. The guide includes sections on

worker experiences applying to front-of-the-house

(FOH) positions, employer hiring practices, and cus-

tomer attitudes. The interviews in Seattle and in the

Bay Area were conducted over a two-year period from

September of 2016 to September of 2018. Speciﬁc

identifying information was removed or changed to

protect respondents’ identity.

METHODOLOGY

SEGMENTS OF THE RESTAURANT INDUSTRY

Not all restaurants are created equal. Although all restaurants are in

the business of serving their guests a meal, factors such as ambience,

type of service, and type of targeted patrons segment the industry

into three broad categories which vary markedly with respect to wag-

es, working conditions, and workforce composition. In this report, we

categorize those segments as fast-food or “quick-service,” casual

full-service, family-style or franchise, and ﬁne-dining, both casual ﬁne-

dining and high-end “white-tablecloth.”

At one end of the spectrum, fast-food or quick-service restaurants

provide limited table service and are often characterized by low-pay-

ing jobs and employment primarily of workers of color and youth.

The next segment, family-style restaurants, includes those that are

often considered “casual-dining” with moderately-priced meals and

informal environments. This segment includes both chain restaurants and franchises such

as Olive Garden or Applebee’s, and smaller, independently owned or family-owned estab-

lishments such as neighborhood restaurants.

At the other end of the spectrum lie ﬁne-dining or “white-tablecloth” restaurants. Fine

dining is often deﬁned by a price point per customer of $40 or more including beverages

but excluding gratuity. Restaurants within this segment are known for high-quality service,

talented — often celebrity — chefs, name recognition or notoriety, and unique restaurant

concepts. As a result of the growth of the industry, there is a growing trend of casual ﬁne

dining within this segment, with an emphasis on high-quality food and service in a relaxed

or thematic setting. Increasingly, “white tablecloth” refers to upscale ﬁne dining at a much

higher price point. Although each establishment in this category seems unique, many of

these establishments are owned and operated as part of small corporate chains or “mini

empires,” both within the city and across the country.

The type of establishment in which a person works signiﬁcantly affects earnings. Fine-

dining establishments offer employment with the highest wages — especially via tips.

However, employment discrimination based on race and ethnicity can lead to exclusion

from jobs in this segment, and this segment experiences the highest rates of segregation.

This segment is therefore most closely studied in this report.

RESTAURANT INDUSTRY:

SEGMENTS AND

STRUCTURE

FIGURE 1

TIER I AND TIER II POSITIONS IN THE

FRONT AND BACKOFTHEHOUSE

BACKOFTHEHOUSE FRONTOFTHEHOUSE

While a worker’s ability to gain employment in a ﬁne-

dining establishment signiﬁcantly increases their earnings

potential, a more important determinant of a worker’s

potential for earnings is the type of position attained in

that establishment. A worker’s position in a restaurant

also shapes how they experience work on a daily basis.

The sommelier helping to pair a wine with an entrée

has very different duties than a dishwasher cleaning a

dirty pot. Each position corresponds to different roles,

compensation, and working conditions.

While many restaurants have their own internal structure of

jobs and job titles, a common pattern for classifying occupa-

tions is applicable throughout the industry.

MANAGERIAL AND SUPERVISORY POSITIONS

These positions include general managers, as-

sistant managers, wine directors/sommeliers,

chefs, and sous chefs. Many of these positions

require speciﬁc vocational training or experience.

FRONT-OF-THE-HOUSE (FOH) POSITIONS

These positions involve direct customer

contact, and include hosts, maître D’s,

bussers, food runners, servers, captains,

bartenders, and barbacks.

BACK-OF-THE-HOUSE (BOH) POSITIONS.

These positions involve no direct guest contact,

and include cleaners, dishwashers, prep cooks,

line cooks, and chefs.

OCCUPATIONAL STRUCTURE

WORKPLACE HIERARCHIES,

TIER I AND TIER II

Both FOH and BOH contain positions that can be categorized into tiers based on com-

pensation and other aspects of job quality, which we refer to as Tier I and Tier II within

both FOH and BOH. This study closely examines the differences in outcome associated

between these two tiers, and the outcomes associated with Tier I FOH positions in ﬁne

dining. As Figure 2 demonstrates, Tier I positions include those like servers and bartenders

in FOH, and chefs and sous chefs in BOH, while Tier II positions include those like bussers

and runners in FOH, and prep cooks and dishwashers in BOH.

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF POSITION

Analysis of wages in a previous survey of restaurant workers in Seattle encapsulating vari-

ous segments of the restaurant industry, reveals important distinctions with respect to

wages among both the type of restaurant and the type of position when comparing white

workers and workers of color. Overall, restaurant workers of color report median wages

of $2 per hour less than white restaurant workers. Among full-service workers, white men

earn $4.81 more per hour than men of color, and $5.28 more per hour than women of color

when comparing median wages, and white women working in tipped occupations report

that they earn median wages $3.01 per hour higher than women of color.

The segment

and position workers occupy have a dramatic impact on their earning potential.

DIVERSITY, NOT EQUITY, DEFINES DINING

Racial and cultural diversity deﬁne the restaurant industry

and its workforce. Although the industry-at-large is over-

represented by small and mid-sized chain conglomerates,

restaurants representing every concept and ethnic cuisine

imaginable dot the Seattle landscape and expand the cu-

linary habits of many diners. However, the rich tapestry of

diversity found in the restaurant industry does not trans-

late into equal opportunity and equal treatment for women

and workers of color. Positions throughout both FOH and

BOH are highly segregated by race, ethnicity, and gender.

Although workers of color and women account for close to

half of the industry’s workforce, workers of color are con-

centrated in less visible, lower-wage jobs, and both are

underrepresented in the coveted, highest-paid FOH posi-

tions. The distribution of workers of color by position has

signiﬁcant long-term economic consequences exacerbated

by a lack of opportunities for training, advancement, and

overall working conditions.

RACE AND ETHNICITY

Although workers of color account for close to half of the

industry’s workforce, a large proportion of these workers are

concentrated in the fast-food and family-style segments.

As Figure 3 illustrates, workers of color are overrepresent-

ed in positions such as delivery and room service (86%),

runners, bussers, and bar-backs (63%), in fast food occu-

pations (52%), and as cooks (60%). Workers of color are

also dramatically underrepresented as counter attendants

(2%), a Tier II FOH occupation exempliﬁed by interaction

with the public. They are underrepresented in supervisory

positions (40%), as bartenders (18%), and servers (40%).

