Metro Jacksonville

As always Republicans are intent on killing the little guy, even as we barely have a middle class any more. ::)

Economic Security only for the Big Shots!

FEBRUARY 17, 2012
Bill would affect pay for servers and bartenders


Cindy Berg remembers the days when she could pay all her bills from restaurant tips.

Those days are long gone, said Berg, who has been a server for about 20 years. Tips dropped off when the economy tanked.

That's why Berg was outraged when she learned this week that Florida lawmakers are considering a bill that would knock back her current wage of $4.65 an hour to $2.13.

"That's ridiculous," said the 47-year-old, who works at an Italian restaurant in St. Pete Beach. "There was a time where as a server that was the best job you could have. … The money is just getting worse and worse and worse, every season."

http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/the-buzz-florida-politics/content/bill-would-affect-pay-servers-and-bartenders?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+tampabaycom%2Fblogs%2Fbuzz+%28The+Buzz+%7C+tampabay.com%29

Quote"There was a time where as a server that was the best job you could have. … The money is just getting worse and worse and worse, every season."

Kids, stay in school and get an education and do something with your life!

WOW they barely get paid as it is! Thats Eff-ed up

Quote from: mtraininjax on February 17, 2012, 01:06:59 PM

Quote"There was a time where as a server that was the best job you could have. … The money is just getting worse and worse and worse, every season."

Kids, stay in school and get an education and do something with your life!

Most young servers and bartender actually ARE in school, but now have to drop out of school because their pay will no longer be enough--------> hence the dumbing down of America

I really feel sorry for my daughter who is a server while she works on becoming a lawyer.

Probably not a popular opinion, but $4.65 is probably too high of a minimum wage anyway for servers who a) get tipped, and b) likely don't report 100% of those tips anyway. The woman in the article has been a server for 20 years, and for many of those years, as she said, the money was good. If she would have chosen to put even a fraction of that money aside and pursue some higher education or the acquisition of a more lucrative skill, she wouldn't be in the position she is. Actions (or in her case inactions), have consequences. It's not the government's responsiblity to protect someone who chooses to spend 20 years refilling ice tea pitchers and peddling greasy spaghetti. If that's what she loves to do, that's great, but she needs to be realistic in not expecting much in the way of lifestyle.

What she also fails to take into account is the obvious fact that if the minimum wage for servers goes down, the demand for servers will go up. Restaurants have been cutting servers hours left and right, and this change might actually allow them to give some of those hours back. She might make less money per hour, but there is a very good chance that she will have the opportunity to work more hours as a result, and reap the benefit of the extra tips those hours provide.

Servers work hard (I did it for two years myself, at roughly a $2 an hour minimum wage), but no harder than the stock boys at Publix, the gas station attendents, the ditch diggers, the cook at McDonalds, and all of the others who work for the minimum wage.

QuoteI really feel sorry for my daughter who is a server while she works on becoming a lawyer.

so not a lawyer yet, well at least she will learn what she does not want to do. I worked for minimum wage at Prudential Bache securities for a few months, showed me what I did NOT want to do. If Americans will not work for the paltry wages, I am sure undocumenteds will do the work. Alabama's law works so well, NOT!

sorry ken, but I have to disagree....servers made $2.13 an hour when minimum wage for others was around $4....minimum wage is now at least $7.25, and higher in many states (FL is $7.67 and adjusts every year).

Quote from: tufsu1 on February 17, 2012, 02:03:25 PM
sorry ken, but I have to disagree....servers made $2.13 an hour when minimum wage for others was around $4....minimum wage is now at least $7.25, and higher in many states (FL is $7.67 and adjusts every year).

Not exactly, though. Servers made $2.13 per hour plus tips, when minimum wage for others was around $4. If they were making a scant $2 an hour in tips, they were already above minimum wage. And under this new legislation, servers would also be working for $2.13 per house plus tips. This means that servers are earning real minimum wage if they make approximately $5 in tips her hour. That seems a reasonable assumption for most restaurants still in business.

I'm definitely not suggesting that I think servers should work for below minimum wage. I just personally think that the previous minimum wage of $4.65 pretty much guarantees that the average server is making significantly more than minimum wage, which I don't think they should be entitled to by government legislation when other types of workers, working just as hard, are paid at minimum wage.

P.S. It would never happen, but in a perfect world, servers would simply be placed on restaurant payrolls like any other worker. The restaurant could raise food prices by 15-20% to compensate. Servers would be guaranteed at least minimum wage. They'd be forced to pay the same income taxes as the rest of us. And diners can leave the TI-83 at home and just pay for their food instead of worrying about tipping.

P.S.P.S.

The most important aspect was left out of the original article above:

The bill (SB 2106) allows restaurants and other employers to pay their staffs the federal tipped minimum wage of $2.13 an hour instead of Florida's minimum of $4.65, only if companies guarantee that employees would make at least $9.98 an hour, when tips are included. If employees earn less than $9.98 an hour, the company would be responsible for making up the difference.

Less-expensive restaurants have the option to and will likely keep paying $4.65 an hour, because they couldn't guarantee their employees would make enough in tips.

Quote from: KenFSU on February 17, 2012, 02:23:59 PM
P.S. It would never happen, but in a perfect world, servers would simply be placed on restaurant payrolls like any other worker. The restaurant could raise food prices by 15-20% to compensate. Servers would be guaranteed at least minimum wage. They'd be forced to pay the same income taxes as the rest of us. And diners can leave the TI-83 at home and just pay for their food instead of worrying about tipping.

Isn't that how it's done across Europe and like, everywhere else on the planet?

