After 101 years, the doors close on L.A.'s Original Pantry Cafe
News of the planned closure drew brisk business as patrons sought a farewell meal at the diner on the corner of 9th and South Figueroa streets.
The shuttering itself was bitter. Once doors were closed, the diner's remaining 25 workers gathered inside, received manila envelopes containing their final checks and, with support from their labor union, refused to leave.
"It's still open from their perspective," said Kurt Petersen, co-president of the Unite Here Local 11 labor union that Petersen said had represented workers at the diner for decades. "They told management they want them to change their mind."
The restaurant built its Los Angeles legacy not on elegant fare (it had a mediocre 3.7 rating on Yelp) but on its 24-hour service, making it a haven for night owls and early risers.
The diner had survived past threats. It dodged a freeway project in the 1950s, moving its location to make way for an off-ramp. Former Mayor Richard Riordan took over the restaurant in 1981 as part of a larger land deal.
'When I fell in love with the Pantry, I was at breakfast, drinking coffee, and I had a book I was reading,' Riordan was quoted as saying in The Times. 'I was very relaxed and the waiter came over and said, 'If you want to read, the library's at 5th and Hope.' I fell in love with it right then.'
But the isolation policies of the COVID-19 pandemic delivered a heavy blow, forcing the diner to limit its hours. Despite $1.7 million in federal loans (all but $500,000 of it forgiven) to preserve 82 jobs at the restaurant, workers said only about two dozen employees remained by Sunday's closure.
Los Angeles court records show a proposed class-action lawsuit was filed in April 2023 on behalf of Pantry workers alleging unpaid wages for overtime, rest and meal breaks. Two weeks later, Riordan died. The wage case remained in settlement talks as recently as February, filings show.
Ownership of the diner transferred to Riordan's trust, which said it sought to sell the asset to support its philanthropic endeavors. The union attempted to negotiate terms that would require any new owner to honor the existing contract. That didn't happen, and the labor union filed a grievance with the National Labor Relations Board.
Read more: The Original Pantry Cafe owner threatens to close historic diner over union contract dispute
Attorney Carl McKinzie, chief executive officer of the trust's company that operates the Pantry, declined comment on Sunday. He referred a reporter to a lengthy prepared statement given to media earlier in the week saying sales talks have been ongoing since last summer.
After the diner's doors closed Sunday, a representative of the trust arrived and attempted to distribute envelopes containing final paychecks. When workers would not step up to take them, she set them on a table.
"They left the envelope on the table and left out the back," said a table server who gave only his first name, Alex. He said he had been employed at the diner 24 years. "No thank you. She don't say nothing."
When workers attempted to stay behind, management called L.A. police, and officers eventually arrived to tell employees they faced trespass charges if they remained. The Pantry's workers left without incident, but Petersen from the union remained and was issued a citation, a union representative said.
Alex was not certain what might happen next week, other than that the union would have people out front with placards and signs. Union officials said they did not know if there was already a new owner in the wings.
The Pantry's online ordering service remained operational Sunday. A Times reporter was able to put in a takeout order for French toast first thing Wednesday.
Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week.