The large majority of FOH Tier I positions are occupied by

white workers. White workers occupy 82 percent of bar-

tender positions, and close to 60 percent of all server and

supervisory positions. White workers also hold 98 percent of

OCCUPATIONAL

SEGREGATION IN SEATTLE

BOTH INTERVIEWED,

WHITE TESTER PRIORITIZED

FOR HIRING

On a Thursday in October, a Black male

tester and a white male tester in their

twenties applied for employment at a

ﬁne-dining restaurant in Seattle. Both

testers met with the general manager (GM)

who reviewed their resume and brieﬂy

interviewed them on the spot. The GM asked

the Black tester if he was interested in a

FOH or BOH position, what shifts he was

interested in, what he studied at school, and

explained that servers often quit. The GM

then told the Black tester he would contact

him if a spot became available. The GM later

that day asked the white tester if he was

interested in a full-time position and then

told him that he would be placed at the top

of the list for consideration as soon as a

position was available. The restaurant had

just hired two new servers.

counter attendant positions. Although counter attendants’

wages are similar to those of other Tier II positions, coun-

ter attendants share other non-wage job characteristics of

Tier I positions, such as direct customer contact, as well as

greater opportunity for advancement through social net-

works with management. However, it should be noted that

both hosts and dishwashers, Tier II positions in the FOH and

BOH respectively, broadly match the demographics of the

restaurant workforce. Nationwide, host positions tend to be

overrepresented by white workers, and dishwasher positions

tend to be overrepresented by workers of color. A concerted

effort to advance hosts, as well as bussers, runners, bar-

backs, and BOH occupations into server and bartender

positions would create expanded opportunities for workers

of color in the industry.

GENDER

Women account for a little over 47 percent of the total

workforce and 45 percent of the restaurant workforce in

Seattle, but the demographic parity does not extend to

earning potential. As shown in Figure 4, female workers are

underrepresented in the industry’s highest-paid jobs. Posi-

tions in the Seattle restaurant industry are highly gendered,

ALL EMPLOYED

RESTAURANT

HOSTS

DISHWASHERS

BUSSERS, RUNNERS, BARBACKS

FOOD SERVERS & DELIVERY

SERVERS

COUNTER ATTENDANTS

FAST FOOD

BARTENDERS

FOOD PREP WORKERS

COOKS

FIRST-LINE SUPERVISORS

CHEFS & HEAD COOKS

25% 50% 75% 100

WHITE

BLACK

LATINX

ASIAN/PACIFIC

ISLANDER

OTHER

NATIVE

AMERICAN

WHITE TESTER WAS CALLED

BACK TO SCHEDULE AN INTERVIEW,

BLACK TESTER WAS NOT

On a Monday in November, a Black male

tester and a white male tester in their

twenties applied for employment at a ﬁne-

dining restaurant in Seattle. Both spoke with

a host, who took their resumes and asked

them to call back to speak with the general

manager. The host asked the Black tester if

he had previous experience as a server and

asked the white tester if he was interested

in a full-time or part-time position. The Black

tester called back to schedule an interview

with the GM and did not receive a return call.

The GM called the white tester directly to

schedule an interview.

FIGURE 3

RESTAURANT

DEMOGRAPHICS

BY RACE

Demographics of

the restaurant

workforce by

race in the city of

Seattle. American

Community

Survey, 2013-2017.

with men holding 65 to 70 percent of chef, supervisory, and

bartender positions, all Tier I FOH positions with the highest

earning potential. Women are markedly overrepresented in

positions involving food preparation, and Tier II FOH service

positions. Women hold 57 to 63 percent of fast food, food

preparation, delivery and room service, host, and server po-

sitions. Although servers are FOH Tier I positions, as seen

in Figure 8, women are underrepresented in the highest

earning Tier I FOH positions. In a striking demonstration of

gender norms, women hold 82 percent of counter attendant,

14 percent of dishwasher, and 20 percent of busser, runner,

and bar-back positions.

THE ROLE OF RACE

AND GENDER ON WAGES

Even though the restaurant industry is the largest employer

of minimum wage workers, and ﬁve of the ten lowest paid

occupations in the Seattle region are in the restaurant in-

dustry, 22 percent of restaurant jobs in Seattle are livable

wage jobs, providing incomes at over four times the poverty

level, and an additional 34 percent of restaurant occupations

provide an income at over twice the poverty level allowing

basic needs to be met.

12,13,14

However, this means 44 percent

LATINA TESTER INTERVIEWED,

WHITE TESTER OFFERED INTERVIEW

On a Saturday in August, a Latina female

tester and a white female tester in their

twenties applied for employment at a ﬁne-

dining restaurant in Seattle. The Latina

tester met with the owner who interviewed

her, reviewed her resume and references, and

told her she was only looking to ﬁll part-time

night shifts and stated that parking was

very expensive so tester would need to make

sure she could arrange transport if hired.

The owner told the tester she was “lovely”

and said she would e-mail her and cc the

hiring manager to follow-up. The white tester

subsequently met with the hiring manager

who reviewed her resume, told her they

were looking to ﬁll part-time brunch shifts,

and told her she would interview her the

following week.

ALL EMPLOYED

RESTAURANT

HOSTS

DISHWASHERS

BUSSERS, RUNNERS, BARBACKS

FOOD SERVERS & DELIVERY

SERVERS

COUNTER ATTENDANTS

FAST FOOD

BARTENDERS

FOOD PREP WORKERS

COOKS

FIRST-LINE SUPERVISORS

CHEFS & HEAD COOKS

25% 50% 75% 100%

MALE FEMALE

FIGURE 4

RESTAURANT

DEMOGRAPHICS

BY GENDER

Demographics of

the restaurant

workforce by

gender in the

city of Seattle.

American

Community

Survey, 2013-2017

of the workforce earns wages that are not sufficient to

meet basic needs, and race and gender play a pivotal role in

determining one’s ability to obtain and hold a livable wage

position.

