Re: Customer's right to determine who is entitled to his tip

More | Report Post

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.