That's unfortunate that he wouldn't entertain an interview. Perhaps he was displeased about the response to your earlier post. I respected the fact that you were going to get his side - it's too bad your readers won't get to hear his explanation. I was assuming (hoping?) there was more to it that the apparent hypocricy people were jumping to - I guess I'll have to dig up a copy of the P-I (if they even run the story) to find out for sure.

The Seattle P-I article. It mostly seems to re-itererate what was posted here with the addition comment:

"'I'm Latino. I'm Hispanic,' Santiago said. 'Of course I support everything that's going on (with the demonstration). But I'm a businessman. In a way, I'm in the middle.'"

He positions it as a need to keep the business open regardless of his interest in the issue - the article also suggests, however, that he wasn't open to scheduling changes proposed well in advance.

My impression is that the rally was dishonest. Who can be againt "reform?" But reform in this case means open borders. But no one says that straightforwardly.

ECB, are you for open borders? No limitations on immigration?

Why am I not surprised you are for illegal immigrants? That was the only reason for the rally, wasn't it?

And I ask the other side, too, why should the Mexicans get a free ride when the Asians have to play by the rules?

My wife tells me stories of INS coming into their store to take Asians who have had the Green Cards expire and the INS chose not to renew.

But the Mexicans? Why, let's give them the world and the keys to the City.

Someone tell Santiago to call 1-877-815-5684. They will help him get his job back, if he wants it.

No, supporting reform does not mean open borders. In this case, the rally was opposed to criminalizing illegal immigration (as I understand it, it is currently a civil infraction) and in supporting an alternate proposal for immigration reform. The alternate proposal would give current immigrants a path to citizenship and would try to better connect people who have work with the people who need it.

Sachi,
You may in fact be correct but that is NOT the message coming through.
If the issue were simply "Amnesty for People Already Here" I might have some sympathy.
But that's not the message.
The message is in fact "We have a right to be here."

if the remaining workers don't quit, i'd say it's time to unionize. might i suggest?

http://www.unitehere8.org/

Erica, thanks for covering this. I have mixed feelings about the stated goals of the protest but very clear feelings about supporting workers' rights to participate in the political system. I don't think I'll be drinking at Septieme any more.

Wolfe did a very good thing yesterday. I'd love to hear what restaurant Wolfe ends managing next up so I can make a point of eating there.

Does he want his job back? There can be a comission put toghether like the one in Monroe to talk to Santiago.

I think it's racist and dehumanizing for anyone to tell Santiago that he has to think or act a certain way because he is Latino. Make your own decisions for yourself and stop meddling in other lives.

At least Santiago is consistent. He shows himself to be as mediocre of character as the food he serves in his establishments is mediocre of quality. (Though La Cocina is below mediocre. I'm always surprised to see anyone but the super-sized buffet grazer types in there given the poor quality of the food.)

Let's just hope that as we are supporting our friends on immigration that they will in turn support us on gay rights and a woman's right to choose when to have a fmaily. I for one am not out there marching just to bring more social conservatives into the ranks of the legal voting population....ya know?

To Raw Data - I'm sure that it is easy for the rallies to communicate more than one message. :-) I just wanted to make it clear what the proposed bills that sparked the rallies would actually do.

I've mentioned this in other places, but it may be worthwhile to repeat that I am a former resident of Seattle, and now living in San Diego. I'm in the thick of it down here, but we have some very level-headed voices about immigration, thankfully.

Well then, I take back what I said about Santiago being open to interviews. He's a giant douchebag.

Yeah: Again, I'm not a racist, and I agree that Santiago is human, and I didn't say all Latinos have to think alike. Read my comments in the last post on this subject, in response to the same nutty allegations, for a more detailed explanation.

It sounds like commie-mouth, but open borders has to happen. Nafta wants all the economic benefits without allowing any social mixing. Then, you'll see The Fence get built from the Yucatan to Chiapas.

Mexico/US/Canada are already big friends, so open borders is the eventual answer.

Then, you know, shuffle off to Mexico and buy your affordable house...