Only 16 percent of workers of color enjoy an income greater

than four times the poverty rate, compared to 27 percent

of white workers (see Figure 5). This disparity is repeated

among the Tier I FOH positions of bartender and server (see

Figure 6). Workers of color are more likely to earn precarious

wages, and this likelihood only increases in the most lucra-

tive positions of bartender and server. Over 40 percent of

bartenders and servers of color are likely to earn a wage in-

sufﬁcient to meet their basic needs, and nearly twice as high

a percentage of servers and bartenders of color earn poverty

level wages (22%) as their white counterparts (13%). This

situation is even starker for women. Nearly 50 percent of

women servers and bartenders earn a wage insufﬁcient to

meet their basic needs, compared to 24 percent of men (see

Figure 8.)

Even though workers of color make up 46 percent of restau-

rant workers, they only account for 31 percent of all workers

earning the average wage for a full-time year-round worker

BOTH INTERVIEWED,

WHITE TESTER OFFERED A JOB

On a Friday in December, a Black female

tester and a white female tester in their

twenties applied for employment at a

ﬁne-dining restaurant in Seattle. Both

testers spoke with the general manager,

who reviewed their resumes and brieﬂy

interviewed both testers. The GM told them

the restaurant was not hiring servers at

the moment. The GM encouraged the Black

tester to apply at a ﬁne dining restaurant

far north of the city. The GM joked with the

white tester and asked if she had a ﬂexible

schedule, if she was interested in a position

as host, and if she could start immediately.

The GM referred to both testers as

“sweetheart” at the end of the interview.

At or Below

Poverty

Level

Twice to Four

Times Poverty

Level

Greater than

Four Times

Poverty Level

Once to Twice

Poverty Level

FIGURE 5

RESTAURANT POVERTY

LEVELS BY RACE

Poverty by race among

restaurant workers in the city of

Seattle. American Community

Survey, 2013-2017.

FIGURE 6

BARTENDER AND SERVER

POVERTY LEVELS BY RACE

Poverty by race among Tier

I FOH workers in the city of

Seattle. American Community

Survey, 2013-2017.

FIGURE 7

RESTAURANT POVERTY

LEVELS BY GENDER

Poverty by gender among

restaurant workers in the city of

Seattle. American Community

Survey, 2013-2017.

FIGURE 8

SERVER AND BARTENDER

POVERTY LEVELS BY GENDER

Poverty by race among Tier

I FOH workers in Seattle.

American Community Survey,

2013-2017.

25%

50%

75%

100%

25%

50%

75%

100%

WORKERS OF COLOR

FEMALE

WHITE

MALE

RESTAURANT

HOSTS

BUSSERS, RUNNERS, BARBACKS

FOOD SERVERS AND DELIVERY

SERVERS

FAST FOOD

BARTENDERS

FOOD PREP WORKERS

COOKS

FIRSTLINE SUPERVISORS

CHEFS AND HEAD COOKS

25% 50% 75% 100%

WHITE WORKERS OF COLOR

in the restaurant industry (see Figure 9). They only account

for 20 percent of servers, 24 percent of bartenders, and 14

percent of ﬁrst-line supervisors earning an above average

wage. This story repeats itself for women who make up less

than a third of above average wage earners, and only 40

percent of above average earning servers, even though they

account for over 60 percent of servers (see Figure 10.)

Restaurant workers in Seattle are among the highest earn-

ing around the country, and earn more at every decile than

most of their counterparts in other states and cities, yet the

occupational and wage disparities faced by women and work-

ers of color mirror those of workers elsewhere and relegate

these workers to economic hardship at disproportionate

rates. A variety of factors play a role in this dynamic, in-

cluding openly discriminatory hiring, training, and retention

practices, implicit bias among employers and restaurant pa-

trons leading to unfavorable hiring conditions for workers of

color and women, absence of networking and training op-

portunities for many disadvantaged worker populations, and

self-selection among workers leading them to remove them-

selves from the hiring pool due to the resulting stereotype

threat and impostor syndrome. The restaurant industry has

an opportunity to address these disparities to ensure a more

vibrant and dynamic restaurant workforce and industry.

FIGURE 9

RACE DEMOGRAPHICS OF FTYR

ABOVE AVERAGE WAGE EARNERS

Race demographics of restaurant workers earning an above-

average wage for full-time year-round restaurant employment in

Seattle. American Community Survey, 2013-2017.

FIGURE 10

GENDER DEMOGRAPHICS OF FTYR

ABOVE AVERAGE WAGE EARNERS

Gender demographics of restaurant workers earning an above-

average wage for full-time year-round restaurant employment in

Seattle. American Community Survey, 2013-2017.

LATINA INTERVIEWER STEERED

TO APPLY ELSEWHERE

On a Sunday in October, a Latina female

tester and a white female tester in their

twenties applied for employment at a

ﬁne-dining restaurant in Seattle. Both

were told their resumes would be put

on ﬁle in case a position opened up. The

Latina tester was encouraged to apply at

a restaurant nearby.

RESTAURANT

HOSTS

BUSSERS, RUNNERS, BARBACKS

FOOD SERVERS AND DELIVERY

SERVERS

FAST FOOD

BARTENDERS

FOOD PREP WORKERS

COOKS

FIRSTLINE SUPERVISORS

CHEFS AND HEAD COOKS

25% 50% 75% 100%

MALE FEMALE

In order to examine the role of overt discrimination in hiring practices in

upscale restaurants where the majority of livable wage opportunities are

centered, the Seattle Ofﬁce for Civil Rights conducted matched pair audit

tests of 105 ﬁne-dining establishments in Seattle. From August 2017 to

November 2018, seven testers visited 105 ﬁne-dining restaurants within

Seattle city limits and applied for a FOH position. Two-person teams, or

dyads, were formed consisting of persons of the same gender and similar

age, appearance, and manner, differing only in race or ethnicity.

Testers were selected, trained, and credentialed to appear equally quali-

ﬁed for the server positions they sought. Each team was carefully matched

for physical and non-physical characteristics. Resumes were developed

to give members of each team equivalent education, restaurant experi-

ence, and other work experience, with the person of color’s credentials

slightly stronger to eliminate ambiguity in interpreting test results. Testers

were provided training in key ﬁne-dining restaurant skills, and teams were

coached together so that personal attributes, such as presentation style

and demeanor, were similar and so that responses to employers’ questions

would be similar.

A comprehensive list of 170 ﬁne-dining establishments in Seattle was com-

piled from multiple publicly available databases including Zagat, Yelp, and

Open Table, from which establishments were randomly selected along with

priority testing of restaurants advertising that they were actively hiring.