 

Quote from: KenFSU on February 17, 2012, 02:23:59 PM
P.S. It would never happen, but in a perfect world, servers would simply be placed on restaurant payrolls like any other worker. The restaurant could raise food prices by 15-20% to compensate. Servers would be guaranteed at least minimum wage. They'd be forced to pay the same income taxes as the rest of us. And diners can leave the TI-83 at home and just pay for their food instead of worrying about tipping.

That's exactly how they do it in "socialist" Europe.  The servers there are salaried and a service charge is automatically added to your bill.  Most of the servers there are experienced professionals with years of experience.

So KenFSU thinks socialist Europe is a "perfect world"?   ;)

Quote from: Dog Walker on February 17, 2012, 02:44:11 PM

Quote from: KenFSU on February 17, 2012, 02:23:59 PM
P.S. It would never happen, but in a perfect world, servers would simply be placed on restaurant payrolls like any other worker. The restaurant could raise food prices by 15-20% to compensate. Servers would be guaranteed at least minimum wage. They'd be forced to pay the same income taxes as the rest of us. And diners can leave the TI-83 at home and just pay for their food instead of worrying about tipping.

That's exactly how they do it in "socialist" Europe.  The servers there are salaried and a service charge is automatically added to your bill.  Most of the servers there are experienced professionals with years of experience.

So KenFSU things socialist Europe is a "perfect world"?   ;)

:D :D :D :D :D

Quote from: Doctor_K on February 17, 2012, 02:44:01 PM

Quote from: KenFSU on February 17, 2012, 02:23:59 PM
P.S. It would never happen, but in a perfect world, servers would simply be placed on restaurant payrolls like any other worker. The restaurant could raise food prices by 15-20% to compensate. Servers would be guaranteed at least minimum wage. They'd be forced to pay the same income taxes as the rest of us. And diners can leave the TI-83 at home and just pay for their food instead of worrying about tipping.

Isn't that how it's done across Europe and like, everywhere else on the planet?

Yes and for the most part we get far better service.  Bar tending and good waiting jobs here are prized by some. The second they make just minimum wage like any other suck job that is how they will treat it.

Our history tells us by the votes of the republican party...they vote everytime to put more weight on those that already have less and vote to lessen financial burden on the wealthy...the votes tell the truth and those votes will be recorded and remembered and we learn that the fact is that the republicans could care less about the middle and lower classes...this is not news at all...and it will continue to be so until fucking democrats and others stop being so politically correct and get mad....I'm starting to see my party as a bunch of pussy boys  that cant attack and get mean....apparently that's the way to brainwash millions of Americans.

Again I ask though, if restaurants are guaranteeing that their servers will make a starting wage of $9.98 an hour through the combination of a $2.13 an hour minimum wage plus tips, and are legally required to make up the difference if they do not, what is their to be outraged about? Those restaurants who cannot afford to guarantee their servers that much money will continue with the previous $4.65 an hour minimum wage.

I don't see who the big, bad 1% holding back the poor server slaves are.

The small business owners operating a local restaurant or individual franchise, selling food on a razor thin margin yet still agreeing to, by default, pay their starting servers a minimum of $2.50 over the minimum wage, with the opportunity to earn more through good work, simply because of their job classification?

This isn't even about minimum wage.

It's about restaurant owner's contribution toward minimum wage, which is a hugely different matter.

All other things held constant, this should actually help servers as a whole.

If half of that $2.50 in savings is used toward giving more hours to servers (which, as I previously mentioned, has been a real struggle for restaurant owners in the last six years), and the other half is utilized to either increase quality or decrease menu prices, everyone wins. The servers get more hours. Customers go out to eat more, increasing restaurant revenues and perhaps necessating even more servers. Restaurant owners aren't going under to pay $4.65 an hour to servers who are already bringing in $20 an hour in tips.

Who loses?

Quote from: KenFSU on February 17, 2012, 04:36:02 PM
If half of that $2.50 in savings is used toward giving more hours to servers (which, as I previously mentioned, has been a real struggle for restaurant owners in the last six years), and the other half is utilized to either increase quality or decrease menu prices, everyone wins. The servers get more hours. Customers go out to eat more, increasing restaurant revenues and perhaps necessating even more servers. Restaurant owners aren't going under to pay $4.65 an hour to servers who are already bringing in $20 an hour in tips.

Who loses?

Everyone looses. It's a race to the bottom..........exploiting our servers......making them work more hours for the same pay, so they can kiss any type of schooling they might be pursuing goodbye, and stay permanently stuck in an underclass.

Decreasing menu prices, or restaurant owners just pocketing more profits.........what do you think will happen?

I already know.

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 17, 2012, 04:58:58 PM

Quote from: KenFSU on February 17, 2012, 04:36:02 PM
If half of that $2.50 in savings is used toward giving more hours to servers (which, as I previously mentioned, has been a real struggle for restaurant owners in the last six years), and the other half is utilized to either increase quality or decrease menu prices, everyone wins. The servers get more hours. Customers go out to eat more, increasing restaurant revenues and perhaps necessating even more servers. Restaurant owners aren't going under to pay $4.65 an hour to servers who are already bringing in $20 an hour in tips.

Who loses?

Everyone looses. It's a race to the bottom..........exploiting our servers......making them work more hours for the same pay, so they can kiss any type of schooling they might be pursuing goodbye, and stay permanently stuck in an underclass.

Decreasing menu prices, or restaurant owners just pocketing more profits.........what do you think will happen?

I already know.

There's no exploitation going on here. And they wouldn't be working more hours for the same pay. If a restaurant owner has $4.65 that he can afford to spend on table service, with a $4.65 minimum wage, he can afford one waitress for one hour. She will walk away with $4.65, plus tips, which we'll call an additional $10 for simplicity sake. So she'll make $14.65 for the day. If he has the same $4.65 to spend on table service, but minimum wage is halved, he can afford to let the same waitress stay on the floor for two hours. She'll make much more money with choice two ($24.65 instead of $14.65), despite the lower (owner's contribution toward) minimum wage.

