Re: Response to Conanylizer
Posted by George on 4/27/09
Why do we have labor laws passed for public reason if as you say, no one cares? It doesn't make sense to me sharwinston. Apparently the public does care. California labor code clearly intructs that gratuities are hereby declared to be the sole property of the employee or employees to whom they are paid, given or left for. What I would like to know is how a judge can rule that gratuities are the the property of all workers in the chain of service when Califoria labor code specifically instructs that gratuities may be paid, given or left for an employee, singular? Because the labor code was passed for public reason, it is my contention that judges should not be defining who the customer's tip is paid, given or left for. It is my belief that California labor code 351, specifically instructs that the right to determine who gratuities are paid, given or left for is a matter solely to be determed by the public and that the public's reasons for tipping, which would include determining who they tip, should not be interpreted or assumed by the courts. Wouldn't the fact that such code is passed for public reason suggest that judges should not be imposing their own personal views on the interpretation of such a law? Wouldn't the fact that such code is passed for public reason suggest that the public, rather than the courts, should be deciding who their tip is paid, given or left for? On 4/25/09, sharwinston wrote: > nobody cares, man.... nobody! > > On 4/23/09, George wrote: >> Well no wonder why I become rude and agressive. >> >> Everyone seems to want to dik with me instead of discussing the >> issue. >> >> It's like you are all afraid to actually discuss the issue for > fear >> you'll look like the terd. >> >> What an honor to meet such a mind screwwer. You must have a really >> high IQ. I am glad to see you are putting your godlike mental >> prowess to such a good use. >>
Posts on this thread, including this one
- Customer's right to determine who is entitled to his tip. , 1/27/09, by George.
- Re: Customer's right to determine who is entitled to his tip, 2/03/09, by George.
- Re: Customer's right to determine who is entitled to his tip, 2/09/09, by Terry.
- Re: Customer's right to determine who is entitled to his tip, 3/11/09, by sharwinston.
- Re: Customer's right to determine who is entitled to his tip, 3/12/09, by lawguy.
- Re: Customer's right to determine who is entitled to his tip, 4/05/09, by George.
- Re: Customer's right to determine who is entitled to his tip, 4/05/09, by George.
- Re: Customer's right to determine who is entitled to his tip, 4/05/09, by George.
- Re: Customer's right to determine who is entitled to his tip, 4/05/09, by George.
- Re: Customer's right to determine who is entitled to his tip, 4/06/09, by George.
- Re: Customer's right to determine who is entitled to his tip, 4/08/09, by George.
- Re: Customer's right to determine who is entitled to his tip, 4/08/09, by George.
- Re: Customer's right to determine who is entitled to his tip, 4/15/09, by sharwinston.
- Re: Customer's right to determine who is entitled to his tip, 4/22/09, by Conanalizer.
- Re: Customer's right to determine who is entitled to his tip, 4/22/09, by George.
- Re: Customer's right to determine who is entitled to his tip, 4/22/09, by George.
- Re: Response to Conanylizer, 4/22/09, by George.
- Re: Response to Conanylizer, 4/22/09, by Conanalizer.
- Re: Response to Conanylizer, 4/23/09, by George.
- Re: Response to Conanylizer, 4/25/09, by sharwinston.
- Re: Response to Conanylizer, 4/27/09, by George.
- Re: Response to Conanylizer, 4/27/09, by George.
- Re: Response to Conanylizer, 4/27/09, by sharwinsotn.
- Re: Response to Conanylizer, 4/28/09, by George.
- Re: Response to Conanylizer, 4/28/09, by sharwinston.
- Re: Response to Conanylizer, 5/01/09, by George.
- Re: Response to Conanylizer, 5/02/09, by sharwinston.
- Re: Response to Conanylizer, 5/03/09, by George.
- Re: Response to Conanylizer, 5/07/09, by sharwinston.
- Re: Response to Conanylizer, 5/19/09, by George.
- Re: Response to Conanylizer, 5/19/09, by Chewtoy.
- Re: Response to Conanylizer, 5/20/09, by George.
- Re: Response to Conanylizer, 5/23/09, by sharwinston.
- Re: Response to Conanylizer, 5/24/09, by v.
- Re: Response to v, 5/27/09, by George.
- Re: Response to v, 5/30/09, by sharwinston.
|