A test was deﬁned as completed if both testers succeeded in (a) inform-

ing the employer that they were seeking a job and (b) revealing their race

to the employer by their appearance. Immediately after completing an

interaction with an employer and without speaking with their testing part-

ner, testers recorded their experiences on a structured questionnaire. No

employer appeared to suspect that any tester was not a bona ﬁde job ap-

plicant, however on ﬁve occasions tests were aborted due to familiarity of

the tester with other employees on site at the test location. In total, 100

valid tests were conducted, with ﬁve tests excluded due to irregularities in

the testing procedure.

The matched pair audit tests found 49 instances of bias in social interac-

tions that favored in-group testers. In three cases, in-group testers were

given a job offer when their out-group dyad was not. In nine cases, in-group

testers were called back for a second interview, while their out-group dyad

was not. In 18 tests, there was clear evidence of the out-group tester receiv-

MATCHED PAIR

AUDIT TESTS

FIGURE 11

MATCHED PAIR AUDIT

TESTS OF SEATTLE

RESTAURANTS

Results of 100 matched

pair audit tests of ﬁne

dining restaurants in

the city of Seattle.

← TREATMENT

FAVORING OUT

GROUP TESTERS

17%

EQUAL

TREATMENT

34%

TREATMENT

FAVORING INGROUP

TESTERS

49%

ing poorer treatment than their in-group counterpart, and

in an additional 14 tests there was evidence of implicit bias

to the detriment of the out-group tester. Additionally, ﬁve

out-group testers were invited to apply elsewhere, either at

restaurants far outside the city limits, or in ethnic-themed

restaurants in adjacent neighborhoods. Only out-group

testers were invited to apply elsewhere. A total of 34 tests

showed evidence of equal treatment, and 17 tests showed

evidence of favorable treatment towards the out-group

tester.

In total, evidence of bias in social interactions favoring in-

group testers was found in 49 percent of audits, evidence

of equal treatment was found in 34 percent of audits, and

evidence of treatment favoring out-group testers was found

in 17 percent of audits. Of audits showing evidence favor-

ing in-group testers, 6.1 percent resulted in job offers to

in-group testers, 18.4 percent resulted in call-backs for in-

group testers, 36.7 percent showed strong evidence of bias

against out-group auditors, 28.6 percent showed evidence

of implicit bias against out-group testers, and 10.2 percent

resulted in out-group testers being told to apply elsewhere.

It should be noted that, in contrast to tests conducted

in other cities, we did not ﬁnd statistical evidence of dis-

crimination in hiring offers in favor of the in-group (white)

testers. Potential reasons for this include that there were

seven testers arrayed in four dyads, or matched pairs, re-

BOTH TESTERS TOLD TO APPLY ONLINE,

WHITE TESTERS RESUME WAS TAKEN

DIRECTLY TO GENERAL MANAGER

On a Wednesday in November, a Black

female tester and a white female tester

in their twenties applied for employment

at a ﬁne-dining restaurant in Seattle.

Both spoke with front-of-the-house staff

who informed them that all applications

were collected online and handed them a

business card with instructions. The white

tester’s resume was taken to the general

manager to see if they were available for an

interview, but the tester was told the GM

was currently in a meeting.

sulting in one female dyad conducting 58 tests and one

male dyad conducting 36 tests. It is possible that there

were subjective unmeasured individual characteristics in

the out-group testers in those two dyads sufﬁcient to over-

come implicit and explicit bias in hiring practices. Although

all testers were actors rigorously trained by SOCR and ROC

United, tester experience ranged from extensive to no previ-

ous FOH serving experience.

It is also possible that since the SOCR testing program tar-

geted the majority of fine-dining restaurants in Seattle,

knowledge of the testing was obtained by employers leading

to a change in behavior. As noted above, there were multiple

instances when in-group testers were treated favorably and

out-group testers experienced discrimination, and these are

described anecdotally in the next section, however these

instances did not impact the statistical analysis of hiring

practices. It is possible, of course, that restaurant workers

of color in Seattle experience less discrimination when com-

pared to their counterparts in other cities, but the existence

of patterns of discrimination in outcomes is readily visible

in the demographics of the industry and can be seen in the

fact that nearly half of all tests were found to favor in-group

testers, and only 34 percent of tests found equal treatment

of in-group and out-group testers. One ﬁnal potential expla-

nation, described qualitatively via focus groups of workers,

is that there is a preference for “lighter-skinned” tokenism in

hiring. When combined with the industry’s high rate of turn-

over, discriminatory experiences on the restaurant ﬂoor, and

workers’ of color reluctance to apply for positions they have

been historically excluded from, this tokenism allows oppor-

tunities for only a small group of highly qualiﬁed workers of

color. This possibility is further discussed in the section that

follows.

ONE TESTER INFORMED THAT

INTERVIEWS WERE BEING

SCHEDULED, OTHER WAS NOT

On a Friday in December, a Black female

tester and a white female tester in their

twenties applied for employment at a

ﬁne-dining restaurant in Seattle. The Black

tester was greeted by a manager who was

busy, but took the tester’s resume and said

they would be in contact if needed. The

white tester met with a front-of-the-house

staff who took her resume and informed

her that interviews were being scheduled

for the following week.

GENERAL MANAGER SHOOK

WHITE TESTER’S HAND ONLY

On a Wednesday in November, a Black

male tester and a white male tester in

their twenties applied for employment

at a ﬁne-dining restaurant in Seattle.

Both spoke with a general manager, who

accepted their resumes and said he would

review them and get back to them. The

GM shook the white tester’s hand and

asked if he was “making the rounds.”

Though racial discrimination in hiring, retention, and promotion is a common experience

for workers, it is rarely overtly expressed as discrimination. Indeed, many restaurant own-

ers are often unaware that the recruitment, hiring, and promotion practices that are

common within the industry are driving racial inequities and leading to employment bar-

riers for workers of color. When questioned about this phenomenon, many employers

stated that they were unable to ﬁnd a sufﬁcient number of qualiﬁed applicants. Oth-

ers circumvented this critique by defending the diversity of their workforce as a whole

without taking into account demographic differences by

position and earning potential.

In order to better under-

stand how workers make sense of the racialized disparities

rampant in their work environment, ROC-United conducted

four focus groups with a total of ﬁfteen current restaurant

workers in Seattle and combined them with details recount-

ed by hiring audit testers.

