Because, for the people who refuse to “get it,” it isn’t actually about exploitation or whatever other lip service they give to make themselves seem magnanimous for not tipping, it’s about the fact that they don’t want to give the delivery driver a penny and have to lie to you and themselves so they think they’re good people. They’re not, though. If they were they’d see it like you do, they’re just selfish and deep down they know it so they concoct their lies to defer blame from their conscience.
Nah, it’s because we don’t keep putting forth a Strawman argument. Tipped jobs are ALLOWED to pay their workers less than minimum wage IF AND ONLY IF their tips do not make up the difference. If they do not, the employer must cover it.
It is literally subsidizing the wages that otherwise the business would legally have to pay. So how do you fight back? You don’t tip and employees need to properly report their tips. The system already has the mechanism in place to fix this.
But you say this and all the people who make WAY MORE than minimum wage with their tips get up in arms because you’re daring to take away their advantage. It’s being exploited by both sides. It’s not about fair treatment for everyone, it’s about “getting mine at someone else’s expense”.
Yes and you not tipping makes a difference how exactly? By making sure the exploitative business gets enough money to keep exploiting their workers for $7.25 instead of $2.13? You’re doing great sweaty, keep it up. Don’t bother boycotting businesses as that would inconvenience you, better to help exploit the worker and then get mad at them about it, that’ll help!
Of course, that assumes lack of regulatory capture, a regulatory agency interested in effective enforcement, enough funding to do that enforcement, and effective protections for whistleblowing when employers threaten to fire employees who don’t report high enough tips even when they don’t receive them.
The US don’t have more than one of these (I don’t know the situation on regulatory capture, so I’m giving benefit of the doubt there).
Because, for the people who refuse to “get it,” it isn’t actually about exploitation or whatever other lip service they give to make themselves seem magnanimous for not tipping, it’s about the fact that they don’t want to give the delivery driver a penny and have to lie to you and themselves so they think they’re good people. They’re not, though. If they were they’d see it like you do, they’re just selfish and deep down they know it so they concoct their lies to defer blame from their conscience.
Or perhaps I avoid services that expect tips.
No, if you do that you get it.
“Don’t give the place your money” is good,
“give the place the money but not the staff member” is bad.
If you avoid those places what I said doesn’t apply to you, you’re already doing the thing I said is better.
Nah, it’s because we don’t keep putting forth a Strawman argument. Tipped jobs are ALLOWED to pay their workers less than minimum wage IF AND ONLY IF their tips do not make up the difference. If they do not, the employer must cover it.
It is literally subsidizing the wages that otherwise the business would legally have to pay. So how do you fight back? You don’t tip and employees need to properly report their tips. The system already has the mechanism in place to fix this.
But you say this and all the people who make WAY MORE than minimum wage with their tips get up in arms because you’re daring to take away their advantage. It’s being exploited by both sides. It’s not about fair treatment for everyone, it’s about “getting mine at someone else’s expense”.
Yes and you not tipping makes a difference how exactly? By making sure the exploitative business gets enough money to keep exploiting their workers for $7.25 instead of $2.13? You’re doing great sweaty, keep it up. Don’t bother boycotting businesses as that would inconvenience you, better to help exploit the worker and then get mad at them about it, that’ll help!
Fuck outta here with your high horse.
Of course, that assumes lack of regulatory capture, a regulatory agency interested in effective enforcement, enough funding to do that enforcement, and effective protections for whistleblowing when employers threaten to fire employees who don’t report high enough tips even when they don’t receive them.
The US don’t have more than one of these (I don’t know the situation on regulatory capture, so I’m giving benefit of the doubt there).