Secondly, with schooling, where there is a will, there is a way. If someone lets a $2 decrease in server wages prevent them from completing school and is instead forced into a life of indentured servitude at Applebees, they probably wouldn't have been that successful in the workforce to begin with. There are so many opportunities for financial aid, and scholarships, and payment plans, and city colleges out there that a college education should never be impossible for anyone if they want it badly enough. Some are born into better positions than others, but there's plenty of success to go around if you want it bad enough.

And yes, I do know what would happen.

The greedy owners who don't reinvest will find themselves out of business, and the wise owners who do use any additional revenue to improve quality or decrease prices will remain in business.

Golly, I probably sound like I hate servers. I really don't. Like I said, I did it myself when I was younger. I just think there's this weird sense of entitlement with servers that you don't see with other comparable jobs.

And, as with most issues of minimum wage, I think people tend to forget that the higher you push up minimum wage, the more jobs, hours, and benefits you eliminate in the process.

I'm fully with you on the system being broken, and I'm equally upset about the gross income disparity out there, I just don't think it necessary applies to this specific situation.

Quote from: KenFSU on February 17, 2012, 05:46:57 PM

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 17, 2012, 04:58:58 PM

Quote from: KenFSU on February 17, 2012, 04:36:02 PM
If half of that $2.50 in savings is used toward giving more hours to servers (which, as I previously mentioned, has been a real struggle for restaurant owners in the last six years), and the other half is utilized to either increase quality or decrease menu prices, everyone wins. The servers get more hours. Customers go out to eat more, increasing restaurant revenues and perhaps necessating even more servers. Restaurant owners aren't going under to pay $4.65 an hour to servers who are already bringing in $20 an hour in tips.

Who loses?

Everyone looses. It's a race to the bottom..........exploiting our servers......making them work more hours for the same pay, so they can kiss any type of schooling they might be pursuing goodbye, and stay permanently stuck in an underclass.

Decreasing menu prices, or restaurant owners just pocketing more profits.........what do you think will happen?

I already know.

There's no exploitation going on here. And they wouldn't be working more hours for the same pay. If a restaurant owner has $4.65 that he can afford to spend on table service, with a $4.65 minimum wage, he can afford one waitress for one hour. She will walk away with $4.65, plus tips, which we'll call an additional $10 for simplicity sake. So she'll make $14.65 for the day. If he has the same $4.65 to spend on table service, but minimum wage is halved, he can afford to let the same waitress stay on the floor for two hours. She'll make much more money with choice two ($24.65 instead of $14.65), despite the lower (owner's contribution toward) minimum wage.


And, as with most issues of minimum wage, I think people tend to forget that the higher you push up minimum wage, the more jobs, hours, and benefits you eliminate in the process.

I'm fully with you on the system being broken, and I'm equally upset about the gross income disparity out there, I just don't think it necessary applies to this specific situation.

He or she will be making $24.65 vs $28.65 for the same amount of working............talk about "making work pay"

Republicans make sure work doesn't pay.

Higher min. wage does NOT eliminate jobs..............that is just a Republican talking point. By that token there would hardly be any server jobs in Europe. But here is the American experience with raising the min. wage:

QuoteNot getting by on minimum wage

By Chris Isidore @CNNMoney September 27, 2011: 9:39 AM ET



NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Most experts agree that to get out of the economic slump, we need more jobs.

But another problem is that millions of Americans already have jobs that don't pay very much.

Getting the economy going will require more than just creating a large number of low-wage positions, said Paul Osterman, economics professor at MIT. Raising the minimum wage to get more cash to the working poor is just as crucial, he said.

About 20% of American adults who have jobs are earning only $10.65 an hour or less, according to Osterman's analysis. Even at 40 hours a week, that amounts to less than $22,314, the poverty level for a family of four.

The federal minimum wage currently stands at $7.25 an hour (18 states set their own rates above the federal level, maxing out at $8.67 an hour in Washington State).

But increases have not kept up with inflation. When adjusted for inflation, the highest federal minimum wage was in 1968, when it was the equivalent of $10.38 in today's dollars.

Poverty's home: The suburbs

Osterman, who has written a new book called "Good Jobs America," said gradually raising the federal minimum wage to something close to that level over the next few years would be an important first step to helping the working poor climb out of poverty, while injecting more money into the economy.

"If you give someone making $15,000 a year a $3,000 increase, that's going to make a tremendous difference in their life," he said.

With a greater percentage of the nation's income going to corporate profits than ever before, Osterman argues that businesses can afford a higher minimum wage.

"There needs to be standards in the job market," he said. "If the object is simply to minimize costs, we can use slaves again."

A 'job-killing' policy?

Many economists and small business owners fear that increasing the minimum wage would end up hurting the working poor rather than helping them, because employers who couldn't afford to pay more would be forced to cut staff.

But there's little empirical evidence to suggest that raising the minimum wage causes companies to cut back on hiring, according to Heidi Shierholz, labor economist for the Economic Policy Institute, a liberal think tank.

In fact, one study conducted by Alan Krueger, President Obama's pick for his next chief economic adviser, found little difference in employment levels of fast food industries in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, which have different minimum wages.

"When you look at surveys of businesses, they consistently list weak demand as the key problem holding hiring back. Wages are nowhere near the major concern for employers," Paul Sonn, legal co-director of the National Employment Law Project Action Fund. "They may not realize it but raising the minimum wage would help sales and help them increase their hiring."

http://money.cnn.com/2011/09/27/news/economy/minimum_wage_jobs/index.htm

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 17, 2012, 06:04:27 PM

Quote from: KenFSU on February 17, 2012, 05:46:57 PM

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 17, 2012, 04:58:58 PM

Quote from: KenFSU on February 17, 2012, 04:36:02 PM
If half of that $2.50 in savings is used toward giving more hours to servers (which, as I previously mentioned, has been a real struggle for restaurant owners in the last six years), and the other half is utilized to either increase quality or decrease menu prices, everyone wins. The servers get more hours. Customers go out to eat more, increasing restaurant revenues and perhaps necessating even more servers. Restaurant owners aren't going under to pay $4.65 an hour to servers who are already bringing in $20 an hour in tips.

