tip - a small sum of money given as a reward for services rendered.
"It's considered part of their pay, even by the government." -- Yes, but I believe who pays the majority of the mandated minimum wage is what is in contention.
"If it bothers you, you should work to get the laws changed so that they have to be paid normal wages like everybody else." -- In California (and a few other states), the law already requires tipped employees to receive the state minimum wage. In the opposite states, the tipped employee receives at least the minimum wage, either from their employer or by the customer. The employer can pay no less than $2.13 an hour if the tipped employee receives compensation above minimum wage. If the minimum amount is not met through other compensation, the company is required to pay the difference. It was my argument above that the employer choosing to pay only the federally-mandated minimum wage is hoping the consumer picks up the difference, therefore saving labor cost.
"If you can't afford to tip the appropriate amount, you can't afford to be in the restaurant." -- Wrong. There is no legal requirement to recognize a tip, therefore, legally, there is no such thing as an "appropriate amount". So, if you can afford the bill, you can afford to be in the restaurant.
"It's part of the cost of going there." -- No, it's not. It may be a cost you personally have decided to inherently add to the bill (based on service or otherwise), but the price of the bill is the actual cost of going there.
It saddens me that, when faced with a differing viewpoint, you resort to name calling as opposed to being confident with your position.
http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/q-a.htm
http://www.dol.gov/esa/whd/regs/compliance/whdfs15.pdf
http://www.adp.com/tools-and-r.../tipped-employees.aspx
http://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/faq_minimumwage.htm
"It's considered part of their pay, even by the government." -- Yes, but I believe who pays the majority of the mandated minimum wage is what is in contention.
"If it bothers you, you should work to get the laws changed so that they have to be paid normal wages like everybody else." -- In California (and a few other states), the law already requires tipped employees to receive the state minimum wage. In the opposite states, the tipped employee receives at least the minimum wage, either from their employer or by the customer. The employer can pay no less than $2.13 an hour if the tipped employee receives compensation above minimum wage. If the minimum amount is not met through other compensation, the company is required to pay the difference. It was my argument above that the employer choosing to pay only the federally-mandated minimum wage is hoping the consumer picks up the difference, therefore saving labor cost.
"If you can't afford to tip the appropriate amount, you can't afford to be in the restaurant." -- Wrong. There is no legal requirement to recognize a tip, therefore, legally, there is no such thing as an "appropriate amount". So, if you can afford the bill, you can afford to be in the restaurant.
"It's part of the cost of going there." -- No, it's not. It may be a cost you personally have decided to inherently add to the bill (based on service or otherwise), but the price of the bill is the actual cost of going there.
It saddens me that, when faced with a differing viewpoint, you resort to name calling as opposed to being confident with your position.
http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/q-a.htm
http://www.dol.gov/esa/whd/regs/compliance/whdfs15.pdf
http://www.adp.com/tools-and-r.../tipped-employees.aspx
http://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/faq_minimumwage.htm