Yes, they need to work, but they -- and front-of-house staff -- would be far better off with restaurants that are open and functioning. Perhaps not at 100%, but they could certainly allow half-capacity or "shift seating".

I'm sorry but it's simply a very bad look, when it is mandated by the government. Nearly everyone else has the luxury of remaining isolated and avoiding exposure, except for this small segment of vulnerable and low-paid workers, whose workplace has almost zero protection, to provide the most essential human necessity -- food.

There may be a misunderstanding here. The shutdowns we're seeing in the US aren't full lockdowns - under current plans, most businesses will remain open and most people will continue to go to work. I'd agree with what you're saying if there were a full lockdown happening that arbitrarily excluded to-go restaurants, but we're just doing targeted shutdowns of the biggest transmission vectors.

> most people will continue to go to work

Virtually all white collar workers, tech, administrative, managerial - work from home. Teachers, school admins & university workers - home. Entertainment (shows, sports, movies, concerts) - home. Apple - home.

Shitty jobs that nobody cares about except during a crisis: janitorial/sanitation - work despite the risks. Cooks/food prep - work despite the risks. Grocery store/Walmart - work despite the risks. Truckers - work despite the risks.

(Trucking isn't necessarily a shitty job but a lot of people seem gleeful that technology may render them obsolete in the near future.)

How do you work from home as a janitor?

That's obviously the point -- while everyone else stays safely at home, people in those jobs must come to the site and get up close to germs, other people, and possibly the virus itself. Who do you think is going to do all this "deep cleaning and disinfecting"? The CEO?