Key themes that emerged pointed to experiences with infor-

mal hiring practices preferencing well-networked applicants,

overt employer discrimination, as well as more subtle barriers

posed by employer practices and protocols. Equally salient

were barriers that workers placed on themselves and that

coworkers placed on each other, including both white workers

who were seeking to maintain their status as well as work-

ers of color who were resentful of the advancement of other

workers of color. Some workers also said that guest prefer-

ence is an important factor. Other common barriers such as

the lack of transportation, commuting among multiple jobs,

and extra childcare needs were acknowledged by many.

PROFILE: JORDAN BROWN

Jordan Brown is 28 years old and originally from Buffalo,

New York. He moved to Seattle to reunite with friends who

urged him to come with promises of good jobs and the op-

portunity to save money, so they could eventually open a

business together. Jordan came with 12 years of experience

in the industry; he started as a dishwasher and prep cook,

but has spent most of his years as a server in ﬁne dining,

some bistros, and often in casual dining or gastropubs.

THE WHITE TESTER

ENCOURAGED TO CONTACT

GENERAL MANAGER DIRECTLY

On a Friday in January, a Black female

tester and a white female tester in their

twenties applied for employment at a

ﬁne-dining restaurant in Seattle. The Black

tester gave her resume to a host. The white

tester gave her resume to a host who told

her she would pass the resume along to the

general manager. The host also gave the

white tester the GM’s business card and

encouraged her to email the GM directly.

WORKERS’ VOICES

VII

“My most vivid memory as a server was when I worked at a showplace called the Tralf. I

got to see some wonderful performances; one was Benjamin Booker, it was magical. I had

never heard of him before that night.” Other positive memories come with great tips. “A

lot of positives. I’ve gotten 50 percent tips before. Birthday tips have always been awe-

some. In Chicago it was really cold and the restaurant was empty, a regular who was a

lawyer gave me a $100 tip on a $40 bill.”

But, over the years, Jordan has learned how he is perceived as a dark-skinned Black man

and is cautious about how and where he seeks work. “Mostly, I feel anxiety. I think grow-

ing up in the 90s, walking into things I felt like racism was dead, but doors kept getting

slammed in my face. It took a while and it took white people telling me, white people who

were watching who told me. The color of my skin is almost always a thing. Appearance as

far as my hair. At one place, if I didn’t keep my hair in a fade, they didn’t like it, but anyone

not black could do anything with their hair.”

“When looking for work, I won’t apply to places because of the experience

of other people of color who I’ve watched, or because I’ve known someone

racist there was in a position of power or there was sexual harassment

happening. Let me put it this way, restaurants don’t need a glassdoor.com.

We all know. If it’s big enough, we know.”

In Seattle, Jordan has been enthusiastically invited to interviews based on

his resume, only to be told that he’s not the right ﬁt once the hiring man-

ager sees him. He recently received an email following up on an interview

suggesting that he was a better ﬁt for a prep cook position, even though his

resume was entirely based on his serving experience. “Unless my manage-

ment has been other people of color, it’s always played a part. A lot of times

when I’ve had white managers, they always favor white men. I’ve watched

it happen - watched someone come in and apply who is perfectly ﬁne and

they end up giving the job to someone with no experience who ends up be-

ing a mediocre worker.”

“It happens constantly. Chicago, New York, everywhere. I’ve even had women and other

minorities do that. I interviewed at a black owned restaurant and it was weird, the guy

had a person of color as his chef, but I later found out that he never hired Black people. His

response to being questioned on this was that he was looking for a higher end clientele

and he couldn’t be a savior for everyone.”

Sometimes, the barriers don’t end after getting the job

“I ﬁnd that sometimes we don’t get the help or the investment that other people do. I’ve

watched it happen. I’ve even gotten berated for trying to teach a white male something

that he didn’t know how to do because it made him ‘feel bad,’ even though the bartender

told me I’d said nothing wrong. Work mules. We are the work mules. [White workers] get

asked if they want to sit down. Crazy stuff. A black woman I worked with experienced so

much harassment and asked to take a break to go outside, and was labeled as lazy.”

“Myself, I prefer diversity. I just hate the same thing every day. I don’t like being in a room

“I ﬁnd that

sometimes we don’t

get the help or the

investment that

other people do. I’ve

watched it happen.

with only black or only white people, or 100 percent period, it makes me uncomfortable,

no matter who it is. I usually try to make sure I apply at a place that is a little more diverse

— that’s newer, now that I’m older. I’ve been the only black person and that’s not fun —

don’t let something come up missing! I’ve literally quit the same day someone’s tips were

missing and I kept getting asked about it when it was least likely that it could be me. I was

the only Black person there. And when it was revealed that I didn’t do it, the manager said,

‘Oh, don’t make this about race!’”

“I’ve had customers who seemed uncomfortable with me serving them at ﬁrst, and I ended

up being their favorite — either through some Black servant fantasy, or I did break down

their barriers. I’ve been questioned about my wine recommendations and had guests

seek suggestions from a white coworker. Loved it when my bartender would respond, ‘You

should ask Jordan, he knows better than me.’... it became a thing for us.”

“I wish this wasn’t a thing and wish I didn’t know that rac-

ism is still a huge thing, because I was a lot happier before…

when I thought it was ‘just me.”

NETWORKS FACILITATE HIRING

The primary theme that emerged from our conversations

involved how hiring decisions are largely based on networks

and who one knows. Without those networking opportuni-

ties it is very difﬁcult to gain the experience necessary to be

considered for an opening. Several workers explained, “The

very ﬁrst job that I got, I was recommended by my brother,”

and “most of the jobs I’ve had in the industry, it was be-

cause someone who already worked… they recommended

[me] into that position.” One manager in one of the focus

groups noted, “I’ve been talking to managers and owners

a lot lately, asking: “How do we [stop] just hiring from our

friend group?”… “It doesn’t matter if it’s a luxury restaurant

or cocktail bar, all of the key positions, you’re trying to hire

people you already know.” Once one has built up experience,

it isn’t enough to take a resume to highlight one’s experi-

ence, as another worker noted: “People want something or

someone they trust. I did the walk around, dropping resumes

at places a couple of times… I’ve never dropped off a resume

again. I [only] apply for positions that are open.”

