Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have no issue if a restaurant chooses to add such a surcharge, that is their decision to make.
Of course, if a surcharge is added and the service isn't adequate, I would not return to that establishment.
If the "surcharge" is added by the establishment and not listed on the menu as part of the item price at the time of order, I would either refuse to pay or pay what was appropriate for the level of service delivered. An arbitrary, unadvertised "surcharge" is wrong and I'd question if it's legal. No different than walking into your local grocery store, buying your items and then being charged an extra 20% for "cashier surcharge".
If I dined out in New York, I'd tip less because the wait staff pay increase will most likely mean I'm paying more for the meal - aka, part of the tip is already included.
When I eat out in Texas, I know I am paying the waitstaff wages via my tip, so I tip accordingly.
I don't believe this applies to typical waitstaff. They are usually not salaried.
If I dined out in New York, I'd tip less because the wait staff pay increase will most likely mean I'm paying more for the meal - aka, part of the tip is already included.
When I eat out in Texas, I know I am paying the waitstaff wages via my tip, so I tip accordingly.
Well that would be a shame given tipped workers in NY are excluded from the phased in $15/hr mandate.
If you are opposed to tipping, perhaps it's better to dine at fast food establishments instead of full service.
Well that would be a shame given tipped workers in NY are excluded from the phased in $15/hr mandate.
If you are opposed to tipping, perhaps it's better to dine at fast food establishments instead of full service.
Opposed to tipping? You might want to have a doctor check your reading comprehension.
I prefer tipping. It allows me to pay based upon the service rendered.
If the tip is swapped out for a waitstaff surcharge, i have no say what the compensation is for the service I receive. A bad waiter will receive the same pay as a good waiter.
I don't believe this applies to typical waitstaff. They are usually not salaried.
It's not clear whether waitstaff will end up going to $15 per hour.
Quote:
When Cuomo first announced his proposal last summer, he called for the $15 minimum to apply to all workers and industries – leading many to wonder whether the governor was planning on eliminating the tipped minimum and establishing a single wage for all employees, as is the case in California, Alaska, Washington, Oregon, Nevada, and Montana, and Minnesota.
Opposed to tipping? You might want to have a doctor check your reading comprehension.
I prefer tipping. It allows me to pay based upon the service rendered.
If the tip is swapped out for a waitstaff surcharge, i have no say what the compensation is for the service I receive. A bad waiter will receive the same pay as a good waiter.
The Govt should not decide which businesses fail or are successful.
That's odd, so you recognize this but are for artificially high wages for the fast food worker?
I had a discussion with my BIL over thanksgiving. He has a Chick-Fil-A. At his store, he has between 10 and 15 people working at any given time throughout a 23 hour day (6 am to 11 pm). Let's say it averages 12 people through the day. If he took his employees from $10 an hour to $15, that means his costs would go up $60 each hour. That would be $1,380 per day. In a six day work week, that would be $8,280, which makes it $430,560 for the year. He doesn't walk away with that from his store for the entire year. He would have two choices. He could go out of business or raise prices.
This is going to be the situation for most businesses. As they raise their prices, what does that do to the buying power of those who got the raises?
Now, imagine what happens if my BIL has to offer vacation, paid leave and health insurance.
I had a discussion with my BIL over thanksgiving. He has a Chick-Fil-A. At his store, he has between 10 and 15 people working at any given time throughout a 23 hour day (6 am to 11 pm). Let's say it averages 12 people through the day. If he took his employees from $10 an hour to $15, that means his costs would go up $60 each hour. That would be $1,380 per day. In a six day work week, that would be $8,280, which makes it $430,560 for the year. He doesn't walk away with that from his store for the entire year. He would have two choices. He could go out of business or raise prices.
This is going to be the situation for most businesses. As they raise their prices, what does that do to the buying power of those who got the raises?
Now, imagine what happens if my BIL has to offer vacation, paid leave and health insurance.
It's like some people can't do basic math.
Just FYI, the reason liberals are for raising the minimum wage has nothing to do with people on minimum wage. That's what the "ordinary" liberals, like the useful pawns who march on the street, think. But the real reason is because the wages of union members are indexed against the minimum wage. So they don't care that the minimum wage workers lose their jobs -- those are write-offs and they'll just be thrown onto the unemployment and welfare rolls. Meanwhile, the union workers make out like bandits.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
