Kempczinski also noted that in many states, sit-down restaurants are allowed to pay servers as little as $2.13 per hour, a federal minimum set in 1991, with tips making up the rest of their pay.
“So right now, there’s an uneven playing field. If you are a restaurant that allows tips or has tips as part of your equation, you’re essentially getting the customer to pay for your labor and you’re getting an extra benefit from no taxes on tips,” Kempczinski said.
This is so bavkwards to me. I’d rather work somewhere where the patron can buy my labor directly, without the capital class taking a cut.
You’d rather pay the owner $20 so she can pay me $15 than pay me $20 directly, and you think that’s better for the workers?
Because restaurant patrons pay the wages of workers no matter what. The only question is whether the owners take a cut first or not. I’d prefer not, but what do I know? I’m just a career waitress.
Ma’am, nobody should be paying a 30% tip for someone to pour a drink, or walk an order up to your table, simply because the employer isn’t paying a fair wage.
Restaurants should pay people like every other business, and kill tipping culture.
But what I do know? I’m just the customer who decides where my money goes.
It’s appreciable to want to be compensated directly, however that means not all servers are compensated equally for their time. Instead of a division between labour and ownership, tipping allows division to fester between labourers.
A few places in my area have removed gratuities and raised staff compensation, and the workers there enjoy not only feeling on par with their coworkers, but also the stability of having a consistent and predictable income.
That said, it’s understandable why changing the gratuity policy might seem offensive if your example of wait staff pocketing 75% of the revenue is anywhere close to accurate. I wouldn’t want it changed either.