Who loses?

Everyone looses. It's a race to the bottom..........exploiting our servers......making them work more hours for the same pay, so they can kiss any type of schooling they might be pursuing goodbye, and stay permanently stuck in an underclass.

Decreasing menu prices, or restaurant owners just pocketing more profits.........what do you think will happen?

I already know.

There's no exploitation going on here. And they wouldn't be working more hours for the same pay. If a restaurant owner has $4.65 that he can afford to spend on table service, with a $4.65 minimum wage, he can afford one waitress for one hour. She will walk away with $4.65, plus tips, which we'll call an additional $10 for simplicity sake. So she'll make $14.65 for the day. If he has the same $4.65 to spend on table service, but minimum wage is halved, he can afford to let the same waitress stay on the floor for two hours. She'll make much more money with choice two ($24.65 instead of $14.65), despite the lower (owner's contribution toward) minimum wage.


And, as with most issues of minimum wage, I think people tend to forget that the higher you push up minimum wage, the more jobs, hours, and benefits you eliminate in the process.

I'm fully with you on the system being broken, and I'm equally upset about the gross income disparity out there, I just don't think it necessary applies to this specific situation.

He or she will be making $24.65 vs $28.65 for the same amount of working............talk about "making work pay"

Republicans make sure work doesn't pay.

Higher min. wage does NOT eliminate jobs..............that is just a Republican talking point. By that token there would hardly be any server jobs in Europe. But here is the American experience with raising the min. wage:

QuoteNot getting by on minimum wage

By Chris Isidore @CNNMoney September 27, 2011: 9:39 AM ET



NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Most experts agree that to get out of the economic slump, we need more jobs.

But another problem is that millions of Americans already have jobs that don't pay very much.

Getting the economy going will require more than just creating a large number of low-wage positions, said Paul Osterman, economics professor at MIT. Raising the minimum wage to get more cash to the working poor is just as crucial, he said.

About 20% of American adults who have jobs are earning only $10.65 an hour or less, according to Osterman's analysis. Even at 40 hours a week, that amounts to less than $22,314, the poverty level for a family of four.

The federal minimum wage currently stands at $7.25 an hour (18 states set their own rates above the federal level, maxing out at $8.67 an hour in Washington State).

But increases have not kept up with inflation. When adjusted for inflation, the highest federal minimum wage was in 1968, when it was the equivalent of $10.38 in today's dollars.

Poverty's home: The suburbs

Osterman, who has written a new book called "Good Jobs America," said gradually raising the federal minimum wage to something close to that level over the next few years would be an important first step to helping the working poor climb out of poverty, while injecting more money into the economy.

"If you give someone making $15,000 a year a $3,000 increase, that's going to make a tremendous difference in their life," he said.

With a greater percentage of the nation's income going to corporate profits than ever before, Osterman argues that businesses can afford a higher minimum wage.

"There needs to be standards in the job market," he said. "If the object is simply to minimize costs, we can use slaves again."

A 'job-killing' policy?

Many economists and small business owners fear that increasing the minimum wage would end up hurting the working poor rather than helping them, because employers who couldn't afford to pay more would be forced to cut staff.

But there's little empirical evidence to suggest that raising the minimum wage causes companies to cut back on hiring, according to Heidi Shierholz, labor economist for the Economic Policy Institute, a liberal think tank.

In fact, one study conducted by Alan Krueger, President Obama's pick for his next chief economic adviser, found little difference in employment levels of fast food industries in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, which have different minimum wages.

"When you look at surveys of businesses, they consistently list weak demand as the key problem holding hiring back. Wages are nowhere near the major concern for employers," Paul Sonn, legal co-director of the National Employment Law Project Action Fund. "They may not realize it but raising the minimum wage would help sales and help them increase their hiring."

http://money.cnn.com/2011/09/27/news/economy/minimum_wage_jobs/index.htm

thanks for the explanation. I did not know that raising labor costs does not affect employment. Since that is the case Congress should raise the minimum wage to $75. I mean we need to get money to the poor and employment will remain the same.

Quote from: mtraininjax on February 17, 2012, 01:06:59 PM

Quote"There was a time where as a server that was the best job you could have. … The money is just getting worse and worse and worse, every season."

Kids, stay in school and get an education and do something with your life!

Wow. That's an ignorant statement. Waiting tables or working in a bar usually gives people the opportunity to pursue passions that a lot of people take for granted (being a writer/artist/musician/filmmaker/stripper). It's also an industry a lot of people are passionate about (fortunately for you). So to to tell someone to get an education and do something with their life is just ridiculous. Maybe you waited tables once. Maybe you sucked at it. For some it's a career they enjoy.

As for the declaring tips issue, once upon a time people paid in cash. Now it's all plastic and 100% of your CC tips HAVE to be declared or the business owner will get audited. Uncle Sam wants his cut, your cut, my cut and everyone else's cut. And apparently they want a couple more dollars from the service industry because too many waiters drive Ferraris.

Quote from: KenFSU on February 17, 2012, 01:53:41 PM
Probably not a popular opinion, but $4.65 is probably too high of a minimum wage anyway for servers who a) get tipped, and b) likely don't report 100% of those tips anyway. The woman in the article has been a server for 20 years, and for many of those years, as she said, the money was good. If she would have chosen to put even a fraction of that money aside and pursue some higher education or the acquisition of a more lucrative skill, she wouldn't be in the position she is. Actions (or in her case inactions), have consequences. It's not the government's responsiblity to protect someone who chooses to spend 20 years refilling ice tea pitchers and peddling greasy spaghetti. If that's what she loves to do, that's great, but she needs to be realistic in not expecting much in the way of lifestyle.

