How do we abolish tipping without harming employees?

[The Liberated Territories]

Raise the minimum wage and abolish the tipping loophole that allows companies to pay tipped employees less then minimum wage.
Also while we're at it reduce the work we to 4 days.

What loophole?

I dunno about other countries but in the US, there is no "tipping loophole." The law supports tipping. See: https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/wages/wagestips

[Telconi]

Raise the minimum wage and abolish the tipping loophole that allows companies to pay tipped employees less then minimum wage.
Also while we're at it reduce the work we to 4 days.

What loophole?

I dunno about other countries but in the US, there is no "tipping loophole." The law supports tipping. See: https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/wages/wagestips

The one that allows companies to pay tipped employees less then minimum wage.

[The Liberated Territories]

What loophole?

I dunno about other countries but in the US, there is no "tipping loophole." The law supports tipping. See: https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/wages/wagestips

The one that allows companies to pay tipped employees less then minimum wage.

Can't tell if you are being sarcastic, Telconi.

If the employee’s tips combined with the employer's direct wages of at least $2.13 per hour do not equal the federal minimum hourly wage, the employer must make up the difference.

[Valrifell]

Saying that tipping indicates the market value for a server is silly since most people tip ~20% regardless of the actual quality of service.

[Petrasylvania]

Raise the minimum wage and abolish the tipping loophole that allows companies to pay tipped employees less then minimum wage.
Also while we're at it reduce the work we to 4 days.

The tipping loophole also means female employees are more likely to be forced to tolerate sexual harassment from customers in order to earn a liveable amount.

[Telconi]

The one that allows companies to pay tipped employees less then minimum wage.

Can't tell if you are being sarcastic, Telconi.

If the employee’s tips combined with the employer's direct wages of at least $2.13 per hour do not equal the federal minimum hourly wage, the employer must make up the difference.

A little from column A, a little from column B.

The sarcasm came in reference to the "loophole" part, because that seems to just mean "exemptions in a law I don't like" these days.

However. I do think the exemption needs to go away. Even given your example of an employer being required to make up the difference, the fact that the employer is still paying sub minimum wage is the issue. IMO tips should be above and beyond a worker's wages, not below it.

[The Liberated Territories]

Can't tell if you are being sarcastic, Telconi.

A little from column A, a little from column B.

The sarcasm came in reference to the "loophole" part, because that seems to just mean "exemptions in a law I don't like" these days.

However. I do think the exemption needs to go away. Even given your example of an employer being required to make up the difference, the fact that the employer is still paying sub minimum wage is the issue. IMO tips should be above and beyond a worker's wages, not below it.

Then by doing this, you make businesses want to cut jobs in order to maintain current profit margins that they lost due to paying higher minimums. Alternatively you make food cost more.

I don't see what's wrong with the current law on this. You could argue the law should treat the people equally, buy you'll get unequal outcomes regardless.

[Petrolheadia]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_vivC7c_1k

So apparently tipping used to be considered a bribe for better service than everyone else, and it only became normalized during the prohibition era when businesses resorted to it as a last-ditch means to stay open.

I'm not too surprised. The entire concept of leaving it up to the consumer to determine how much money an employee makes is only going to fleece those who care the most, leaving them with less money than those who care the least. Everyone should be skeptical of a custom that results in that.

Also, if waiters and cooks don't make enough money, isn't that what the minimum wage is for? If it's too low, raise it. If it's inadequately enforced, enforce it. There ought to be a law that any business proven to underpay workers has all its assets seized.

In the meantime, how do we phase out the custom of tipping without harming employees in the process?

We just let people tip if they wanna.

[Petrolheadia]

Just fire any waiters who receive tips. Those who will stay will happily say that they are not being harmed and happy.

Same asshole as always, good to see that.

[Ifreann]

The Culture > The Federation

y e s.

I'll allow it.

---

Let's not abolish tipping. Most people are going to cling here on to the idea that employers/bosses etc. should be forced to pay a "living" wage, ignoring the slew of problems that has by itself (raising costs and/or destroying jobs.)

It'd be a lot easier to afford wages for staff if there wasn't an employer profiting off their labour.

[Petrolheadia]

Let's not abolish tipping. Most people are going to cling here on to the idea that employers/bosses etc. should be forced to pay a "living" wage, ignoring the slew of problems that has by itself (raising costs and/or destroying jobs.)

It'd be a lot easier to afford wages for staff if there wasn't an employer profiting off their labour.

It'd be a lot harder to get wages without a job creator.

[Jebslund]

It'd be a lot easier to afford wages for staff if there wasn't an employer profiting off their labour.

It'd be a lot harder to get wages without a job creator.

Because jobs are created out of the goodness of rich people's hearts and not because, you know, those businesses would not be making any significant profit without employees to increase production.

You seem to be falling into the same trap as video game producers. Namely, the idea that desperately trying to stay relevant as a "job creator" is more important than the people who do the work making enough money to live on.

Speaking of:

A little from column A, a little from column B.

The sarcasm came in reference to the "loophole" part, because that seems to just mean "exemptions in a law I don't like" these days.

However. I do think the exemption needs to go away. Even given your example of an employer being required to make up the difference, the fact that the employer is still paying sub minimum wage is the issue. IMO tips should be above and beyond a worker's wages, not below it.

Then by doing this, you make businesses want to cut jobs in order to maintain current profit margins that they lost due to paying higher minimums. Alternatively you make food cost more.

I don't see what's wrong with the current law on this. You could argue the law should treat the people equally, buy you'll get unequal outcomes regardless.

