I mean, you’re paying them either way. Businesses money for salaries comes from customers. It’s still silly and indirect, but it’s not like you wouldn’t be paying the workers’ salary anyway.
Without tipping their entirely hourly wage has to come out of what you pay for the meal. Thus the price of your meal will go up to make up for what they used to get in tips.
I’d rather have that. Why is responsibility of covering wages shifting to the customer? And in return the blame? Sounds like a situation those in charge love, since instead of them being the bad guy they get to say “what an asshole customer right?” it’s their fault your take home pay is lower today.
Hiding behind the customer going darn then it’s out of my hands. Don’t got money to spare. Then they hop in their expensive car and drive to their expensive home instead of them being the ones to pay a proper wage for their employees.
Or, maybe, the owners of the restaurant make slightly less profit and pay their employees a living wage.
There are a small number of restaurants across the US that actually do pay their servers and other employees reasonable hourly rates, and make it clear to patrons that they don’t accept tips. Prices are still reasonable and customers do continue coming back.
Or, maybe, the owners of the restaurant make slightly less profit and pay their employees a living wage.
And maybe landlord start handing over deeds to the people paying their mortgages. But we’re operating in reality and need to consider things that might happen.
If companies eat the cost of pay increases how will the executives afford that new yacht they’ve been eyeing?
I know it sounds really easy to get all huffy and self-righteous, but 60% of restaurants do not make it past the first year, and 80% go under in five years.
It’s hard out there. If the place isn’t making money, everyone loses their job.
You’re not wrong, but my point is that we’re dealing with laws of math here. You can’t just go “Just accept less profit” when the majority don’t make enough profit to survive. That money has to come from somewhere.
My mom ran a couple restaurants at different times in her life. She’s a high school drop-out who has never had a great job so it isn’t like she’s some high class capitalist. Both restaurants failed within a year or two, and she came out each time quite a bit worse than she went in. The company in charge of the building locked the doors and kept all her stuff in lieu of rent. It’s pretty brutal. She lost all the money she put into it well beyond any money she might have made on the business itself, and she went into debt each time as a result of the failing business as well.
I mean, you’re paying them either way. Businesses money for salaries comes from customers. It’s still silly and indirect, but it’s not like you wouldn’t be paying the workers’ salary anyway.
It hides the true cost of the meal and allows both the employee and the employer to avoid taxes on this part of the “salary”
deleted by creator
As a Brit this seems like such a ridiculous attitude to have.
When you go out for food you are paying for:
If you’re dining in you also get:
If you are getting delivery you instead pay for someone to bring it to you.
The food itself is like 40% of what you’re paying for, the rest is just convenience and atmosphere.
Without tipping their entirely hourly wage has to come out of what you pay for the meal. Thus the price of your meal will go up to make up for what they used to get in tips.
And that is how it works in all other civilised countries.
I’d rather have that. Why is responsibility of covering wages shifting to the customer? And in return the blame? Sounds like a situation those in charge love, since instead of them being the bad guy they get to say “what an asshole customer right?” it’s their fault your take home pay is lower today.
Hiding behind the customer going darn then it’s out of my hands. Don’t got money to spare. Then they hop in their expensive car and drive to their expensive home instead of them being the ones to pay a proper wage for their employees.
Sounds like a misleading system all around.
Or, maybe, the owners of the restaurant make slightly less profit and pay their employees a living wage.
There are a small number of restaurants across the US that actually do pay their servers and other employees reasonable hourly rates, and make it clear to patrons that they don’t accept tips. Prices are still reasonable and customers do continue coming back.
And maybe landlord start handing over deeds to the people paying their mortgages. But we’re operating in reality and need to consider things that might happen.
If companies eat the cost of pay increases how will the executives afford that new yacht they’ve been eyeing?
I know it sounds really easy to get all huffy and self-righteous, but 60% of restaurants do not make it past the first year, and 80% go under in five years.
It’s hard out there. If the place isn’t making money, everyone loses their job.
Yeah, but then it shouldn’t really exist as a business in the first place, should it?
You’re not wrong, but my point is that we’re dealing with laws of math here. You can’t just go “Just accept less profit” when the majority don’t make enough profit to survive. That money has to come from somewhere.
My mom ran a couple restaurants at different times in her life. She’s a high school drop-out who has never had a great job so it isn’t like she’s some high class capitalist. Both restaurants failed within a year or two, and she came out each time quite a bit worse than she went in. The company in charge of the building locked the doors and kept all her stuff in lieu of rent. It’s pretty brutal. She lost all the money she put into it well beyond any money she might have made on the business itself, and she went into debt each time as a result of the failing business as well.