I think Mr. Santiago is in a position where he busts his tits all day to keep his restaurants open, and like most people approached by the media got blindsided by this. Throwing away a whole day in the restaurant business is not something most people in it can afford to do.

I'm quite sure Mr. Santiago supports the rights of illegal immigrants, though, as they are the primary means by which he keeps his wages down.

Firing his employees didn't change the fact that he had to close shop yesterday. Santiago just looks like a business owner on a power trip, not a business owner trying to cushion the economic blow of losing business for a day. He can kiss my ass.

i went by la cocina last night and it was packed. i was surprised by this, but not based upon the boycott calls issued here yesterday, or the immigration rights march.

it is shocking that anyone would eat at la cocina. their food is an abomination.

you want good mexican food? go to el gallito. the lopez family will fill you up with delicious chow and their family-run business is delightful. best chile verde within city limits.

The spark for this whole movement was the GOP passing a bill making illegal immigration a felony, like for child molestation (unless you are Repuiblican in Texas), rape, murder, major theft, meth production etc. With jail time. Thank god the massive reaction by immigrants and their families exposed this outrage for the bucket of slime it is. They saved us from ourselves. The rational liberal mainstream would have let both GOP houses vote this in before they even started debating it. The GOP made this crisis and it isn't working out quite as their race-baiting gay-bashing strategists had planned.

There are millions of illegal immigrants in the United States. The only way the penal system could afford a massive influx of new inmates, even for short stays, would be to open up concentration camp style facilities (currently being designed and built by Haliberton?). I think also that this occured simultaneously with several prominant GOPers calling for an increase prison labor.

Only a small number of people seem to be pushing for open boarders. This seems pretty much a straw man. What kind of reform is possible or best to rationalize the facts on ground? I'm confused about that.

Keep in mind that there's not only the pressure of being an illegal Mexican on this side of the border.

The pressure on the Mexican side of it is the huge expectation by families there that you are a $$ success here (the $$ which comes through relentless, hard work). You've obviously already left the Mexican labor pool (with it's low-slung economic glass ceiling), so you're not churning up any pesos there. The potential fiasco and utter ignominy is to return to Mexico as a failed illegal immigrant -- one who brings home no bacon, who's fallen on the wrong side of the law, or has fallen into life on the streets.

Mexico and Canada are our neighbors. We should be more concerned about the well-being of our neighbors.

Or, we could put all of our neighbors in prison. Make that 'everyone'; put everyone in prison.

Plus, CHETBOB, one has to ask the obvious question: who would benefit from such criminalization?

Certainly not the American Consumer, who depends upon the depressed wages paid to the millions of illegal workers picking our produce, slaughtering our meat, unplugging our toilets, and building for us the McMansions they themselves can't afford to live in.

See, if you're going to suddenly create a whole new (and large) class of criminals, you're going to need just oodles of new prisons in which to hold them (pending eventual deportation of course), fleets of buses to transport them back to where they came from, and a big ole fence stretching from Sea To Shining Sea, replete with private security forces on the ramparts to prevent all those illegals from coming back into the country.

Which, from where I'm sitting, makes it sound like Halliburton & friends will have plenty of no-bid contracts to maintain their "shareholder satisfaction" quotient for the next several decades.

Let's make that slimy little conservative mexican pay for what he did.

The Capitol Hill community will make him hurt with a boycot, and he'll have to stand united with his latino brothers and sisters.

Who would benefit from criminalization? "Certainly not the American Consumer" - true. The argument I've heard, though, is that it'd be the American Tax Payer. The argument suggests that the amount we pay education (through public schools) and treating (through public hospitals) outweighs the economic benefit to illegal immigrants.

I'm not sure if this math actually adds up. Obviously, the people saving the money are the businesses that employee them - how much this savings is passed onto end consumers vs. how much improved work conditions the market can bare is another issue altogether.

I don't have answers here nor have I seen any solid analysis on it (outside of uninformed armchair economicists with strong political biases).