What she also fails to take into account is the obvious fact that if the minimum wage for servers goes down, the demand for servers will go up. Restaurants have been cutting servers hours left and right, and this change might actually allow them to give some of those hours back. She might make less money per hour, but there is a very good chance that she will have the opportunity to work more hours as a result, and reap the benefit of the extra tips those hours provide.

Servers work hard (I did it for two years myself, at roughly a $2 an hour minimum wage), but no harder than the stock boys at Publix, the gas station attendents, the ditch diggers, the cook at McDonalds, and all of the others who work for the minimum wage.

"If she would have chosen to put even a fraction of that money aside and pursue some higher education or the acquisition of a more lucrative skill, she wouldn't be in the position she is."

Higher education does not guarantee lucrative employment.

The acquisition of more lucrative skills does not guarantee lucrative employment either.

"It's not the government's responsiblity to protect someone who chooses to spend 20 years refilling ice tea pitchers and peddling greasy spaghetti"

This is a gross generalization of the server profession.

It is indeed the government's job to uphold fair and just payment practices. If it can be shown that this practice is unjust, then it is indeed the government's job to correct it. All workers deserve just pay. No matter what the profession.

Perhaps moving away from tips, and moving towards servers being paid a regular hourly wage is the solution. But that is a different case than the one you are trying to make. Suggesting servers deserve lower wages, because they have chosen the serving profession, is not a strong argument.

At any rate, I think your case will be stronger if you avoid overgeneralizing, and if you avoid characterizing the profession so uncharitably. Both weaken your case.

...also, many hospitality workers work their way on up into management positions, and even go on to open their own places up. Hospitality is a great career. It is not taken very seriously here, but in other cities, like in Miami, Chicago, Seattle, NYC, and so on, it is a quite highly esteemed career, from many perspectives.

thank you purplebike that was perfectly stated.
And I don't know anyone who can really live on minimum wage anyway.

QuoteSecondly, with schooling, where there is a will, there is a way. If someone lets a $2 decrease in server wages prevent them from completing school and is instead forced into a life of indentured servitude at Applebees, they probably wouldn't have been that successful in the workforce to begin with.

On the flipside, if a restaurant owner can't make his business model work without a $2 decrease in server wages and is instead forced into bankruptcy, he probably shouldn't have opened a restaurant in the first place?

Quote from: Brian Siebenschuh on February 18, 2012, 01:26:42 AM

QuoteSecondly, with schooling, where there is a will, there is a way. If someone lets a $2 decrease in server wages prevent them from completing school and is instead forced into a life of indentured servitude at Applebees, they probably wouldn't have been that successful in the workforce to begin with.

On the flipside, if a restaurant owner can't make his business model work without a $2 decrease in server wages and is instead forced into bankruptcy, he probably shouldn't have opened a restaurant in the first place?

So true.

And another thing people forget is that the purchasing power of the minimum wage has already eroded since 1968.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0774473.html

It s at a level of slightly half of what it was in 1968 adjusted for inflation, but Republicans are still intent on lowering it even more!

How low must it get before we term it slave labor?

There is a lot of propaganda that goes along with justifying inhumane conditions in the US:

QuoteLower wages

The terms "employee" or "worker" have often been replaced by "associate". This plays up the allegedly voluntary nature of the interaction, while playing down the subordinate status of the wage laborer, as well as the worker-boss class distinction emphasized by labor movements.[original research?]

Billboards, as well as TV, Internet and newspaper advertisements, consistently show low-wage workers with smiles on their faces, appearing happy.[citation needed]

Job interviews and other data on requirements for lower skilled workers in developed countriesâ€"particularly in the growing service sectorâ€"indicate that the more workers depend on low wages, and the less skilled or desirable their job is, the more employers screen for workers without better employment options and expect them to feign unremunerative motivation. Such screening and feigning may not only contribute to the positive self-image of the employer as someone granting desirable employment, but also signal wage-dependence by indicating the employee's willingness to feign, which in turn may discourage the dissatisfaction normally associated with job-switching or union activity.[citation needed]

At the same time, employers in the service industry have justified unstable, part-time employment and low wages by playing down the importance of service jobs for the lives of the wage laborers (e.g. just temporary before finding something better, student summer jobs etc.).[90][improper synthesis?]

In the early 20th century, "scientific methods of strikebreaking"[91] were devisedâ€"employing a variety of tactics that emphasized how strikes undermined "harmony" and "Americanism".[92]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery

How much longer are we pretending to be a civilized society while we allow all civil protections to be eroded?

Brian - how many times have you ever had to cut a check to 'make-up' the difference of one of your servers making less than minimum wage?

For that matter - any actual resauranteur who cares to respond - Have you EVER had to cut an extra check to a server, above and beyond the $2.13/hr?

If you did, you need to step your game up or fire the server - because obviously something's not working.

Jesus Christ, people.  $80 sales/hour x 10% = $8/hr in tips + $2.13/hr from the restaurant - that's about $10/hr based on a 10% tipping method.  Who fucking tips only 10%???  Canadians?!?   :o  Tea-Drinking Baptist?  Euros?

Serving is a sales position, and the more you sell, the more you make.  If you're relying on the restaurant to help you out to minimum wage, you probably should find another line of work for one of two reasons:  You Suck at Life or the restaurant doesn't have any business; in which case you need to be looking for another job anyhow.