EMPLOYER BIAS

Another theme that emerged from the focus groups in-

volved employer bias, both subtle and overt. “The racism

that is involved in our industry isn’t the kind that is actively

WHITE TESTER ENCOURAGED

TO CONTACT GENERAL

MANAGER DIRECTLY

On a Friday in January, a Black female

tester and a white female tester in their

twenties applied for employment at a ﬁne-

dining restaurant in Seattle. Both were met

by FOH staff who accepted their resumes.

The Black tester was told to apply online

and was not greeted with a smile or eye

contact. The white tester was told to email

the general manager directly and was asked

about her recent experience.

hurtful, it’s passively hurtful and painful,” said one worker. “I

don’t see a lot of people of color in serving positions. Maybe

budget, but not at higher-end restaurants,” noted another.

When workers of color are on the ﬂoor, they are more likely

to face disciplinary sanctions, “People are quicker to disci-

pline workers of color,” noted one participant. One African

American manager who noted that she could see workers of

color breathe a sigh of relief when they saw her explained,

“As we think about encouraging more workers of color to

enter these positions where they’re not normally [present],

we don’t have a lot of workers of color with experience …

they’re going to stand out and any errors they make are go-

ing to stand out. So how do we support them and prepare

restaurants for meetings and provide ongoing trainings? It’s

not just about hiring people in the door, but keeping them.”

She also noted near constant turnover when they did hire

workers of color, in part due to the unfair discipline:

“I finally got an African American in FOH one day and he

came to work sick one day, hung over… I let the new manag-

er know… and he was extremely passive aggressive… bussing

his tables for him, slamming things down. It was very unfair

because we had white employees that would come in and

be 1000 times worse… clearly intoxicated from the night be-

fore, and it was just okay… we didn’t see many black folks in

there honestly.”

Workers observed that management already knows who it

wants for a position, “It’s the old school mentality of women

on the ﬂoor, women in the front of the house, and men are

the managers.” One worker noted, “Owners don’t explicitly

say it, but they feel certain races are not a good ﬁt for cer-

tain positions.” The exceptions, in workers’ minds, stand out:

“At [one restaurant] the owner is a woman of color, and she

has tried to hire for diversity and we have a pretty diverse

clientele. She had a lot of press for being a South Asian busi-

nesswoman in the neighborhood.”

RESTAURANT PATRON PREFERENCE

Participants in the focus groups noted that clientele play an

important role in how workers are treated. One white server

who was bussing noted, “I was just helping deliver food to

the table. I was the white guy so [customers] wanted to talk

to me, not the African American manager.”

WHITE TESTER ENCOURAGED

TO APPLY

On a Friday in January, a Black female

tester and a white female tester in their

twenties applied for employment at a

ﬁne-dining restaurant in Seattle. Both

were met by FOH staff and told that

interviews would be occurring shortly.

The white tester was greeted warmly and

asked about her background.

WHITE TESTER INVITED

TO AN INTERVIEW

On a Sunday in March, a Black female tester

and a white female tester in their twenties

applied for employment at a ﬁne-dining

restaurant in Seattle. The Black tester

was met by a host who asked if she had

experience tending bar. The white tester

was greeted by back-of-the-house staff

who offered a short, rushed interaction.

The white tester was called back for an

interview, while the Black tester was not.

One worker of color complained about restaurant patrons

treating workers as exotic oddities. “If you are the only per-

son of color working FOH at a bar or restaurant, there’s a

general curiosity about you. People notice you and ask ques-

tions to ﬁgure you out.” While another complained about

patrons doubting their ﬁne-dining skills, “I curated the wine

list, and they can’t fathom that a Black person could be do-

ing such a thing... ‘Oh, you speak so well,’ they say. There’s an

expectation that a person of color can’t have reﬁned taste

or enjoy things that aren’t necessary to life, such as cocktails

or luxury items.”

At times, workers acknowledged the issue of customer

preference but saw it as the natural order of things, as one

worker stated: “People are more comfortable being served

by somebody that looks like them.”

STEREOTYPE THREAT, IMPOSTER

SYNDROME, AND WORKER RESENTMENT

Many workers shared the common experience of being re-

quired to train new, white workers for a higher-paid position

but never being considered for that position themselves

— for example, bussers and runners training a newly hired

server, or long-time servers training white workers to take

on a management role.

While qualiﬁed workers did object to being passed over for

positions, many expressed a desire to avoid advancement

opportunities in a manifestation of “imposter syndrome”

and “stereotype threat,” both common occurrences for

women or people of color who do not fit the stereotypi-

cal image for certain positions. “Imposter syndrome” is a

thought pattern in which one doubts one’s accomplishments

and has an ungrounded fear of being exposed as unquali-

ﬁed or incapable, whereas “stereotype threat” refers to the

fear of conﬁrming negative stereotypes about one’s iden-

tity group.

These workers said they did not want to pursue

advancement out of concern that they would be viewed as

underqualiﬁed or “not the right ﬁt” for the position, regard-

less of their actual skillset.

WHITE TESTER TOLD

HER RESUME WOULD BE GIVEN

DIRECTLY TO MANAGER

On a Friday in June, a Black female tester

and a white female tester in their twenties

applied for employment at a ﬁne-dining

restaurant in Seattle. Both were met by a

FOH staff who accepted their resumes. The

white tester was told her resume would be

given to the manager.

WHITE TESTER INTERVIEWED,

OFFERED A STAGE

On a Tuesday in May a Black male tester

and a white male tester in their twenties

applied for employment at a ﬁne-dining

restaurant in Seattle. The Black tester left

his resume with a FOH staff. The white

tester was directed to the hiring manager

who conducted a brief interview and

invited the tester to come in on Friday for

a stage (work trial).

Restaurant Opportunities Centers United has developed

a suite of policy recommendations to promote equitable

outcomes in the restaurant industry. A selection of these

recommendations are highlighted here.

In order to racially desegregate the restaurant industry,

many more restaurants need to engage in the process of

interrogating and transforming their recruitment, hiring, and

retention pathways to proactively counter bias and discrimi-

nation. We need policymakers to leverage their inﬂuence, in

conjunction with committed restaurant owners, restaurant

patrons, and workers. Without the pressure of these vital

players, industry-wide change will likely be gradual and in-

termittent.

