Tapped In: Attracting & Cultivating the Next Generation of Restaurant Workers

By MENU Magazine

February 11, 2026

Your Stories

MENU in conversation with Donald Guse Salah, Restaurants Canada’s Director of Workforce Development

Labour shortages may be the restaurant industry’s biggest headache—but for Donald Guse Salah, they’re also its biggest opportunity. As Director of Workforce Development at Restaurants Canada, Donald is leading national efforts to rewire how the industry finds, trains, and keeps talent. His mission: unlock overlooked labour pools, build real pipelines for skilled kitchen roles, and equip operators with the tools they need to hire and hold onto the next generation of workers.

Donald’s path to this role has been anything but traditional. He started out supporting job seekers with disabilities, experience that gave him a deep respect for the human side of workforce development. From there, he moved into business association work, helping employers design inclusive hiring practices. Now, at Restaurants Canada, he brings both lenses—advocating for people while delivering bottom-line solutions for operators—to an industry he knows and cares about.

What makes Donald stand out is his emphasis on action over theory. He’s building service partner networks across the country, creating youth employment toolkits, connecting members with grants and subsidies, and driving the flagship Cultivating Skilled Domestic Talent initiative—a program tackling the industry’s over-reliance on internationally trained workers by building community-based pipelines of homegrown talent.

For Donald, the work isn’t abstract—it’s personal. His first paycheque came from a family-run burger joint, and he still sees restaurants as the glue of Canadian communities: sponsoring local hockey teams, hosting neighbourhood events, and giving countless Canadians their very first jobs. It’s that mix of economic power and social impact that fuels his drive to find solutions.

In this interview, Donald talks about why workforce development has become mission-critical, how Restaurants Canada is backing operators with practical supports, and what it will take to ensure restaurants can thrive with the talent they need in the years ahead.

MENU Magazine: Operators everywhere are struggling with labour shortages, but the talent gap is most acute in the back-of-house. What does the lack of culinary talent mean for the industry and what can be done to address it?

Donald Guse Salah: It’s funny you ask that—I think Kelly Higginson addressed some of it really incisively in recent interviews. But to start with the second part of your question, what’s at stake if these roles aren’t filled is pretty clear: if you don’t have people in the kitchen, your business can’t operate. You need staff to prepare and provide the food customers are coming in to eat. Without that, you can’t employ servers, hosts, dishwashers—even people in marketing, graphic design, or web development. If there’s no food, there’s nothing to serve and nothing to promote. For an industry that provides the most first jobs to youth and is Canada’s fourth-largest private sector employer, you need people in the kitchen. Without them, we can’t be those things.

Why the gap exists is more complicated. I don’t think it’s any single thing; it’s a confluence of factors. In some cases, it’s hard to motivate people to go into skilled kitchen roles when they can work front of house, maybe earn more with tips, and have more flexibility. Every restaurant handles tip pooling differently, so it’s not consistent. And kitchen work, because it’s skilled, requires more training and commitment.

Culinary programs have seen declining enrollment for years. They’ve relied heavily on international students to bolster numbers, but immigration policy changes are hurting those programs—and the industry as a whole. Also, cooking hasn’t been promoted as a “desirable” career path for Canadians in the same way other skilled trades have. For the last decade or more, trades have been emphasized, but usually in the context of electricians, plumbers, or construction—rarely chefs or bakers, even though those are trades too. People need homes and running water, sure, but they also need food.

Part of the problem is a general lack of understanding about career pathways in the industry. We could do a better job showing the upward mobility that’s possible. Think about McDonald’s retiring CEO, who started out as crew and worked her way up to the top job—there aren’t many industries where you see that kind of progression. Coming through the kitchen is essential to understanding operations and stepping into higher-level roles, especially in full-service restaurants. The challenge is getting more people to see the attraction of that path.

MENU Magazine: Are the challenges facing full-service and quick-service restaurants very different?

DGS: With quick service, there are two challenges I hear most consistently—though this is anecdotal, not based on formal studies. The first is filling roles with less desirable hours: overnight, early morning, or late-night shifts. Those can be harder to staff. The second, more common challenge is getting people into management positions—store managers and similar roles. Part of that comes down to a lack of understanding about the career pathways in these organizations. McDonald’s is a good example, and Tim Hortons too. Both have operators who say the same thing: you can start in an entry-level management role and work your way up to franchisee, regional director, or even CEO. These are not dead-end jobs. But parents aren’t often telling their kids, “You should consider a career in quick service—you could move from crew into management and beyond.” That’s just not the conversation being had.