This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
a few seconds ago
- New York Post
All about ‘yield curves' – and the big move for stocks they're pointing to in 2025
In my 50-plus years of running money, I've noticed that the biggest market moves come from factors that have gone unnoticed – and right now, there's a doozy lurking under the table. Amid all the tariff tumult of the past few months, the global yield curve has been quietly re-steepening. Also note that the previously long-watched US-based yield curve – which investors lately (and wrongly) have been ignoring – has been doing the same. So what's a yield curve, again? It's a graph showing government bond yields from 3-month to 10-year, left to right. When long-term rates top short rates, the curve slopes upward — and is deemed 'steep' and historically bullish. When short-term rates top long, it is 'inverted'— an historically fairly reliable though imperfect recession warning. Advertisement 4 The biggest market moves come from factors that have gone unnoticed – and right now, there's a doozy lurking under the table. AFP via Getty Images Why is that? Like a dashboard indicator, the yield curve usually predicts bank lending trends. Banks use short-term deposits to fund long-term loans — pocketing the spread. Borrow at one rate, lend at a higher rate. Steep curves mean bigger profits, so banks lend eagerly, spurring growth. Meanwhile, inverted curves — when short-term rates top long — shrink loan profitability. Banks lend less. Since economies rely hugely on loans to finance growth — from building inventory to funding expansion — GDP gets squashed. Advertisement For decades, the US yield curve rarely misfired, becoming a lodestar for investors. But like assuming a car's dash is reality, they ignored its 'under the hood' function — the lending. It worked until it didn't. After global stocks' 2022 decline, yield curves inverted globally. Recession fears surged. Investors gnashed. Yet lending grew. US, eurozone and global GDP expanded. Pockets of contraction like Germany arose but were rare. Stocks bulled upward. Investors were befuddled. The curve remained inverted in 2023 and through most of 2024, with stocks rising, GDP growing. Pundits scratched their heads, then got bored, ignoring and deeming it 'broken.' It seems they never asked: Why did it 'break'? 4 Amid all the tariff tumult of the past few months, the global yield curve has been quietly re-steepening. Advertisement Under the hood, banks held tons of ultra-low-rate, COVID-era deposits. In 2020, US bank deposits ballooned 20.8% from the year earlier and another 11.7% in 2021. They stayed elevated through 2022 and 2023, echoing global trends. In other words: Banks didn't need to borrow to lend. They needn't compete for deposits by raising deposit rates. That stash of low-cost deposits kept lending profitable even as the Fed hiked to highs of 5.5% alongside other central banks globally. Now, unseen, yield curves flipped positive, aiding global loan profits. This stems from short-term rate cuts (most heavily overseas – and rising long-term rates (which most wrongly fear, and which are also bullish). Money flows globally between most nations, so I always monitor a GDP-weighted global yield curve. Last July, it was down 0.55 percentage points — inverted. A few months before that it was down nearly a full point. Now? It has flipped to positive 0.50 points — a quiet, nearly 1.5-point lending boost in slightly over a year. It is both bullish and explains recent trends. Advertisement 4 A GDP-weighted global yield curve can explain recent trends. AP America's curve improved but remains basically flat – down 0.07 points. But Britain flipped from down 0.99 points a year ago to positive 0.35 points now. Continental Europe's shifted more — from down 0.47 to up 1.03! Stocks show it matters: Regionally the MSCI Europe clocked early new highs and sits up 22% year to date. The non-US trounces America this year. Steeper curves favor value stocks (like the eurozone and UK's) over growth stocks (which dominate the US). Eurozone and UK Financials—up 52% and 33%, respectively—quietly lead in 2025, trouncing US Tech's 10%. Why? A bank profit turbocharge! Europe's value-heavy Industrials lead, too. They need lending to finance growth. 4 America's curve improved but remains basically flat – down 0.07 points. That most observers still ignore the curve is vital. It means stocks haven't yet fully priced in this growing, bullish power. Expect it to help drive stocks higher here and to continue doing the same throughout Europe, the UK and most emerging markets. Ken Fisher is the founder and executive chairman of Fisher Investments, a four-time New York Times bestselling author, and regular columnist in 21 countries globally.
USA Today
2 hours ago
- USA Today
Trump sharpens the axe for the Education Department. Swing away, Mr. President.