Employers, in particular, can advance racial equity through,

“Adding Racial Equity to the Menu: An Equity Toolkit for

Restaurant Employees,” a toolkit created by Restaurant

Opportunities Centers United (ROC United), Race Forward,

and the Center for Social Inclusion. The toolkit provides in-

terested employers with step-by-step resources to assess,

plan, and implement steps towards greater racial equity on

the job. The toolkit allows employers to track the level of oc-

cupational segregation through straightforward worksheets

that can be used to measure change in segregation over

time. The toolkit also allows employers to dig deeper and

create action-based plans around racial equity assessments

and work plans; recruitment, outreach, and advertising; the

application and hiring process; and promotions and training.

The toolkit was created with the input and support of com-

mitted restaurateurs who tested and piloted the multiple

steps outlined therein. The toolkit provides useful strategies

for combating implicit bias, encouraging employers to make

reasoned thought-out decisions using suggested rubrics,

and avoiding spur-of-the moment decisions in the pressure-

cooker atmosphere of a busy kitchen. Employers can obtain

the toolkit and use it independently, or can reach out to ROC

United for assistance in crafting a plan to advance racial eq-

uity in their restaurants.

WHITE TESTER INVITED

TO INTERVIEW

On a Sunday in July, a Black female tester

and a white female tester in their twenties

applied for employment at a ﬁne-dining

restaurant in Seattle. Both were met by

a host who accepted their resumes. The

white tester received a phone call and an

invitation for an interview from the general

manager, but the Black tester did not.

POLICY

RECOMMENDATIONS

VIII

Policymakers can advance greater racial equity across the

industry by passing legislation that provides incentives to

restaurants that are willing to engage in the intensive pro-

cess of transitioning to a more equitable workplace. After

thorough research through a partnership with the Harvard

Law School Food Law and Policy Clinic, ROC United and

Race Forward identiﬁed three primary incentive structures

for policy makers to consider: tax, licensing, and recogni-

tion incentives. The city of Austin, Texas, for example, has

adopted a Business Expansion Incentive Program that

provides economic incentives in the form of property tax

reimbursements and a percentage of wages reimbursement

to employers who pay their employees at least the city of

Austin’s living wage (currently $15 per hour), and operate

locally, hire workers with barriers, or relocate workers with-

in the city limits. The city of Oakland, CA is considering a

recognition program that would certify progress towards

racial equity for employers who could demonstrate such.

ROC United has developed an online program in cooperation

with UC Berkeley Haas School of Business to certify employ-

ers interested in decreasing segregation and wage inequity

in their business that utilizes the tools in the Racial Equity

Toolkit to walk employers through racial equity assessments,

education and training, stakeholder engagement, action plan

development, and action plan implementation.

Restaurant patrons play the most crucial role in advancing

racial equity. The restaurant industry has been transformed

by the public’s demand for organic, local, and sustainable

food. The public must also prioritize treatment of work-

ers, and in particular, racial and wage equity when choosing

restaurants. ROC United has developed a tool, the Diners

Guide, that allows restaurant patrons to see how restau-

rants fare on wages, beneﬁts, and racial equity. The public

should use this tool to encourage restaurants they frequent

to participate in certification programs to demonstrate

public demand for worker rights. An ofﬁcial recognition pro-

gram would then serve as an incentive for restaurateurs to

demonstrate to the public their commitment to racial and

wage equity. The ﬁndings in this report, supported by the

vignettes interspersed throughout, clearly show that these

and other steps are necessary to achieve racial equity in the

restaurant industry.

WHITE TESTER INTERVIEWED,

INVITED TO A FOLLOWUP

INTERVIEW NEXT DAY

On a Wednesday in July a Black male tester

and a white male tester in their twenties

applied for employment at a ﬁne-dining

restaurant in Seattle. Each tester handed

in his resume to a FOH staff. The white

tester was invited to meet the general

manager who conducted an interview,

inquired about availability, wine knowledge,

and prior experience. The GM invited the

white tester to return the following day for

a formal interview.

The restaurant industry has the potential to

provide livable wage jobs to a plurality if not

a majority of its workforce. However, even

though Seattle’s restaurant industry is racially

diverse, demographic data derived from the US

Census demonstrate severe racial and ethnic

segregation by occupation. Although workers of

color account for 46 percent of the industry’s

workforce, workers of color are concentrated

in less visible, lower-wage jobs, and are under-

represented in the coveted, highest-paid FOH

positions. For example, only 18 percent of bar-

tenders in Seattle are workers of color and are

nearly half as likely as their white counterparts

to earn a livable wage. Matched pair audit tests of restaurant hiring

practices found that a plurality of applicants of color experience

unfavorable treatment during the hiring process, and during inter-

views and focus groups restaurant workers described a pattern of

discriminatory behavior in their interactions with managers, cus-

tomers, and co-workers. These experiences ultimately lead many

workers of color to avoid seeking higher-earning opportunities in

the industry. A concerted effort is needed to support employers

committed to racial equity, to ensure workers are supported as

they seek employment opportunities, and to build demand among

consumers for racial equity in their dining decisions.

CONCLUSION

WORKERS OF COLOR

ACCOUNT FOR

46%

OF THE INDUSTRY’S

WORKFORCE

WHITE TESTER WAS TOLD RESUME

WOULD BE GIVEN DIRECTLY TO GENERAL MANAGER

On a Friday in August, a Black female tester and a white female tester in their twenties

applied for employment at a ﬁne-dining restaurant in Seattle. Both were met by FOH staff

who accepted their resumes. The Black tester was told to apply online. The white tester

was ensured her resume would be handed directly to the general manager.

WHITE TESTER OFFERED JOB AS SERVER, BLACK TESTER ASKED

TO CONSIDER A POSITION AS A BARISTA

On a Friday in August a Black male tester and a white male tester in their twenties applied

for employment at a ﬁne-dining restaurant in Seattle. Both testers were interviewed by

the hiring manager who inquired about availability, prior experience, and explained the pay

structure. The hiring manager asked the Black tester if he would be willing to work as a

barista, a lower paying position, and told him to call back that evening. The hiring manager

offered the white tester a position as a server at the end of the interview, and did not

mention the barista position.