Firstly, what's wrong is that it requires the employee to prove a negative. If an employee doesn't make enough tips to close the gap, they have to be able to prove it in order for the employer to have to make up the difference. Second, the fact that the employer can then turn around and say, "Oh, you didn't make enough tips? You're fired for unsatisfactory performance!" in every state. Third, reporting and proving the disparity requires time and money someone making sub-minimum-wage simply doesn't have, especially if they are having to work multiple jobs just to make ends meet.

I'll also point out that, if a person putting in 40 hours of honest work a week cannot live off of the wages they earn without the government having to supplement their income, that person is simply not being paid an honest wage for the work they put in. There is no ifs, ands, or buts. If you cannot afford to pay your employees a fair, livable wage, you simply cannot afford to be in business, nor do you deserve to be.

[Marginal Territory]

As a tipped employee, and yes, short of a communist revolution, I feel the best way to do this would be to remove the ability of businesses to pay tipped employees less than minimum wage or otherwise profit from tips.

[Samiakku]

You do what most other countries do and pay the workers a regular wage.

yep.

[Ifreann]

It'd be a lot easier to afford wages for staff if there wasn't an employer profiting off their labour.

It'd be a lot harder to get wages without a job creator.

I dunno man, I've been to an eatery or two in my day and I've never noticed the owner doing anything to get my money, whereas the people in the kitchen made me food and the wait staff brought it to me.

[Luziyca]

Get rid of the US$2.13 shit, at least pay them US$7.25.

[Petrolheadia]

It'd be a lot harder to get wages without a job creator.

I dunno man, I've been to an eatery or two in my day and I've never noticed the owner doing anything to get my money, whereas the people in the kitchen made me food and the wait staff brought it to me.

In the owner's restaurant.

[Mystic Warriors]

If I want to tip my waitress, that's my right. It's my money and I can do as I please with it legally.

[Mystic Warriors]

Get rid of the US$2.13 shit, at least pay them US$7.25.

Where is that 2.13 coming from?

[The South Falls]

If I want to tip my waitress, that's my right. It's my money and I can do as I please with it legally.

But if you don't, he/she might not eat.

Get rid of the US$2.13 shit, at least pay them US$7.25.

Where is that 2.13 coming from?

That's the federal minimum wage for servers who make tips.

[Petrolheadia]

It'd be a lot harder to get wages without a job creator.

Because jobs are created out of the goodness of rich people's hearts and not because, you know, those businesses would not be making any significant profit without employees to increase production.

You seem to be falling into the same trap as video game producers. Namely, the idea that desperately trying to stay relevant as a "job creator" is more important than the people who do the work making enough money to live on.

If you don't do that, you'll soon be creating 0 jobs with a payroll of $0.

I'll also point out that, if a person putting in 40 hours of honest work a week cannot live off of the wages they earn without the government having to supplement their income, that person is simply not being paid an honest wage for the work they put in. There is no ifs, ands, or buts. If you cannot afford to pay your employees a fair, livable wage, you simply cannot afford to be in business, nor do you deserve to be.

Or that employee is not doing a valuable enough job, and you're willing to drop his pay to $0 for that.

[Mystic Warriors]

If I want to tip my waitress, that's my right. It's my money and I can do as I please with it legally.

But if you don't, he/she might not eat.

Where is that 2.13 coming from?

That's the federal minimum wage for servers who make tips.

Im going against the idea of ending tips, not for it.

[Jebslund]

Because jobs are created out of the goodness of rich people's hearts and not because, you know, those businesses would not be making any significant profit without employees to increase production.

You seem to be falling into the same trap as video game producers. Namely, the idea that desperately trying to stay relevant as a "job creator" is more important than the people who do the work making enough money to live on.

If you don't do that, you'll soon be creating 0 jobs with a payroll of $0.

Gee, if only there was a way for a group of people to come together to form a company with no one owner or person in charge, but, rather, a group of people working roughly as equals and sharing the duties of running a business, as well as the associated costs and profits... I mean, it's not like multiple people could make a company that sells multiple products or performs a given service without one guy sitting at the top taking the lion's share of the profits, right?

I'll also point out that, if a person putting in 40 hours of honest work a week cannot live off of the wages they earn without the government having to supplement their income, that person is simply not being paid an honest wage for the work they put in. There is no ifs, ands, or buts. If you cannot afford to pay your employees a fair, livable wage, you simply cannot afford to be in business, nor do you deserve to be.

Or that employee is not doing a valuable enough job, and you're willing to drop his pay to $0 for that.

If you cannot afford to pay your employees a living wage, you cannot afford to be in business. There is no such thing as a person who does honest work not being valuable enough to pay an honest wage to. That is an argument rooted in greed, not in need (not even the needs of the business. If you make more than your employees, you can afford to raise their pay, because your business has enough revenue to still profit after the raise, else you would not be making more. While I will agree that, if all employees are able to live off of their wages alone, without government assistance, the argument can be made that they are being paid what their labor is worth, but the government is not there to pay your employees for you while you still take the lions share of the company's profits for yourself.).

[Petrolheadia]

If you don't do that, you'll soon be creating 0 jobs with a payroll of $0.

Gee, if only there was a way for a group of people to come together to form a company with no one owner or person in charge, but, rather, a group of people working roughly as equals and sharing the duties of running a business, as well as the associated costs and profits... I mean, it's not like multiple people could make a company that sells multiple products or performs a given service without one guy sitting at the top taking the lion's share of the profits, right?

You can, and people do.

Or that employee is not doing a valuable enough job, and you're willing to drop his pay to $0 for that.

If you cannot afford to pay your employees a living wage, you cannot afford to be in business. There is no such thing as a person who does honest work not being valuable enough to pay an honest wage to.

There is, if nobody is willing to pay enough for the product of such labor.

[Aellex]

Tipping always was something I never understood in Anglo-Saxon culture. You're already paying for a service, why should you give extra money to the person delivering it?