|
|
|
|
|
by dheera
2050 days ago
|
|
The difference is this -- let's say your delivery company pays the driver $1 per hour plus "100% of the tips" but guarantees them at least $15 per hour. The reality is that $1 + tips almost never makes it to $15, so they always pay them $15 an hour. If you tip $5, they get $1 + $5 (from you) + $9 (from the company). If you tip $0, they get $1 + $14 (from the company). This is a shitty system designed to get you to offset company expenses. In a well-designed system they should not pay them $1 + 100% of the tips, they should pay them $15 + 100% of the tips and where tips are truly optional. |
|
I think where we may disagree is that my main concern is that the employee makes that minimum threshold, whether paid directly by the customer via a weird quasi-voluntary tax or by the employer who would presumably pass that cost on to the customer. Again, assuming it all gets claimed in income I don't see any shortfalls; it's just a weird convention.
Where I may have a problem is that there seems to be some evidence there is bias in tipping. I've seen some that indicates some race groups/protected classes are tipped less, controlling for service quality, even by their own race/class. If true, it would mean tipping is a de-facto form of discrimination and obviously needs to go away.