Re: Response to v

More | Report Post

Good for you.

No one here cares what you believe. Nobody cares, man.........nobody!

On 5/27/09, George wrote:
> I have found tons of laws and regulations which more than back up
> my belief that when an employer mandates tip pooling, such acts
> violate our laws. The problem is, judges are ruling that such
> acts are legal. Many labor agencies, along with the U.S
> Department of Labor are saying it's legal. While I can find
> no laws to back up their opinions, their opinions seem to be
> the final word on whether or not such prectices are legal.
>
> Why are opinions, which can easily be disproven, over-riding the
> laws of our country?
>
> Why are workers who receive tip income being treated like they
> have no rights and as if our laws should not act to protect them?
>
>
> On 5/24/09, v wrote:
>> George!!!! Man -- You haven't found that what you are saying is illegal? It is not legal for
>> any one to take your tips. In my online research i came across that law. All this time here,
> &
>> i'm not the one researching this. How come you haven't found it yet? I couldn't re-find that
>> site if i wanted to. But it's out there bud! Stop wasteing time here, go find the law. Then
>> take it further from there.
>>
>> Good luck George! Hope you find what yur looking for.
>>
>>
>> On 5/23/09, sharwinston wrote:
>>> nobody cares, man........ nobody cares.
>>>
>>> On 5/20/09, George wrote:
>>>> If I am an idiot for not knowing that property is often
>>>> taken in court from those to whom it was given, then please
>>>> explain a case, other than one relating to tips, where
>>>> property was taken from someone in court without any
>>>> evidence to back up the ruling that such property should
>>>> be taken. My point is, shouldn't there be evidence to
>>>> support the taking of what someone has been given. Should
>>>> the legality of a taking really solely on the opinion of
>>>> judges?
>>>>
>>>> In one notable California case concerning forced tip
>>>> pooling, an employer was allowed to take tips away from
>>>> a waitress so that the tips could be shared among other
>>>> types of workers. Shouln't it be the restaurant's burden
>>>> to prove that restaurant customers intended that the tips
>>>> they have given are to be divided among the waiter, the
>>>> busboy and the bartender?
>>>>
>>>> If someone took your property, wouldn't you want the
>>>> courts to expect some kind of evidence to substantiate
>>>> that the taking of your property was legal?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 5/19/09, Chewtoy wrote:
>>>>> On 5/19/09, George wrote:
>>>>>> The injustice of the situation is, when an employee
>>>>>> receives a tip from a customer, his employer is now
>>>>>> able to take the tip away from him with the excuse
>>>>>> that it might have been intended for someone else.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Imagine someone stealing what another person has
>>>>>> given you and when you go before a judge, the judge
>>>>>> looks you straight in the eye and says "what was given
>>>>>> you wasn't intended for you, therefore I must rule
>>>>>> in favor of the party who took what was given you....
>>>>>
>>>>> We're back to the reasoned debate phase. What happened, your meds kick in? Get a
>>>>> revised 'script?
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Property is often taken in court from those to whom it was given. Visit bankruptcy
>>>>> or family court to see property taken away.... All the time. You're an idiot for not
>>>>> knowing this, George.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. You want a lawsuit over every tip (you idiot!)? That's why no one (no judge, not us)
>>>>> care about who wanted to give you (or anyone) any particular tip. We need a general
>>>>> rule. The courts have agreed the general rule is: almost no one cares who they tip. So,
>>>>> even if a particular tip was given to you, fk you, it goes into the pool.
>>>>>
>>>>> Want to jump to insults? Am I part of the conspiracy? Go fkursf. I ain't seen a dime
>>>>> from you, and you're not getting anything else.
>>>>>
>>>>> To all other non-George posters: sorry for responding; Chewtoy out.