ATTORNEYS LAW STUDENTS PUBLIC
TOP POSTS ALL POSTS SUBMIT POST
Share | Print | Report Post Employment Law Chatboard

Hot Now...
• Attorney Chat Center
• Attorney Classifieds
• Attorney Chatboards
• Practice Areas
• Law Students
Most Popular
• Set Your Quick Links
• Chat Center
• All Chatboards
• Classified Ads


Re: Customer's right to determine who is entitled to his tip
Posted by George on 4/22/09

    The point I would like to make is, if customer tipping is
    creating an impairment of obligations concerning a business and
    his employees, then the simple solution is for the business to
    put out no tipping signs. However, when a business has no signs
    stating that tipping is not allowed and, when in fact, the
    business is openly encouraging customers to tip, then there
    should be no reason that customers should not be allowed their
    liberty to determine, for themselves who should receive their
    tip. Do you understand the difference? We are not talking about
    a customer's right to give a tip. We are talking about a
    customer's right to choose who should receive his tip when
    clearly the business is not choosing to prohibit customer's
    from tipping.

    You seem to be twisting my argument into one suggesting that
    customers have a right to tip. My argument is, if business
    choose not to prohibit customers from tipping, which might be
    construed as a an act which impairs the obligation of a
    contracts, then shouldn't the customer have the right to
    determine who will receive such tip? I agree that if tipping is
    prohibitted, then certainly the customer would not have a right
    to determine who should receive his tip. But we are talking
    about situations where the employer has clearly waived his
    rights and is openly allowing customers their rights.

    I understand that our constitution only protects the rights of
    our citizens when such rights do not infinge on the rights of
    others. When businesses allow customers to tip they are
    certainly communicating to customers that that tipping is not
    causing any harm to the business. In such a case, I believe
    customers have a constitutional right to exercise their liberty
    by determine who will receive their tip.

    Do you agree or disagree? If you disagree please explain.


    /22/09, Conanalizer wrote:
    > On 1/27/09, George wrote:
    >> Does a customer have a constitutional right to determine
    >> who is legally entitled to his tip?
    >>
    >> If your answer is NO, please explain why a citizen of the
    >> United States should be deprived such liberty. Is there any
    >> harm in allowing customers to determine who should be
    >> entitled to their tip?
    >
    > The answer is "no," there is no Constitutional right (read
    > the Constitution; it lists several liberties, and giving away
    > tips isn't listed).
    >
    > While "liberty" may be a reeeeeeeeeeeallllly important right,
    > you aren't always free to do anything you want (including
    > giving away tips to the person of your choice) if, as your
    > question suggests, there is "harm in allowing customers to
    > determine who should be entitled to thier tip."
    >
    > First, let's consider the Constitution.
    >
    > The US Constitution prohibits the interference of contracts
    > (Article I section 10 prohibits "impairing the Obligation of
    > Contracts"). An employee of a business is an "agent" of that
    > business and thus in contractual relationship with the
    > business (even "at will" employees are considered to have
    > an "at will" contract).
    >
    > A customer wanting to provide a benefit (a tip) to the agent
    > for performing the service for which the agent was hired is
    > creating a conflict of interest for the agent and interfering
    > with the business' contractual relationship with the agent.
    >
    > Rather than solely serving the interests of the business (the
    > principal), the agent (if patrons may tip) will
    > invariably "serve two masters," depriving the business of its
    > contractual and thus constitutionally protected right (and,
    > in addition, assisting the violation of the agent's duties
    > under common law) to loyalty and exclusive service.
    >
    > While it may be reasonable for someone who feels underpaid to
    > think they deserve a tip, the Constitution does not give
    > anyone the right to impair contractual obligations, nor
    > create a conflict of interest for agents, nor to induce an
    > agent's violation of the duty of loyalty.

     
     

 
Google
 
Web Counsel.Net
  Site Map: Home Search Legal Jobs Classifieds Law Students Contacts Practice Areas Advertise
  © 1996 - 2008. All Rights Reserved. Please review our Terms of Use, Mission Statement, and Privacy Policy.