Ex-F&B boss questions legality of home-based cafes in S'pore, points out skirting of strict rules Rent and operational costs are considered one of the big barriers for home-based cafe owners to move to "bricks-and-mortar spaces". A former restaurant and bar owner is questioning the legality of home-based cafés in Singapore, calling the rise in their numbers as evidence of the double standards in the already cutthroat F&B industry. Ee Chien Chua, who revealed in his LinkedIn post that he used to run a licensed eatery and bar for six years, pointed out that he had to pay rent for his commercial business, as well as comply with different regulations.   They include grease trap cleaning, fire certifications, pest control, and making Central Provident Fund (CPF) contributions for staff, who were also offered paid leave as part of their employee entitlements.       Ee wrote: "So you’ll have to forgive me when I say: I don’t think this new wave of 'home cafés or restaurants' is a fair game. It is now quite pervasive." He was responding to a recent Straits Times report about this new wave of operators, who cited high rent and operational costs as reasons why they would not move into "bricks-and-mortar spaces".   However, Ee added that he was "not about being anti-young-entrepreneur or anti-hustle". "It’s about fairness," he said.   Rules exist for a reason   Ee's case was that rules exist for a reason, namely, "for hygiene, for safety, for accountability". "When you invite the public into your home for a paid meal or drink, and you’re not licensed or regulated like the rest of us," he wrote. He continued by asking "how is that fair to those trying to survive in the real F&B world?"   Bypassing system Ee added that home-based cafe owners know the rent is high, hence, are not paying any. "No intention to go legit. No intention to level up. Just bypass the system," Ee wrote. Moreover, home-based businesses also might not comply with mask-wearing or food handler permits that are needed for commercial entities. He also speculated that those with live-in maids might even help with service and prep, which is against the law. He said this reeks of "hypocrisy" and "double standards".   He questioned if the Urban Redevelopment Authority of Singapore (URA) and Singapore Food Agency (SFA) are looking into these home-based businesses and ensuring consistency of rules.     "Something feels broken. And we shouldn’t wait until there’s a serious incident before we talk about it," he wrote. He also asked: "If the barrier to entry is zero, and authorities don’t enforce existing rules, why should anyone even bother doing things the “right” way anymore?"   What are the current guidelines?   According to URA's home-based business scheme guidelines, residents may carry out small scale home-based business activities without requiring URA’s approval.   These include baking on a small scale, hairdressing, private tuition, as well as sewing services. These operations are to be carried out without the use of heavy equipment or appliances that are not intended for domestic use, as well no advertisements, signages, or posters displayed at the residential premises.   Responses   In the comments section, many who presumably are or were F&B owners, commiserated with Ee. One suggested F&B businesses look into this issue and bring it "officially" to the attention of the authorities.   In one post, Ee added that he "should’ve just converted the usage of the shophouse that I rented for my restaurant to home use, and then still use it as a restaurant and bar".   Top photo via Unsplash

England FA mcm cannot look beyond 5m distance .. Their "talent" shortage damn sad   Still want to welcome Dan Ashworth and Lee Carsley 

@noobmaster

how dare they bring poison mushroom into trumpland