Of course, it's arguable that this isn't a financial issue (even though both sides are using that as a contention) but an ideological one. If so, I think the challenge is unifying the voice of the protestors. The dominant message I keep hearing from my friends (as mentioned previously) is that "anti-illegal-immigrant = anti-Hispanic and anti-Hispanic = racist and I'm not a racist and so I'm pro-illegal-immigrant". Obviously the logic behind this is severely flawed on several levels and, worse, it sends a bad message to the non-protesting electorate and political establishment.

Comprehensive proposals for alternate reform are needed. I'm sure they're out there but they aren't receiving much press. The current proposal is extreme; some of the counter proposals are equally extreme (e.g., dismantle borders, make everyone immigrants, etc). I'd like to see a couple solid pragmatic options float to the top of the public consciousness, but that hasn't happened yet.

does this mean I won't get my $100 to fill my gas tank?

The one thing people don't realize is that by boycotting Santiago's restaurants, you're actually hurting the Latinos who work for him, more than you're hurting him.

They'll end up losing their jobs if you hurt his business. He'll just cut his losses and move on.

Tyrven:
Please note that none of "counter proposals" that you mention (dismantal borders, everyone immigrants etc.) have the slightest organized advocacy in legislature. Those extremes are strawmen. Making illegal immigration a felony, requiring massive prison infrastructure expansion, has been passed by the current United States House of Representatives. There are other proposals for adjusting immigration laws out there. The democrats in the Senate have one they have put forward, that I understand is reasonably thought through, though I don't know the details. What the legal immigrants and their supporters, like me, are not going to willingly accept are proposals that treat their hard working relatives and friends like subhumans, equivilant to felonious child molesters, meth manufacturers, and traitors.

Yes, Santiago has a right to fire people if he pleases. Yes, boycotting Santiago's restaurants will hurt his employees more than him. Yes, fat people will still keep him in business. But that doesn't mean he's not a colossal asshole and I recommend not giving a colossal asshole more of your money than you have to.

There are colossal assholes everywhere, Jamied, and you likely give your money to countless colossal assholes every single week. The restaurant you go to instead of Septieme/Cocina next weekend may be run by a ruthless colossal asshole that would make Santiago look like Mother Teresa. You just don't see that guy/woman openly practicing his/her assholedom in the public eye.

One thing to consider: he may be a colossal asshole, but notice that he let the other workers who walked out keep their jobs.

It was not the walkout itself he fired the manager for, it was closing the restaurant entirely, costing him an entire day of business, without his permission.

A point I'm surprised hasn't been mentioned: this afternoon there were KOMO and KIRO vans with their 30 foot antennas (or whatever those things are called) parked in front of Septieme to report on this. No matter what your feeling on immigration laws, it would be _so_ cool to have your former boss staked out by the media for being a jerk to you.

I'm sorry but I fail to see where Santiago did anything wrong, why he should be subjected to this BS.

His manager has a responsibility to "Manage" the restaurant. That means to ensure that staff is working when the business is open. If workers wanted the day off they should have had someone fill in for them.

Vance wolfe broke his employment contract by not providing workers, regardless of what protest was going on.

let's face it, this is a protest on Capitol Hill (yes, I recognize this was nationwide as well) in SEATTLE. If all the businesses on Capitol Hill closed their doors everytime there was a protest, there would be 3 day work weeks.

I am planning on going there for dinner on Friday night in support of this decision.

Colossal Assholes shouldn't have to hide in the closet anymore! No more anti-colossal-asshole discrimination! Don't prejudge! That apparant ordinary asshole at your favorite restaurant may be a Colossal Asshole, worthy of extra sympathy and tolerance! Break the Chains of Closet Colossal Asshole injustice!

P.S. Is the food really good?

Wow Someguy, what an amazingly myopic view of the situation. It would've been hard for Vance to "manage" a resaurant where the entire kitchen staff was gone. How would they have stayed open? As already suggested earlier here, ALL of Mr. Santiago's kitchen staff at both restaruants are hispanic, and quite a number are probably illeagal. Now you want me to feel sympathetic toward him because he needs to keep both places open to fill the gas tank on his Hummer2 by paying his own countrymen low wages. I guess in your view, he really is living the American Dream - screw everyone else over as hard as you can. In my view that's plain greed, not good business.