The only thing I see happening is that the restaurants are going to end up doubling their labor cost for the FOH and raise their prices accordingly - NOBODY IS TRULY BENEFITTING FROM THIS BILL EXCEPT FOR THE INSTITUTION OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE WRITING IT - in the form of a greater share of payroll taxes, insurance premiums, etc...  paid by the restaurant. 

Settle down everyone, Faye neglected to add this piece to her story, may not have known she was NOT getting the full story:

QuoteThe bill (SB 2106), approved by a Senate committee Thursday, would allow restaurants and other employers to pay their staffs the federal tipped minimum wage of $2.13 an hour instead of Florida's minimum of $4.65. To qualify, companies would have to guarantee that employees would make at least $9.98 an hour, when tips are included.

Not all businesses can guarantee that their employees make at least $9.98 per hour. Not as big of a deal as first thought.

QuoteWaiting tables or working in a bar usually gives people the opportunity to pursue passions that a lot of people take for granted

I know a lot of maids and hotel housekeepers who cannot speak a lick of English, I am sure they came to America to make cleaning a career. Not saying that there are not career waiters and servers, I just do not know of any, nor do I know of hotel housekeeping staff who said when they were younger, "I want to clean rooms for a living".

Quote from: KenFSU on February 17, 2012, 02:39:46 PM
P.S.P.S.

The most important aspect was left out of the original article above:

The bill (SB 2106) allows restaurants and other employers to pay their staffs the federal tipped minimum wage of $2.13 an hour instead of Florida's minimum of $4.65, only if companies guarantee that employees would make at least $9.98 an hour, when tips are included. If employees earn less than $9.98 an hour, the company would be responsible for making up the difference.

Less-expensive restaurants have the option to and will likely keep paying $4.65 an hour, because they couldn't guarantee their employees would make enough in tips.

If the OP put that in the title or first post, it wouldn't come off as sensationalist as it did. 

I waited tables and bartended for 5 years.  I was paid $2.13/hour (gasp!) and I always made well over minimum wage, very often pulling in $20-$25/hr based on how well I worked.  I honestly do not see the outrage on this (non)issue.

Am I the only one who thinks Faye wouldn't give a hoot about waitresses if her daughter wasn't one?? I understand that it's only temporary while she "works on becoming a lawyer"?  Why was that even worth mentioning, Faye??  Do you think that's not a good profession?  There are millions of waiters and servers all across the country. Is something wrong with them? Why do you feel the need to qualify it by saying it's not an end goal? I'm sorry she's not a mega-mogul, but people have to earn their stripes first.  I have a suspicion that you'd know nothing about that. I'm not trying to call her a huge hypocrite, but I can't help but notice some of the symptoms based on her muckraker-esque posting history.  I preferred when she was feeling sorry for herself for losing to Micah.  Glad Garden Guy found another chance to slam the repubs while not reading any of the actual posts.

The restaurant industry by nature is a difficult one, where passing through costs to the customer is extremely difficult.  Any chance to remove a fixed cost from the equation makes it easier for owners to stay afloat.  Any motivated and capable server should still be able to earn a fine wage despite the reduction in the fixed portion of their income.  A good server doesn't worry about whether or not they'll average minimum wage.  A good server is well beyond $20 an hour.  It's the terrible servers that need to be worried, but if they can't make $5 in tips (which would require adequate service to tables spending a combined total of $25 on food), they have no business serving.  Working on commission is tough, but the american society has made tipping servers all but a requirement anyway.  What other minimum wage employees get extra money for doing their job adequately??  Does the cart pusher at Target get an extra $20 for rounding up the carts???? NO.  Does the retail employee get an extra $100 a night for folding the clothes well at 11 pm after the store closes?? NOPE. 

I hate that Faye even tried to sully our forum with this trash.  If a first time reading happens to click on this thread, I doubt they'll be back.  This is just more people complaining that they aren't a millionaire, but they aren't willing to put in any work to do it themselves.   People love to hate on the rich because they write off all the hard work it took to get there as just dumb luck.  While that may factor into it, luck favors the prepared and the courageous. 

PS- All a server has to do to stay afloat is to do a mediocre job serving Chriswufgator at one of his $200 lunches or $400 dinners.  If I knew his dinner schedule, I may pick up a second job just to catch him once a week.

QuoteI hate that Faye even tried to sully our forum with this trash.  If a first time reading happens to click on this thread, I doubt they'll be back.  This is just more people complaining that they aren't a millionaire, but they aren't willing to put in any work to do it themselves.   People love to hate on the rich because they write off all the hard work it took to get there as just dumb luck.  While that may factor into it, luck favors the prepared and the courageous. 

CZ, did you see that disability payments are now running $200 billion a year and growing rapidly. Some 25% of those unemployed since the beginning of this crisis have somehow qualified for disability payments.  Government transfers now account for 22% of household income.

Some great stuff over at american.com on future debt issues, not to mention results of how the President is handling the debt crisis.

Quote from: Captain Zissou on February 20, 2012, 12:55:30 PM
people have to earn their stripes first. 

Yup, and it builds character to make it harder and harder to earn your stripes. ::)

Who needs economic security anyway?

Why are Republicans intent on making things harder and harder for the little guy, while going overboard with protecting mega-corporations?

How far must this race to the bottom go?

QuoteWhy are Republicans intent on making things harder and harder for the little guy, while going overboard with protecting mega-corporations?

Personally, I hope the Democrats will all the elections in November. I know full well that they cannot tax enough to raise enough capital to bail out the social issues or the health care issues we have coming due by 2014, 2015 or 2016. No one in Congress wants to address the debt issue, that is what should be addressed and made the major issue in America, yet no one does anything about it, neither party. So why not let the Dems show us how to do it. They have done such a great job over the last 4 years, why not 4 more?

