Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ksixnine t1_ja9r84s wrote

Reply to comment by spince in What's your experience with Initiative 82? by UncleLongHair0

Ok.

Would you rather make $114 or $200 on a given 7 hour shift?

And, do you understand how the tip credit worked?

Healthcare as a bonus is wonderful - the thing is it could have been incorporated while keeping the tip credit in play.

Edit* it also depends on what the owner wants to do with the service fee: in many cases it is used for healthcare/ inflation, in some cases it is used to pay the kitchen higher wages, etc.. there isn’t any law stating what that money has to go towards.

1

spince t1_ja9x0xf wrote

> Would you rather make $114 or $200 on a given 7 hour shift?

If every single factor in the compensation package is equal, obviously more. But that's disingenuous because in your own post you're talking $114 with a guaranteed minimum wage floor + health care benefits vs. one without those things.If you're talking $114 with healthcare or $200 without, it would depend on whether my cost of acquiring private healthcare insurance on my own would be more than $86 per shift.

> And, do you understand how the tip credit worked?

I do!

>it also depends on what the owner wants to dowith the service fee: in many cases it is used for healthcare/ inflation, insome cases it is used to pay the kitchen higher wages, etc.. there isn’t anylaw stating what that money has to go towards.

Which returns to me to my original point - if waitstaff feel like the service fee is not being used to their benefit, they should take their labor elsewhere.Management could also return to encouraging tipping while abandoning the 20% service fee. It's not the customer's responsibility to now do a 40% add-on to whatever they order.

1

ksixnine t1_jaatj9v wrote

The $114 or $200 are both with healthcare ~ that was why I asked if you understood the tip credit: healthcare in conjunction with the tip credit was already a thing before the pandemic/ I-82.

Different establishments have different protocols on where the service fee goes, and based on the experience of the server determines whether they can move to a different job or not - it really isn’t as if they are saying ‘I’m not making what I’m worth, so I’ll leave’ and is closer to saying ‘no one will hire me because I’m not experienced enough’ ~ which doesn’t even scratch the surface as to whether they are good or bad at the job.

The reality is management was always on the hook to pay whatever the minimum wage was if sales were low - they grumbled about healthcare, and ironed out what food cost to raise to meet the new labor demands.

Without the cushion of the tip credit, and the rest of the financial responsibilities that they have to contend with, they aren’t going to trim their profit margins — truth be told: the customer has always been responsible for keeping the doors open, and the cost of doing business was somewhat hidden; however, now that certain people demanded that the tax credit be removed in favor of using a standard wage, restaurants are going to pass that responsibility onto you.

The elephant in the room is that the gratuity industry that many detest generates about $48bil annually (yes, just tips..) and that the argument to increase wages/ remove the tip credit was a means to tax food service workers more.

1

spince t1_jabsrtm wrote

>The $114 or $200 are both with healthcare ~ that was why I asked if you understood the tip credit: healthcare in conjunction with the tip credit was already a thing before the pandemic/ I-82.

Sorry, your original comment didn't make this clear since you stated the service fee was implemented for health care and higher wages. Your premise keeps changing so it's hard to understand what you're arguing.

The rest of your post is waxing poetic about Initiative 82 which I didn't state a position on and focusing on a very specific hypothetical of a server who wouldn't benefit under initiative 82 so I won't address it.

> the customer has always been responsible for keeping the doors open, and the cost of doing business was somewhat hidden

What I'm arguing is very simple - it's not the customer's responsibility to ensure servers are paid as much as they can get anymore than it's the customer's responsibility to ensure owners profit as much as they can.

My personal tolerance is a 20% obligatory add on fee on the bill. I don't care if it's in the form of a mandatory service charge or a cultural obligation of a tip, because the premise of the tip has long been disconnected from actual service quality.

Restaurants that do a 20% fee and guilt you into tipping on top of that are not places I will patronize.

0

ksixnine t1_jac1bsc wrote

Mmm, this entire post, per OP, is dealing with I82… You do understand that, yes?

Dealing with I82 from a consumer or a supplier standpoint, both entities should feel as if they are being treated fairly - true or not?

My asking if you understood the tip credit was to understand how well you understood it pre and post I82 having been passed. Now that we both know your depth: which pay structure [both with healthcare] would you care to be under – $114 (via wage increase) or $200 (via tip credit)

>What I'm arguing is very simple - it's not the customer's responsibility to ensure servers are paid as much as they can get anymore than it's the customer's responsibility to ensure owners profit as much as they can.

-This tells me that you aren’t sincere in what you’re saying … you aren’t grasping your personal role in how this specific economic system works: you cannot argue for the server to go elsewhere for work without understanding your purpose in why sed establishment encouraged you to come in - and yes, that does place you in a position of providing profit for the establishment as you also pay the server’s salary ~ it’s no different than buying a car, or groceries, or getting a haircut .. your choice in doing business at sed establishment keeps the doors open, and people employed.

>My personal tolerance is a 20% obligatory add on fee on the bill. I don't care if it's in the form of a mandatory service charge or a cultural obligation of a tip, because the premise of the tip has long been disconnected from actual service quality.

-Your personal tolerance matters little in this discussion, and cultural norms are just that, cultural norms: when in Rome, do as the Romans do — admit it or not, the tip credit allows for people to help gauge worth/ value based on a rating systems of a food critic (or several), and the premise of a tip has been lost on customers that didn’t have a better grasp on what their meal truly should have been charged ~ without the tip credit, people are clutching their pearls based on a new understanding of the capitalist culture of restaurants and how they, the diner, actually figure in.

>Restaurants that do a 20% fee and guilt you into tipping on top of that are not places I will patronize.

-Most all businesses want to run on the cheapest possible labor that maximizes their earnings without sacrificing service.. if you feel guilty by knowing the truth, what else needs to be hidden from you?

Would you feel better if it was a 35% service fee and no line for a tip?

Would you be happier dining in a prix fixe environment ~ with or without the option of doing prorated ala carte menu items?

Fact is, your disdain by learning the reality of the economics of keeping a restaurant open is exactly what scares restauranteurs — the restaurant industry is difficult, and the ability to constantly trim costs is dwindling precipitously .. the last thing you or I want is for restaurants to take an approach of you being a one time customer, but if that scheme works because it shields you from being better aware of how your dining choice on the evening is keeping its doors open, then more shall follow.

0