Despite the Department of Education's massive budget, students in the U.S. far too often lag behind peers in other industrialized countries. The largest employer in the United States isn't a Fortune 100 company like Alphabet, Amazon or Apple. It's the federal government − and that's a problem. Thankfully, President Donald Trump continues to slash bureaucratic bloat. On July 11, the administration sent layoff notices to more than 1,300 State Department workers, and three days later, the Supreme Court allowed Trump to move forward with plans to gut the Department of Education. That's bad news for government employees, but great for taxpayers, especially given the Education Department's expense − $268 billion in the last fiscal year − and its lack of effectiveness. Despite the department's massive budget, students in the U.S. far too often lag behind peers in other industrialized countries. In 2022, for example, American high school students scored behind teens from 25 other countries on an international math test. And we're losing ground. Math and reading scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress continue to decline. Part of the drop can be attributed to pandemic-related learning loss, but reading scores in the U.S. began to decline in 2019 − before Americans had even heard of COVID-19. But how will pulling the federal government out of K-12 education help? It's important to note that more than 90% of public school funding comes from state and local governments along with foundations and other private sources. Much of the federal education budget is used to feed the bureaucracy, which generates rules and regulations that local administrators and teachers must obey. If all of that bureaucratic oversight consistently produced better results, there might be a case for keeping it. But the data clearly shows it doesn't. Removing federal bureaucrats from our schools should give states and local school districts more flexibility to set education policy, and that should improve choices for parents like me. Returning more control to the states also should improve efficiency and enable schools to better meet students' needs. Opinion: Our schools are struggling because teachers unions don't put kids first Government efficiency is vital for the American people Trump isn't cutting jobs only at the Education Department, of course. The State Department layoffs follow reductions at other federal agencies this spring. The cuts are driven by necessity: our national debt is now more than $37 trillion and the annual budget deficit will top $1 trillion again this year. So, I was surprised to see news reports paint the laid off State Department workers as heroic. Cameras caught teary goodbyes and applause for well-liked employees. I don't recall the same concern when President Joe Biden halted construction of the Keystone Pipeline, which cost 1,500 workers their jobs and eliminated plans to create thousands more. Opinion: PBS, NPR push liberal propaganda. Trump is right to cut their funding. Companies often restructure. So should the federal government. While job loss is certainly scary, and I don't wish it on anyone, federal job cuts should be put in the context of the overall jobs market. Microsoft announced this month it would eliminate 9,000 jobs, not because the company is failing but because it's retooling as the market changes. Other companies, including Intel and Meta, have announced plans to restructure this year as the emergence of artificial intelligence and other technology changes how Americans work. The federal government should be as flexible as our top companies in adapting to a changing world. Yet, progressives have criticized the Trump administration's efforts to restructure the federal bureaucracy as cruel. The president's job, however, isn't to employ as many bureaucrats as possible. It's to deliver effective services as efficiently as possible to taxpayers. Dismantling ineffective and inefficient bureaucracies like the Education Department is a long overdue step toward achieving that goal. Nicole Russell is a columnist at USA TODAY and a mother of four who lives in Texas. Contact her at nrussell@ and follow her on X, formerly Twitter: @russell_nm. Sign up for her weekly newsletter, The Right Track, here.