QuoteAnd the Left wants to solve the problem by raising taxes on "the rich." We are down well over $1 trillion a year in our deficit. Obama's new plan raise taxes a lot and still has $1.3 trillion in deficits, with very rosy assumptions.

"According to the New York Times, the president's plan to abolish the Bush tax cuts for those making more than $250,000 is expected to bring in merely $0.7 trillion over the next decade, or about 0.4 percent of Gross Domestic Product per year [about $60 billion in the coming years, under optimistic projections that assume higher growth and no recessions]. As a comparison, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that the deficit over the same period is going to be $13 trillion, more than 6 percent of GDP per year.

"The rich in America obviously have lots of money, but there are simply not enough of them to fund the president´s preferred level of spending." (American.com)

I know this is a broad over generalization, but in keeping with the spirit of the previous post, here it goes.  Generally, my friends and myself align predominantly with the republican party.  Most of us are nearly in the middle, but fiscally conservative.  We have no great wealth and make modest incomes. Some of us make below the median wage, some slightly above.  One common idea that we share is that we all believe we will some day make it, we just haven't yet.  We agree that there is much work to be done before we will be wealthy, but it is coming if we continue to work.  None of us consider ourselves the 'little guy', just someone who hasn't built up their nest egg yet.  We think the whole 'little guy' mentality is a good way to get crushed by someone with our mindset. I don't think we are alone in our outlook.

Faye's argument presupposes that no republicans ever lacked vast storehouses of wealth.  She also assumes that those who don't already start with wealth will never acquire it.  I pray that she is not representative of the liberal party as a whole, but if so I pity them.  They will never succeed with such a defeatist outlook.

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 20, 2012, 01:48:51 PM

Quote from: Captain Zissou on February 20, 2012, 12:55:30 PM
people have to earn their stripes first. 

Yup, and it builds character to make it harder and harder to earn your stripes. ::)

You really think people can't accomplish anything, don't you? Why don't you start believing in people, rather than shaking your fist at the people that pass you by?

Quote from: Captain Zissou on February 20, 2012, 02:13:54 PM

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 20, 2012, 01:48:51 PM

Quote from: Captain Zissou on February 20, 2012, 12:55:30 PM
people have to earn their stripes first. 

Yup, and it builds character to make it harder and harder to earn your stripes. ::)

You really think people can't accomplish anything, don't you? Why don't you start believing in people, rather than shaking your fist at the people that pass you by?

I completely believe in extending fair opportunity to people, rather than regressively keep taking away from people's opportunities.

Based on that I do believe that given fair opportunity people can indeed succeed.

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 20, 2012, 02:22:03 PM

Quote from: Captain Zissou on February 20, 2012, 02:13:54 PM

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 20, 2012, 01:48:51 PM

Quote from: Captain Zissou on February 20, 2012, 12:55:30 PM
people have to earn their stripes first. 

Yup, and it builds character to make it harder and harder to earn your stripes. ::)

You really think people can't accomplish anything, don't you? Why don't you start believing in people, rather than shaking your fist at the people that pass you by?

I completely believe in extending fair opportunity to people, rather than regressively keep taking away from people's opportunities.

Based on that I do believe that given fair opportunity people can indeed succeed.

The only people in life that can take away opportunity from you... is yourself.

There's nothing political about that.

Quote from: fieldafm on February 20, 2012, 02:46:36 PM

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 20, 2012, 02:22:03 PM

Quote from: Captain Zissou on February 20, 2012, 02:13:54 PM

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 20, 2012, 01:48:51 PM

Quote from: Captain Zissou on February 20, 2012, 12:55:30 PM
people have to earn their stripes first. 

Yup, and it builds character to make it harder and harder to earn your stripes. ::)

You really think people can't accomplish anything, don't you? Why don't you start believing in people, rather than shaking your fist at the people that pass you by?

I completely believe in extending fair opportunity to people, rather than regressively keep taking away from people's opportunities.

Based on that I do believe that given fair opportunity people can indeed succeed.

The only people in life that can take away opportunity from you... is yourself.

There's nothing political about that.

What happened to the American way of leveling the playing ground..........equal opportunity to all, instead of taking away opportunity.

"The only people in life that can take away opportunity from you... is yourself."

Really? How can someone make such a broad statement?

Let me ask you.......If we didn't have a public education system, how would that be in terms of taking away opportunity to American citizens?

Would you still agree with your silly statement?

It's that personal responsibility crap taken to the extreme.

The Public school system is part of the problem. That is another one of the programs the Dems tried to "help and make fair". That has worked out well.

QuoteWhat happened to the American way of leveling the playing ground..........equal opportunity to all, instead of taking away opportunity.

Leveling the playing ground? If you consume oxygen, you have just as much opportunity as me to do something great with today.

The public school system was built and designed for factory life. Think about it, a regime of classes on the hour, every day, same classes. Factories have changed, so should the school system. Come to think of it, a lot has changed in our country, so should the way DC operates, but it does not change, Why?

Quote from: bill on February 20, 2012, 03:09:31 PM
The Public school system is part of the problem. That is another one of the programs the Dems tried to "help and make fair". That has worked out well.

The public school systems in Europe, Japan and China work really well.

You can take any good concept and make it dysfunctional, that doesn't mean the concept is wrong or does no good.

Quote from: mtraininjax on February 20, 2012, 03:16:11 PM
Come to think of it, a lot has changed in our country, so should the way DC operates, but it does not change, Why?

Publicly financed elections and an end to gerry-mandered districts will restore Democracy and ensure we don't have a 95% re-election rate of incumbents..........stifling any effective Democratic process.

Quote from: mtraininjax on February 20, 2012, 03:16:11 PM
The public school system was built and designed for factory life. Think about it, a regime of classes on the hour, every day, same classes. Factories have changed, so should the school system. Come to think of it, a lot has changed in our country, so should the way DC operates, but it does not change, Why?

