Michigan republicans circumventing

[nostradumbass]

 

[cincymma79]

I had a friend in college that I was waiting on to finish her double shift and this couple kept ordering stuff and she stayed half an hour after they were supposed to close waiting on just them and the guy paid the $170 bill with cash, counted every dollar of the change and put it all in his pocket and left 0 tip. I kind of regret not ripping the rearview mirror off his car to at least make him have to spend what he didn't tip.

I get freebies at most places I go to regularly because I tip well and don't screw them by tipping on the discounted tab amount. Just a few bucks here and there makes a huge difference in service.

I leave five minimum, even when the bill is 5. Unless my service is legit bad, not slow or mistakes and shit, I give 20% at least for anything where 5 would be less. People are assholes to servers though.

Went to a place where hey didn’t tell us here would be a long delay before we sat down. We waited an hour for bar food before asking to see the manager. We didn’t pay for the meal but I still tipped her for what it would have cost.

 

[Gunny]

While there may be some politicking here it’s not obvious to me that it has anything to do with an ultimate repeal. A lot of these ballot measures are brought forth for the intent of boosting turnout amongst initiative supporters who are likely to vote with a given party all the way down the ballot. Democrats used to frequently make this complaint about state level defense of marriage initiatives - that their real intent was to boost turnout with the religious right. Some republicans have said the same about marijuana initiatives. In this case, the republicans may be folding on what they perceive as a small-potatoes issue just to keep it off the ballot.

 

[Rod1]

Not every waitress job is for a corporation, and if they work for tips, so there's no such thing as doing more for less. Restaurants don't have a huge profit margin(average is 3-5%) so replacing their tip-based income with a higher wage would absolutely be getting more from them for less. They couldn't afford as many people on staff and there wouldn't be as much pressure to tip, so they'd have half the employees covering all the tables so it would be slower service, higher prices, and less tips for the wait staff. This is why restaurant servers make a lot more than fast food workers.

Or simply pass the cost of the service into the menu.

 

[franklinstower]

When you can be replaced by literally anybody w/ little to no training....your job isn't that hard playa.

That is just not true. Define hard.... if you only mean that hard is defined by needing a high level of intelligence or special skills then yeah you are right. I don't define hard in those artificial terms though.

People who work menial jobs work plenty hard for a living. It is good and honest work and no one should shit on them for it.

I guarantee I know someone who thinks what you do at the level you do it is for losers. Its all relative.

 

[franklinstower]

Not every waitress job is for a corporation, and if they work for tips, so there's no such thing as doing more for less. Restaurants don't have a huge profit margin(average is 3-5%) so replacing their tip-based income with a higher wage would absolutely be getting more from them for less. They couldn't afford as many people on staff and there wouldn't be as much pressure to tip, so they'd have half the employees covering all the tables so it would be slower service, higher prices, and less tips for the wait staff. This is why restaurant servers make a lot more than fast food workers.

The bill in question does not replace higher wages for tips it simply asks for a higher wage for those who are also receiving tips...... A 3 to 5 % margin sound ok to me -- its the same as convenience stores or grocery stores. Restaurants can afford to pay employees more and still make a profit.

Bottom line for me is that we should not produce jobs that need to be filled but that also don't support a certain minimum standard of living. The majority of Americans agree and are willing to support it which is by fucking Republicans had to resort to these shitty dishonest and greedy tactics.

I really don't care if you support it or not. These kinds of policies are inevitable. It is only a matter of time before what the majority of Americans really want becomes policy. The rest is just delay tactics.

 

[nostradumbass]

The bill in question does not replace higher wages for tips it simply asks for a higher wage for those who are also receiving tips...... A 3 to 5 % margin sound ok to me -- its the same as convenience stores or grocery stores. Restaurants can afford to pay employees more and still make a profit.

Bottom line for me is that we should not produce jobs that need to be filled but that also don't support a certain minimum standard of living. The majority of Americans agree and are willing to support it which is by fucking Republicans had to resort to these shitty dishonest and greedy tactics.

I really don't care if you support it or not. These kinds of policies are inevitable. It is only a matter of time before what the majority of Americans really want becomes policy. The rest is just delay tactics.