Business of Fashion
5 hours ago
- Business of Fashion
A New Challenge for New York Fashion
NEW YORK — At its midcentury peak, the streets of the Garment District — a stretch of Midtown home to New York's clothing manufacturing industry — were filled with so many rushing racks of fabric and A-line dresses it was hard to pass through. That romantic image is far in the past. Since the 1970s, the city's manufacturing capacity has diminished over 90 percent, according to the New York Economic Development Council. Today, former garment factories, workshops and storefronts sit abandoned. Still, it's the historic and operational centre of New York fashion, where third-generation makers and some of the industry's biggest names craft runway collections and Met Gala dresses. A new zoning measure passed by the Department of City Planning, or DCP, in June could change that. If approved by city council and New York mayor Eric Adams, as expected later this summer, the Midtown South Mixed-Use plan, known as MSMX, will lift manufacturing zoning protections to allow the neighbourhood's buildings to be converted into housing. The district saw manufacturing rules relaxed in both 2004 and 2018, and given the industry's shrinkage in the area, many consider the move overdue. Fashion wouldn't be pushed out, DCP said. In its environmental impact analysis, however, it found 114 fashion-related businesses, out of a total of nearly 500 still operating in the area, could be displaced, mostly due to the inevitable rent increases that would follow redevelopment. Opponents worry that in its current state, the plan could further harm an already weak ecosystem, still feeling the aftershocks of Covid's impact. While the Garment District is far from its height, it's not yet a relic. Brands — especially young labels — rely on the area's sample and pattern-makers, sewers, finishers, button suppliers and other specialised makers, and their close proximity fosters creativity and resource sharing. The impact wouldn't be immediate, but it could force some makers to either relocate or shutter altogether, which has implications for fashion. 'This perpetual erosion of the Garment District is an active dismantling of our creative infrastructure,' said Tessa Maffucci, assistant chair of fashion at Pratt Institute and The Fashion Workforce Development Coalition lead. 'What has made New York a global capital is we have this innovative, playful, break-the-rules model that works because of this diverse ecosystem of makers that are centrally located and clustered together. When we lose that, we don't get the next Ralph Lauren.' Of course, Ralph Lauren emerged from a different Garment District, over 50 years ago. Now, it mostly operates as an 'R&D hub' with small-batch production, said Steven Kolb, chief executive of the Council of Fashion Designers of America. He doesn't believe the rezoning represents a major threat to the district's primary uses. But as designer Jackson Wiederhoeft, who makes his namesake ready-to-wear and bridal line in the Garment District, put it, 'It's a beautiful plant that's teetering and needs more soil … instead, we're putting it into a smaller pot and chopping off fruit. It's never going to grow into a huge tree if we keep reducing the size of the pot.' The situation is one of many challenges New York fashion faces today. Last year, The Partnership for New York City, a business advocacy group, published a report with consulting firm McKinsey, alleging New York's status as a global fashion capital is at risk, citing lack of support for emerging talent, the closure of specialty stores, high operating costs, disintegration of manufacturing and a fragmented and increasingly negligible fashion week. There's no clear solution to these problems, with fashion businesses in the middle. 'The challenge is to work within a system that is in disruption,' said Stan Herman, designer and former CFDA president. 'We're not moving backwards.' Everything Is an Ecosystem While much of fashion has filtered out of the Garment District for downtown or even further out to Bushwick, Long Island City and Sunset Park (which the city pushed for in 2018), it's still the symbolic center of the industry. 'It's a representation of New York itself. You had a dream, and you came to New York to make it happen,' said Wen Zhou, co-founder and chief executive of 3.1 Phillip Lim, which launched in the early 2000s. Brands including Thom Browne, Carolina Herrera and Calvin Klein have offices, ateliers and showrooms in the area, and often work with local finishers and patternmakers on samples and special pieces. Up-and-coming designers, such as Kallmeyer, TWP, Meruert Tolegen and Grace Ling, in particular, benefit from the collaboration, speed and access it provides. As a fashion capital, New York's evergreen advantage is its proximity to culture and American consumption. But a fashion capital needs a strong talent pool, top schools to churn it out, retailers, a fashion week that attracts international press and buyers, access to funding, media and production capabilities, all firing in tandem. 