Follow us!

    Re: Starbuck's ruling

    Posted by George on 6/03/08

    I guess you are right. Tip jars don't deceive customers into a false
    perception that customers have no righ to determine who should receive
    their tip and what amount they should receive. Judges are the one
    deceiving customers into a false perseption that they have no right to
    determine who should receive their tip and what amount they should
    receive. That's why managers at Starbucks can no longer receive a tip
    from a customer. Judges in California have ruled that because state
    laws state that agents of the employer are prohibitted from taking any
    part of the tips bestowed upon an employee, such a law should infinge
    on the constitutional rights of the consumer and deprive him his
    liberty to tip a manager.

    The truth of the matter is, state laws simply instruct that mandagers
    are prohibtted from taking tips customers have given an employee.
    State laws do not and would not attempt to suggest that American
    citizens cannot tip a manager or agent of the employer. The reason
    California judges are misinterpretting state laws in such a manner is
    to support their unsubstantiated opinion that employers are allowed to
    collect and control the customer's tip. By deceptively suggeting
    through court rulings that state laws govern who can or can't be
    included in a tip pool, the public is deceived into a false perception
    that employers are not confiscating and controllng their tips. Instead
    customers are fraudulently deceived into the notion that the courts,
    along with state laws are governing their tips.

    Is it fraud to suggest that state laws would have the authority to
    govern its citizen's personal property when our constitution has
    provisions specifically designed to protect against such governing?

    Truth makes many appeals, not the least of which is its power to
    shock.
    Jules Renard


    On 4/25/08, Martha wrote:
    > On 4/25/08, George wrote:
    >> ....
    >> Isn't it fraud to deceive consumers into a false perception that
    >> they have no right to determine, for themselves, who should
    >> receive their tip and what amount that person should receive?
    >>
    >> Isn't that exactly what tip jars do?
    >>
    >
    > Yes.
    >
    > No.

    Posts on this thread, including this one
  • Starbuck's ruling, 4/22/08, by George.
  • Re: Starbuck's ruling, 4/22/08, by Ann.
  • Re: Starbuck's ruling, 4/23/08, by George.
  • Re: Starbuck's ruling, 4/23/08, by Ann.
  • Re: Starbuck's ruling, 4/24/08, by George.
  • Re: Starbuck's ruling, 4/24/08, by Ann.
  • Re: Starbuck's ruling, 4/25/08, by George.
  • Re: Starbuck's ruling, 4/25/08, by George.
  • Re: Starbuck's ruling, 4/25/08, by Martha.
  • Re: Starbuck's ruling, 5/09/08, by sharwinston.
  • Re: Starbuck's ruling, 5/27/08, by George.
  • Re: Starbuck's ruling, 6/03/08, by George .
  • Re: Starbuck's ruling, 6/04/08, by sharwinston.


  Site Map:  Home Chatboards Legal Jobs Classified Ads Search Contacts Advertise
  © 1996 - 2013. All Rights Reserved. Please review our Terms of Use, Mission Statement, and Privacy Policy.