For full service, the biggest challenge is filling skilled kitchen positions—for all the reasons I’ve mentioned earlier. There’s a lack of awareness of career pathways, but there are also issues around wage discrepancies. Servers often earn more in tips, so people ask, “Why would I work in the kitchen and do all that work?” On top of that, it requires more training, sometimes formal education, and certainly more ambition and interest in working with food. It has to be an environment that fits your work style.

MENU Magazine: So where are the potential solutions?

DGS: Many sector-specific training programs follow a familiar pattern: they’re funded by government grants. Some are well put together, with equipment, capital investment, and even industry partners involved. But almost all of them face the same problem—when the grant money runs out, the program disappears. That might be after one year, three years, or even ten, but very few have a plan to sustain the training long term.

Other programs are created by service providers in isolation. They might see that people want to work in foodservice, so they design training on their own. I ran one of those myself years ago in a teaching kitchen for job seekers with disabilities. It was a great experience, but it wasn’t informed by operators. We weren’t training based on the real competencies needed in restaurant kitchens. That’s common. Programs may be well-meaning but miss the mark, or they focus on things like soft skills, which are important, but don’t translate into industry-recognized certifications or readiness for the line.

Restaurants Canada’s Cultivating Skilled Domestic Talent initiative is different in two key ways: sustainability and credibility. Instead of chasing short-term grants, we work with service providers who already have the kitchens, staff and budgets to make this part of their core operations. That means the training doesn’t vanish when funding shifts—it becomes part of what they do every day.

Second, we build the programs directly with restaurant partners. Each one is informed by at least one or two operators who define the core competencies they need in their kitchens. That means the training is practical and transferable: knife skills, plating, multitasking, monitoring sauces, managing prep. These are the baseline skills that allow candidates to walk into a prep cook, line cook, or short-order cook role with confidence and contribute productively right away.

The difference is that this model produces job seekers who are truly industry-ready—and it ensures the programs last. It’s not about training people how to “make a pizza and that’s it.” It’s about creating a pipeline ofworkers with the general skills every kitchen needs, informed by operators, and sustainable for the long term.

MENU Magazine: Are there any high-value funding opportunities out there for operators, independent of this program?

DGS: I can’t pretend to know every funding bucket in every province, but there are a couple of programs that are consistently available across Canada.

One is the Canada Summer Jobs program. It’s a federal wage subsidy that supports hiring youth aged 15 to 30 for summer positions. Employers apply in the fall—usually between October and December—for funding that covers part of the wages. Not-for-profits can get up to 100% of minimum wage covered, while private and public sector employers can get about 50%. You can even request an advance on the funding, though you need to be sure you’ll hire the people you apply for.

The other is the Student Work Placement Program, which in hospitality is run by Tourism HR Canada under the Propel banner. This one provides subsidies when you hire students in culinary or hospitality programs for work placements. It’s meant to reduce costs for operators while giving students meaningful industry experience.

Beyond those two national programs, there are also provincial and local wage subsidies. Some provinces—Ontario, British Columbia, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Québec—have well-developed programs. Others, like Alberta, don’t have as much infrastructure right now. Typically, these subsidies are tied to hiring people who face barriers to employment, whether that’s youth, newcomers, or people with disabilities.

MENU Magazine: In your view, what demographics are underrepresented in hospitality hiring, but hold real potential to strengthen the workforce?

DGS: You’re asking me a question I definitely have a biased opinion about. Overlooked and promising can sound contradictory, but I think both apply here.

The obvious answer is youth. They have to be the future of the industry. Restaurants are the number one source of first jobs in Canada, and yet youth unemployment remains high. There’s enormous potential when you’re bringing people into the workforce for the first time—you can spark an interest and help build skills that stay with them. But they’re often overlooked because of the challenges that come with new generations. Many have grown up with most of their interactions through screens, so developing the interpersonal skills that restaurants require takes time. We’re also finding that many young people don’t have their first job until 18 or 20. At that age, they’re at the same place developmentally as those of us who started working at 14 or 15. Employers may need to adjust their expectations and invest more in training, even though that costs time and money. On top of that, there are stereotypes about youth being unreliable or more drawn to gig work. All of this makes operators hesitant. But youth remain the most promising stream because they are the future workforce of our industry.

My biased answer is job seekers with disabilities. They are the largest minority group in the country, yet they have the lowest employment rate. While some individuals won’t be able to work, there are a huge number who can—and often it’s a lack of understanding that gets in the way. People tend to think only of visible disabilities, like mobility issues, and assume their kitchens aren’t designed for that. But most disabilities are invisible. The number one disability in Canada is chronic pain. Others include learning disabilities or conditions that may simply require more flexibility in training, task assignment, or workplace support. Operators may feel trepidation if they’re not familiar with disability inclusion, but the reality is most restaurants already have employees with disabilities—they just haven’t self-disclosed (i.e., employees with mental health experiences). This group represents a significant, overlooked workforce, and bringing them in can be incredibly rewarding for both the business and the individual.