'Every piece of it needs the other piece to continue to go,' said Sergio Hudson, the LA-based designer of his namesake line, which is made entirely in New York. Fashion 'is all about immediacy,' said Zhou, and local production creates a 'feedback loop' that fosters experimentation and efficiency. When 3.1 Phillip Lim was just getting started, 'the speed and flexibility made it feel like we were able to do anything and everything.' But it's also crucial for vendors themselves, many of whom now share employees, depending on the unpredictable ebb and flow of work. The opportunity to learn in the district is a huge pull for New York's fashion schools, said Naika Colas, associate director of fashion management at Parsons School of Design. Working designers rely on the district's experts in construction and commerciality. 'They know exactly what needs to go in these stores. They know what Saks wants, they know what Neimans wants,' said Hudson. 'My brand wouldn't be what it was if it wasn't for those people that poured knowledge into me.' For designers just starting out who can't meet minimums to manufacture abroad or manage importing complexity, local production is often the only option. But proponents say there are advantages for anyone, especially now, given president Donald Trump's protectionist trade policies. Brands don't have to take as big of risks on inventory and can closely react to demand without falling into a pattern of discounting, said Gigi Burris, a milliner and the founder of Closely Crafted, an organisation aimed at preserving American craftsmanship. Though as a brand scales, producing in the Garment District gets more challenging because of capacity. Underlying the real-estate struggle is a skilled-talent crisis, which spans outside New York. Plus, technology is relatively aged. Ready-to-wear label Tanner Fletcher, for example, got its start in the Garment District in 2020, but to meet growth goals, moved half of its production to a factory in China this year. 'We're able to make a lot more and the quality is really good … [even with tariffs] it's still more cost effective to produce in China,' said designer Tanner Richie. Evening wear and wedding collections are still made in the Garment District because 'we need to be fitting it on customers really quickly.' Changed systems reflect a changed world. While New York needs to 'preserve, subsidise and support the garment manufacturing industry,' strict centralisation around the district is not important because designers can do a lot remotely, said Gary Wassner, founder of financing and factoring company Hilldun Corp. Something is lost, though. 'You lose the feeling of an industry working together, you lose the feeling of energy, excitement and creativity, being part of an ecosystem,' said Wassner. A Fashion or Finance Capital? There is some optimism: Fashion stakeholders such as the NYFWDC, CFDA, Closely Crafted and Pratt Fashion want to harness the moment to secure support in a city where it's hard to come by, despite the industry contributing over $3 billion in annual tax revenue and immeasurable cultural impact. While other cities like Paris and Milan protect fashion as a crucial cultural export with tax and trade incentives, subsidised shows and support schemes, New York has toggled between inconsistent and laissez faire approaches. It also lacks the stabilising influence of luxury giants. 'Fashion is a big economic driver,' said Kolb. 'The city knows and understands that … but sometimes we are at a disadvantage because we don't get the government support that other cities get. Everything we do we're on our own.' The CFDA supported the 2018 rezoning, with the Economic Development Council promising $20 million in funding to aid in purchasing a fashion-specific building and tax abatements for landlords who house manufacturers, none of which materialised, said Kolb. The city also pledged funding to the Garment District Alliance (the neighbourhood's business development organisation), aimed at supporting the district, that the NYFWDC says has yet to be funneled to makers. 'You can point a lot of fingers,' said Kolb. But 'now in 2025 I want to see how you're going to make good on those promises.' In addition to re-upping pledges made in 2018, groups have advocated for expanding local workforce programs, and establishing a displacement relief fund for those negatively impacted. The CFDA has pushed for reconsideration of its 'The Local Production Fund,' a proposal that would offset costs to make in New York with credits to factories. Kolb said he feels positive about the progression of talks with the city. 'The garment and fashion sectors are important segments of the city's economy, and we are committed to investing in these sectors,' said Joe Marvilli, DCP deputy press secretary, in an email to BoF. 'We will continue to work with our partners across City government to identify how to support the district, including through non-zoning tools and small business support, as this plan moves forward.' Consistent business would reduce prices, said George Kalajian, a fifth-generation pleater who has worked with brands including Carolina Herrera, Khaite and Proenza Schouler. 'I have seven pleating machines. One is running almost every day. If two of my machines ran everyday, I could drop my prices by 50 percent. More work circulating here would be so much better for all of us,' Kalajian said. In New York, everything comes down to dollars and cents. The city has an affordability problem. Rising rents have quickened the pace of closures in the Garment District. Designers, meanwhile, lament the cost of showing, working and living as compared with other fashion capitals. In turn, some talent has seeped out. In the face of so many challenges, proactivity is important, said Herman. 'We have to be aggressive about how we feel about fashion, otherwise the world will pass us by,' Herman said.