Well, no. Convenience store and grocery store employees don't get tips, and make significantly less than restaurant servers. People tip because they know servers rely on tips and it's customary. Restaurants simply cannot afford to keep the current number of employees and pay them double or triple. That profit margin is with their current payouts, and would shrink significantly if they multiplied the payroll costs. Everybody on all sides would lose if servers became hourly wage employees rather than relying on tips. It's more work for them, less money, slower service for you, the extra cost would be passed on to patrons just to keep the restaurant afloat. This silly woman thinks it's just more free money and isn't considering corollary effects at all, which is probably why she's a diner waitress at her age in the first place.

 

[SiKnSiN]

Well, no. Convenience store and grocery store employees don't get tips, and make significantly less than restaurant servers. People tip because they know servers rely on tips and it's customary. Restaurants simply cannot afford to keep the current number of employees and pay them double or triple. That profit margin is with their current payouts, and would shrink significantly if they multiplied the payroll costs. Everybody on all sides would lose if servers became hourly wage employees rather than relying on tips. It's more work for them, less money, slower service for you, the extra cost would be passed on to patrons just to keep the restaurant afloat. This silly woman thinks it's just more free money and isn't considering corollary effects at all, which is probably why she's a diner waitress at her age in the first place.

Yep.

Thanks for saving me the time.

 

[Otto!]

She's a waitress. They work for tips and the hourly amount is just to cancel out taxes on their tips. She makes a lot more than $3/hr.

I realize that, but up here it’s 12$ an hour +tips. At $3 an hour it sucks when business is slow.

 

[franklinstower]

Well, no. Convenience store and grocery store employees don't get tips, and make significantly less than restaurant servers. People tip because they know servers rely on tips and it's customary. Restaurants simply cannot afford to keep the current number of employees and pay them double or triple. That profit margin is with their current payouts, and would shrink significantly if they multiplied the payroll costs. Everybody on all sides would lose if servers became hourly wage employees rather than relying on tips. It's more work for them, less money, slower service for you, the extra cost would be passed on to patrons just to keep the restaurant afloat. This silly woman thinks it's just more free money and isn't considering corollary effects at all, which is probably why she's a diner waitress at her age in the first place.

Im sorry man but I feel like you don't listen well. I get your trying to put accroass your point and it's taken. I just disagree. I think we can pay our.servers more and still make a profit. I know we can. Plenty of economists agree. Did you know that? Maybe there IS a way if there is a will.........


But this is all beside the point. The point is that the majority of Americans and and certainly those in the OP want to do it and that Republicans underhandedly and dishonesty and manipulatively sidetracked the will of the people.

 

[nostradumbass]

Im sorry man but I feel like you don't listen well. I get your trying to put accroass your point and it's taken. I just disagree. I think we can pay our.servers more and still make a profit. I know we can. Plenty of economists agree. Did you know that? Maybe there IS a way if there is a will.........


But this is all beside the point. The point is that the majority of Americans and and certainly those in the OP want to do it and that Republicans underhandedly and dishonesty and manipulatively sidetracked the will of the people.

Yeah, but it's not "we". You're trying to dictate business practices for other people and not yourself with no information on their profits. If a majority of Americans supported confiscating all of Jeff Bezos' money and divvying it up among us all, is it denying "the will of the people" to not do that? You can't just have a tyranny of the majority and people are stupid and support shit with no regard for corollary effects. What economist thinks restaurants can maintain their current number of employees and pay them double and triple their current wage? Restaurant servers are not "the least among us", they're quite a lot ahead of the other jobs you've mention in this very thread. A majority of restaurants already go out of business with a few years.

 

[franklinstower]

Yeah, but it's not "we". You're trying to dictate business practices for other people and not yourself with no information on their profits. If a majority of Americans supported confiscating all of Jeff Bezos' money and divvying it up among us all, is it denying "the will of the people" to not do that? You can't just have a tyranny of the majority and people are stupid and support shit with no regard for corollary effects. What economist thinks restaurants can maintain their current number of employees and pay them double and triple their current wage? Restaurant servers are not "the least among us", they're quite a lot ahead of the other jobs you've mention in this very thread. A majority of restaurants already go out of business with a few years.

You don't know what I am doing but what you are doing is trying to assert that there is no way to pay people a living wage. This is an economic issue but it is also a philosophical and moral issue too.

I am with the camp of economists and human beings who are optimistic about the possibility of everyone who works being able to live a certain level of dignity. I am with the camp who thinks this can and should be done. You are not. Ok man... I don't care if you are not. Vote your conscience. I will too.

The point of this thread is that the majority of people DO want to pay servers more, they DO want the people who serve them to have a certain standard of living and that they were going to vote that into law but the Republicans dishonestly and underhandedly fucked them over.