MENU Magazine: What do we know about the size and composition of the potential labour pool among Canadians with disabilities?

DGS: Depending on which Statistics Canada data you look at, people with disabilities represent somewhere between 22 and 27 per cent of the Canadian population. Both numbers are significant. Personally, I don’t put much weight on the higher figure—it came from census data collected during COVID, when many people self-identified as experiencing mental health challenges. While some of those cases are ongoing, I think a lot were temporary and tied to the pandemic.

Even if you go with the 22 per cent figure, that’s still a very large share of the population. And when you look at employment, the gap becomes clear. In 2015, the employment rate for people with disabilities was about 59 per cent, meaning 41 per cent were not employed. In the 2022 census, the rate of disability in the population jumped to 27 per cent and the employment rate rose slightly to 62 per cent. Either way, it’s still the lowest of any demographic group in Canada—the national average employment rate sits closer to 80–81 per cent.

So, we’re talking about roughly a quarter of Canadians with consistently lower employment rates. That signals a huge untapped labour pool. But it also means operators need to think about how to integrate accessibility and provide accommodations in the workplace. There are changes required—but there are also a host of good reasons to do it, and the potential returns are significant.

MENU Magazine: What would it take for restaurants to be as agile with talent as they are with guests, and what opportunities would that yield?

DGS: The big opportunity is retention. The retention rate among people with disabilities is higher than most other groups. We don’t want to frame them as “super employees,” but you certainly generate loyalty. And when businesses—and restaurants in particular—start to think about accessibility, the impact goes beyond just people with disabilities. It benefits youth, newcomers, older Canadians—everyone.

For example, take job interviews. If you offer accommodations so candidates can present themselves in the way they’re most comfortable—whether that’s a traditional verbal interview, something written, or even a demonstrative approach—you get a truer sense of their abilities. That’s good for everyone, not just one group.

The same applies in the workplace. The outcome has to stay the same—standards can’t be compromised—but the way tasks get done doesn’t have to be identical for every employee. Maybe someone is really strong at 70 per cent of a role and weaker at 30 per cent, while a colleague excels at that 30 per cent. You can divide tasks to maximize strengths. Yes, there are challenges with that, especially in terms of workplace perceptions or union rules, but those adjustments can lead to broader productivity gains.

Accessibility practices don’t just remove barriers; they lift overall performance. And while immigration will continue to be important, it’s not enough on its own. Operators need to engage with other underrepresented demographics too. Youth need more support as they enter the workforce, and people with disabilities and Indigenous communities—who face some of the lowest employment rates—represent significant untapped potential. It all comes down to building more flexibility and accessibility into the way restaurants operate.

MENU Magazine: Can you share an example of how you’ve matched a restaurant with the right partner, and how that kind of tailored approach delivers results?

DGS: This initiative is still fairly new, so none of the programs are far enough along to have success numbers yet. But I can share some examples of how we’ve matched restaurants and partners in ways that reflect their needs.

One example is a secondary school in Brampton that wanted to launch a foodservice stream for its students. We connected them with a post-secondary culinary program to provide curriculum and possibly instructors, creating a feeder system that builds a stronger pipeline of domestic culinary students. At the same time, we linked the school with the limited-service arm of a large restaurant group, that gives students paid placements during the school year and in the summer—an entry point into the industry. From there, they can move into full-service roles within the brand’s broader operations.

Another case involves a full-service independent restaurant group. They partnered with a training provider that had been running a two-week culinary program but wanted to revise it. Now, the restaurant’s head chef is working directly with the provider to update the curriculum, extend the training period, and bring in additional restaurants to form a committee that can keep shaping the program year after year.

A third example is a restaurant partnering with two organizations that support job seekers with autism. One partner has kitchen facilities, both contribute trainers and candidates, and the restaurant helps define the core competencies the program should cover. The idea isn’t that one restaurant hires every graduate, but that the training is directly shaped by industry input, and the restaurant will hire from that pool.

In each case, the goal is the same: align the training partner’s resources with the restaurant’s needs. I share with restaurants what service partners are available and what they can offer, and the restaurant decides if that’s the right fit—or if we should go out and look for a different kind of partner. It’s not a one-size-fits-all model; it’s about building matches that make sense and can grow into sustainable pipelines.