So i used to work at a fancy restaurant in boston, and there are some things about it i'm finding questionable. I was sketched out by them at the time but didnt say too much because you know, didn't wanna rock the boat.
Primarily, it's that while we were not dissallowed from taking breaks, we were discouraged from taking them unless we were working a double. My coworkers didn't seem to be entirely aware that in the state of massachusetts you are entitled to a 30 min break if you work more than six hours, and a 10-15 if you work 4. Most of the other hires were college students, and i think they may be relying on the naivete & work ethic of their mostly young staff to extract as much labor as possible. The thing that makes me question if i'm overthinking it is that again, we were not forbidden from taking breaks, just somewhat discouraged. I don't know what would happen if someone consistently took their 10-15 min breaks as they are entitled to, but i had to take one a couple times because i felt like absolute shit and needed to eat and while my manager wasn't rude or passive aggressive, she didn't seem too happy about it either. i remember another host telling me something along the lines of “we just don't typically take breaks unless we work a double” when i asked about it during my first shift.
They also did unpaid “stage” shifts. Mine lasted about 3 hr and i did get paid but only because i was already gonna be hired and complained about my tansit expenses (which were insane. The pay from 3 hrs work covered maybe half of it at $18/hr). I seated folks during my stage so it wasn't just shadowing, i was doing actual revenue generating work albeit not as much work as when i was officially hired.
I also just dont feel i was trained very well (i didnt even know where the dumpser was until like 2 and a half weeks in) and i kinda think that i was set up for failure but thats besides the point.
Am i right to find this concerning? If not legally, then morally?