What the heck does that really mean anyway?
I became disappointed to learn that the tips for dealers at casinos were all pooled and split up among all the dealers. That's too bad, because a tip in those cases are definately rewards for good play, sometimes for the luck of winning, but usually for the fun the dealer added to the game.
I didn't realize waitstaff were also pooling tips at some restaurants... I wonder how widespread that is. I have a feeling the neighborhood bar I go to, this is not the case. They certainly make a point to close out all open tabs before they go off shift, so a new tab is started under the new waitress. I'm a very good tipper at my regular hangouts where they know my name.
The practice is not that widespread at locally owned bars and restaurants, but is quite common at the chain places. At my two favorite locally owned pubs, all the bartenders and waitstaff "eat what they kill," although at one place, there are two bartenders per shift and they pool the tips for that particular shift only. From what I've been told, chains places like Outback, TGIF, Applebee's etc. pool the tips, which might explain why the service is mediocre on the best of days.
Hair of the Dog asked :
What the heck does that really mean anyway?
The courts have corruptly ruled that employers may share the customer's tip among employees of the employer's choosing. You see, many waiters have gone to court alledging that their employer was stealing their tips and giving them to other workers. The courts have ruled that waiters are liars and that employers are not stealing their waiter's tips. The courts have ruled that employers should be allowed to pool their employees tips among employees whom the business owner believes should receive those tips, which in most cases is as many as possible. You see when business are allowed to share the customers tip among as many workers as possible, the financial benfits of the customer's tip become financial gains for the business owner. If business owners are allowed to share their employee's tips among all or many of their employees, then the business can reduce the wages they are paying all these employees and save money. If the courts would have ruled that the tips were the waiters and the wiaters alone, the businenss would be forced to pay higher wages to the other employees since they would then not be receiving any tips.
As far as determining how widespread this problem is, just consider this. If businesses steal their employee's tips and share them with other workers, our government will allow those employers to pay those employees less in hourly wages. What this means is that businesses are being rewarded for stealing the tips our public presents certain workers in the service industry. If you steal your employee's tip and share them with other workers whom customers neglected to tip, then our government will allow you an ability to save money and thus make more for yourself. You can reduce all your employees wages to $2.13 an hour saving yourself thousands of dollars a year, if and only if, you steal the tips from your tipped employees and share them with the other workers.
Now, how widespread do you think employer required tip pooling is going to become? You see, that is what the courts call this blatant stealing. They don't call it stealing, they call it employer required tip pooling. The courts have allowed employers an ability to mandate that tips received from customers must be pooled or shared among all employees who serve the customer in some way. Now instead of customer's having the right to determine who should receive their tip, the courts have claimed the right to determine who should receive the customer's tip. As a result the courts have ruled that tips do not belong to the person to whom they have been given but instead belong to those who serve the customer in some way. Business owners have gotten exactly what they wanted. They wanted the courts to rule that an employee who is given a tip has no legal claim to that tip and that is exactly what our corrupt justice system gave them. Now, when you give a tip to a employee, you are not really giving the employee the tip but instead you are giving the employer a tip so he can utilize the money to negotiate lower wages for his employees. The courts have ruled that the employee to whom you gave your tip has no legal rights to such money.
Employer required tip pooling is the courts ruling that the public should not have a right to determine for themselves who should receive their tip for such rights deny business owners their ability to steal their employee's tip.
My intent is not to suggest that the public should not tip if it is their desire to tip. My intent is to inform the public of what is actually happening to their tip and to politely and graciously ask that they stand up for my rights to keep the tip they have given me. You can stop tipping if you like, but please stand up for my rights to keep the tips that others have given me. Businesses across this country are stealing the tips you the public so graciously gives us workers in the service industry. We hate to trouble you after all the goodwill you've already shown but your goodwill is going in vain when you sit idly by as our employers steal our tips.
What the heck does "The courts have ruled that employers may share the customer's tip among employees whom the customer had every right to tip but didn't" really mean anyway?
It means that the courts have ruled that it doesn't matter who the customer actually gives a tip to. The courts have ruled that customers don't care who get's their tip and as such any tip presented is considered by the courts to be the property of who ever the courts feel should share in the customer's tip. It means that if a customer chooses to tip one individual, his rights to do so will not be respected by the courts and instead the courts will determine for the customer who should be the recipient of his tip. It also means that you can specifically inform the business owner that your tip is not intended for the hostess but instead is intended for the waiter or another specified worker and yet the business can legally disregard your specific instructions that the hostess should not share in your tip based on an errant ruling by the courts that employer required tip pooling is allowed under the law. It means that business owners can take your tip away from amy employee to whom you present it and give it to other workers irregardless of whether you want the business to take such actions or not. Businesses can now share your tip with anyone the courts feel should share in your tip. Your right to determine whether your tip is intended for one employee or all employees serving you will be deprived you because the courts believe you don't care who get's your tip.
What it means to workers is that if customer don't speak up and let judges like this know that they do care who recieves their tip, businesses will continue to have a legal ability to steal the tips you present us.