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: Response to Conanylizer
Posted by George on 4/22/09

    Please expound on how my tipping a worker in a restaurant is
    crating a confict of interest. I really want to hear your
    reasoning on this ridiculous notion.

    Isn't the interest of the business to give good service?

    How can it be a confict of interest for me to help pay the
    business's worker? How can it be a confict of interest for me
    to intice workers into givng me the good service the business
    is obviously interested in providing me?

    I just don't understand how you can suggest that I am creating
    a confict of interest when I choose to pay an employee what his
    employer is unwilling to pay him.

    Your arguments are so full of holes I don't even know where to
    start.


    On 4/22/09, 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.