BLACK TESTER INTERVIEWED WITH NO FOLLOWUP,

WHITE TESTER WAS INVITED TO INTERVIEW MULTIPLE TIMES

On a Friday in August a Black male tester and a white male tester in their twenties applied

for employment at a ﬁne-dining restaurant in Seattle. The Black tester was interviewed

by the general manager and HR rep, who discussed his availability, past experience, skills,

wages, and tip structure. They then told the Black tester to apply online, and he received

no additional follow-up. The white tester left his resume with a server, and received three

emails, two from an assistant manager, and one from the GM, asking him to apply online

in order to schedule an interview.

WHITE TESTER WAS INTERVIEWED BY GENERAL MANAGER,

BLACK TESTER WAS NOT

On a Friday in October, a Black female tester and a white female tester in their twenties

applied for employment at a ﬁne-dining restaurant in Seattle. The Black tester left her

resume with a FOH staff who told her she would give it to the general manager. The white

tester was invited to meet the GM who reviewed her resume, told her they were hiring for

lunch, and promised to get back to her.

APPENDIX:

ADDITIONAL VIGNETTES

WHITE TESTER MET WITH GENERAL MANAGER,

BLACK TESTER WAS NOT

On a Thursday in October, a Black female tester and a white female tester in their twen-

ties applied for employment at a ﬁne-dining restaurant in Seattle. Both testers left their

resumes with a FOH staff. The white tester was invited to meet the general manager, who

told her they were not hiring but would keep her information on ﬁle.

WHITE TESTER WAS GIVEN APPLICATION TO COMPLETE,

BLACK TESTER WAS NOT

On a Friday in October, a Black female tester and a white female tester in their twen-

ties applied for employment at a ﬁne-dining restaurant in Seattle. Both testers left their

resumes with a FOH staff. The white tester was given an application to ﬁll-out. The ap-

plication included questions about criminal background.

WHITE TESTER WAS INVITED TO CONTACT GENERAL MANAGER,

BLACK TESTER WAS NOT

On a Thursday in October, a Black female tester and a white female tester in their twen-

ties applied for employment at a ﬁne-dining restaurant in Seattle. Both testers left their

resumes with a FOH staff. The white tester was given the general manager’s business card

and encouraged to contact them directly to discuss open server positions.

BLACK TESTER WAS ASKED WHERE SHE LIVED,

WHITE TESTER WAS ASKED ABOUT MORNINGSHIFT

On a Friday in October, a Black female tester and a white female tester in their twenties

applied for employment at a ﬁne-dining restaurant in Seattle. Both testers met with the

hiring manager. The hiring manager asked the Black tester where she lived, and asked the

white tester if an 8am to 2pm Monday to Friday shift would work for her.

BOTH TESTERS INTERVIEWED, BLACK TESTER INTERVIEWED

EXTENSIVELY ON WINE KNOWLEDGE

On a Wednesday in November, a Black male tester and a white male tester in their twen-

ties applied for employment at a ﬁne-dining restaurant in Seattle. The Black tester was

given an application to ﬁll out at home. The white tester was asked to ﬁll out an applica-

tion on the spot to give to the manager, and was given a business card with the manager’s

name and contact information. Both testers were invited to apply the next day and were

questioned extensively by the hiring manager. Unlike the white tester, the Black tester was

not provided an application page testing knowledge of wine and liquor, and instead was

asked to rank wine according to body and varietal. The restaurant had recently hired two

servers and told both testers to apply again in March.

1 Bureau of Labor Statistics, May 2018 Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates for the United States, Washington,

and Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue metropolitan statistical areas.

2 Restaurant Opportunities Centers (ROC) United analysis of American Community Survey 2013-2017. IPUMS-USA, Uni-

versity of Minnesota, www.ipums.org. High earning or livable wage is deﬁned here as earning four-times the poverty level

or more. The median worker in that category was single with no children, and the average was single with less than one

child. For this report, we can estimate the livable hourly wage to be $26 in the city of Seattle.

3 Ibid. Statewide, workers of color comprise 28.3 percent of the entire workforce.

4 The restaurant categories described in this report are similar to the NAICS categories, with the addition of a distinction

within full service between “ﬁne dining” and “casual restaurants.” Distinguishing these two categories proves critical to

our analysis because job quality, employer practices, and patterns of ethnic and racial employment and occupational

segregation differ across the two segments.

5 Bureau of Labor Statistics, Quarterly Census of Employees and Wages for Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue Metropolitan Statisti-

cal Area, 2013-2017.

6 Restaurant Opportunities Centers (ROC) United analysis of American Community Survey 2013-2017. IPUMS-USA, Univer-

sity of Minnesota, www.ipums.org. High earning is here deﬁned as earning four-times the poverty level or more. See also

Bureau of Labor Statistics characteristics of minimum wage workers.

7 Restaurant Opportunities Centers United analysis of Long-Term Occupational Projections 2016-2026 and Short-Term Oc-

cupational Projections 2018-2020, Projections Central: State Occupational Projections, Projections Managing Partnership,

weighted by Average Annual Openings. Derived from Occupational Employment Projections, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

8 US Census, “2012 Economic Census.” Available at http://www.census.gov/econ/. Estimate uses 6.5% sales tax for the

state and 3% for the city.

9 See note 2.

10 Restaurant Opportunities Centers United, 2004. The Great Service Divide. New York, NY: ROC United.

11 Behind the Kitchen Door: The Highs and Lows of Seattle’s Booming Restaurant Economy, 2015. New York, NY: ROC United.

12 Bureau of Labor Statistics, March 2018. Report 1072: Characteristics of minimum wage workers, 2017.

13 Bureau of Labor Statistics, May 2018 Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates for the Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue

metropolitan statistical areas sorted by median wage.

14 See note 2.

15 Ending Jim Crow in America’s Restaurants: Racial and Gender Occupational Segregation in the Restaurant Industry,”

2015. New York, NY: ROC-United.

16 Edwards, C. W., 2019. Overcoming Imposter Syndrome and Stereotype Threat: Reconceptualizing the Deﬁnition of a

Scholar. Taboo: The Journal of Culture and Education, 18 (1). https://doi.org/10.31390/ taboo.18.1.03.

END NOTES

ROC United

275 7th Ave, Suite 1703

New York, NY 10001

212.343.1771

ROC Seattle

1402 Third Avenue, Suite 201

Seattle, WA 98101

206.369.9995

Research for this publication was generously

supported by the W.K. Kellogg Foundation

and Annie E. Casey Foundation