Replies

Mark wrote:

The key here is that the busboys and bar tenders really aren't servicing the customer. They're servicing you, the waiter.

I don't go to work to be serviced, do you. I go to work to make money for my family. You are right, however, that busboys and bartenders aren't servicing the customer, however, they aren't servicing the waiter either, they are servicing the business owner. The courts, however, seem to believe that everyone working in a restaurant is servicing the customer and as such should share in the customer's tip irregardless of whether or not the customer is in agreement.

Here's a question for you. If a customer chooses not to give a tip, didn't the waiter still service the customer? The reason I have asked this question is because several judges around this country seems to beleive that any person who serves a customer is entitled to a tip. That is the current ruling in Califorinia, Massachusetts and several other states. Anyone in California who serves a customer is entitled to a tip, well, that is, a tip from a waiter. While waiters can be forced to give other workers a tip, customers don't have to give the waiter a tip. Do you see an unjustice here? The waiter who is simply going to work to provide for his family can be forced to give tips to other workers and yet the customer who is actually being serviced doesn't have to tip. If California were actually right and tips belong to those who serve the customer, then it seems to me servers could simply take the money from the customer like business owners are doing to their waiters.

California is wrong in assuming that tips belong to anyone who serves the customer. If they were right, tipping would not be voluntary. Tipping is and always has been voluntary. Tip pooling is no different than tipping and should be treated no differently than tipping. No one has to tip and no one should have to pool tips. Pooling tips, like tipping, is a constitutional right of an individual to spend his money however he chooses. Tip pooling has corruptly been changed into a means to legally steal other people's property. Tips are defined under federal law as the sole property of the tipped employee. While those workers who are actually given tips have a legally entitlement to such money, those who are not voluntarily given tips have no entitlement to such money. If a waiter refuses to give his busboy a tip, it is no different than a customer refusing to give the waiter a tip. But our courts think differently. They seem to errantly believe that waiters are non-citizens and that they should not have the same rights as all other citizens of the United States. They believe waiters should be forced to tip other workers so the business owner won't have to pay these workers.

The confusion over what tip pooling actually is has been the root of the problem that has taken it's toll on workers across this nation. While I and many others understand that tip pooling is no different than tipping and as such can only be legal if voluntary, those interested in seeing that employers are able to steal their worker's tips insist that tip pooling is the legal means by which employer's have been allowed to steal their worker's tips. They refuse to debate the issue. They refuse to answer the simple question of why would our federal government allow stealing?

You see, it is the federal government's current contention that tip pooling, including employer required, has been allowed under federal law. Employers can steal their employee's tips and give them to other workers who the customer had every right and ability to tip but didn't. The reason why federal laws would allow such blatant theft are left unaswered and yet the logical interpretation that the law which allows tip pooling is simply allowing workers their constitional right to voluntarily give tips to other workers is disgarded as an unsubstantiated lie. You see, our governemtn wants the public to believe that others along with myself are lying to you. You should instead believe that their is a logical reason behind allowing employers an ability to steal the tips you present workers in the service industry. Now they may argue, those other workers deserve tips or the employer really isn't stealing, it's tip pooling, not stealing and it's allowed under federal law.

What do you think. Is tip pooling the right of an employer to take the tips away from the worker whom the customer has
presented a tip so that others may share in it, especially the employer, OR, is tip pooling the constitutional right of an individual to voluntarily give tips to other workers? Which one sounds right to you? Well I guess it really doesn't matter because your government doesn't think you have any business determining matters concerning your money. That's right, they are going to ignore any imput you have on this issue and continue to interpret federal laws as allowing business owners an ability to steal the tips you present workers in the service industry. The only way they will hear us is if we make some noise. Please help us make some noise on this issue. Our nation is deteriorating at the hands of an openly and blatantly corrupt government who refuses to even explain their actions.

By the way, those of you who think that I am waiter are incorrect. I am simply a concerned citizen you see's through the injustices being perpetuated against waiters and other workers who earn their living from the good will of our people. I am almost to the point of believing that our government dispises good will so much that this is the reason they are allowing business owners an ability to steal the good will of the American public. They seem to want the American way to be not about good will towards others but instead about willing good will to the highest bidder.