Quote:
Originally Posted by FredSnerd
Thats what you said Chris
|
Yes, BUT - and it's a BIG BUT.... "minimum" refers to what they get as their
collective standard acceptable weekly take-home. The boss DOES pay them less than this - but it's the way this structure works that sees their total come back into the realms of reasonable pay....
I.e.:
Weekly take-home is considered good at $500 per week (for instance).
This is made up of (excluding taxes for the sake of simplicity):
$350 in hourly wages from the "boss".
$150 in tips (or wages) direct from the patrons. These are NOT negotiable, or paid based on how "pleased" a customer is. They are EXPECTED.
How can the boss be "ripping" the worker off IF (and this is the kicker) it's EXPECTED from the patrons - nationally - that the extra $150 or MORE comes from them to bring up their total to what we'd expect a good wage to be over here. The only difference between there and here is this. If a meal cost me $50 here - I'd give the total to the restaurant owner, and out of that they'd pay the labour component to the worker who served the table. In the US, I'd pay probably $40 or less for the meal (better value typically - if, as Claude says, not always as nice) and give the waitress $10 as part of her wagein the "form" of a "tip". That's 20%, but you get my drift. The owner is happy, because part of his/her wages bill is being paid by me, and therefore they can provide the meal cheaper.
I fail to see how this can be considered unfair! If the patrons (like some here on IIS) refused to pay tips as a matter of point, and this became endemic - then things would have to change. Remembers - the term "tip" is merely a historic one. It's really "wage component number two".
What you've all missed, sadly, is that for those that wish to work harder and "nicer", they're rewarded by tips that usually exceed the standard - bringing their total wage well up on what the "standard" wage is - and this is a bad thing?