Actually, they are moving away from that.  My son is in an 8 course program with certain classes every other day and some classes every day.  The alternating classes are 1:50 with the daily classes being :50.

Ribault Middle - 6th Grade.

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 20, 2012, 03:21:40 PM

Quote from: mtraininjax on February 20, 2012, 03:16:11 PM
Come to think of it, a lot has changed in our country, so should the way DC operates, but it does not change, Why?

Publicly financed elections and an end to gerry-mandered districts will restore Democracy and ensure we don't have a 95% re-election rate of incumbents..........stifling any effective Democratic process.

Wow Faye!  Finally something that all sides should be able to agree on.   Election financing reform and incorporating term limits will improve how our system works.

Are you actually acknowledging that Democrats are capable of exploiting our system in the same ways you accuse the evil Republicans of?  If you are it would be a refreshing change from your usual mantra.

Furthermore on the topic of gerrymandering, I'm still curious how the most recent redistricting allowed Corrine Brown to keep her gerrymandered district ensuring she continues to stay in office funding her family and cronies.  From what I understand of the rules and the recent voter approved amendment regarding redistricting  the districts were to be compact and follow logical geographic boundaries.   I guess I need to do more reading as her district is neither.

IMO we have to hold both sides accountable and not turn a blind eye to their incompetence of running this country.  The goal of the RNC and DNC is to polarize both sides so that the middle will not be able to garner enough support to remove them from power.  They can take turns being in charge and can exploit the system in order to pander to fund their special interests.   There is too much money behind the National Committees and until we stop the $$$ flow they will continue to choose what candidates the voters can choose from.

A lot of grand ideas being thrown about, but as the subject line of the thread suggests - is it right, in this day and age, for TGI Fridays or Applebee's or The Olive Garden to cut their servers' hourly wage in half?  Down to TWO DOLLARS AN HOUR?  I'm gonna say no.

Quote from: Brian Siebenschuh on February 21, 2012, 02:42:23 AM
A lot of grand ideas being thrown about, but as the subject line of the thread suggests - is it right, in this day and age, for TGI Fridays or Applebee's or The Olive Garden to cut their servers' hourly wage in half?  Down to TWO DOLLARS AN HOUR?  I'm gonna say no.

Is it right for the government to walk into a private business and tell the owner that minimum wage laws do not apply to their servers, and that they must guarantee them a $2.50 premium over minimum wage or else make up the difference themselves?

I'm gonna say no.

Servers are free to make how ever much their hard work and sales acumen allows, but it is patently ridiculous to insist that servers shouldn't be bound by the same wage floor as every other worker out there.

Do they do something particularly admirable that should guarantee them a $2.50 higher minimum wage than janitors, or garbage men, or ditch diggers, or fast food workers?

Quote from: KenFSU on February 21, 2012, 08:12:44 AM

Quote from: Brian Siebenschuh on February 21, 2012, 02:42:23 AM
A lot of grand ideas being thrown about, but as the subject line of the thread suggests - is it right, in this day and age, for TGI Fridays or Applebee's or The Olive Garden to cut their servers' hourly wage in half?  Down to TWO DOLLARS AN HOUR?  I'm gonna say no.

Is it right for the government to walk into a private business and tell the owner that minimum wage laws do not apply to their servers, and that they must guarantee them a $2.50 premium over minimum wage or else make up the difference themselves?

So let's keep the base at $4.65 rather than lowering it to $2.13. No need to slash the min. wage for servers to 1985 levels and then pretend there is some guarantee of $9.98 per hour  ::)

Why would Corporate Restaurant owners want this bill if it wasn't a guaranteed way to increase their profits at the expense of the workers? People of Faith are against this bill also because of its inhumane consequences.

Just leave the servers' min. wage at $4.65 alreay instead of cutting it by $2.50 to help corporate restaurants.

Quote
Florida Servers Could Soon Earn 1985 Minimum Wage

Under SB 2106, a restaurant servers wage could go from $4.65/hr to $2.13/hr


By Christina Hernandez

|  Monday, Feb 20, 2012  |  Updated 10:44 PM EST

The bill to slash tipped employees minimum wage was requested by the Florida Restaurant and Lodging Association. According to the South Florida AFL-CIO, many corporate restaurants, like the Outback Steakhouse, like the idea.

Even though it would save restaurants money, the manager of Sal's Italian Ristorante in Miramar said it doesn't matter. His employees work hard and deserve more.

"She's over here running around like crazy. She doesn't know what to do with herself and she's only getting paid $4," Christian Aguilar said about Santana. "If it was up to me, I'd really higher her hourly wage to $7 or something because she's just running around all day."

Restaurants would have to promise that employees would make at least $9.98 an hour with tips to qualify for the new wage. That's something most servers say is impossible to predict in the food business.

"I have tables that will spend like $50 or more and not leave a penny," Santana said.

The bill has already passed one Senate committee, but still has many more steps to go. If approved, it would go into effect in July.

Tipped workers, labor, community, and faith leaders will hold a rally outside the Miami Lakes Outback Steakhouse to urge the restaurant, and other corporate chains, to abandon their support of SB 2106. The rally will begin at 3 p.m. at 15490 NW 77th Court.

http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/politics/Florida-servers-could-soon-earn-1985-minimum-wage-139774843.html

So under current minimum wage laws... if I work a 2 hour lunch shift and get NO tips or have NO customers... I make $9.30.

Under the new rules... same shift and same circumstance I make $19.96.

What am I missing?

Quote from: BridgeTroll on February 21, 2012, 10:06:39 AM
So under current minimum wage laws... if I work a 2 hour lunch shift and get NO tips or have NO customers... I make $9.30.

Under the new rules... same shift and same circumstance I make $19.96.

What am I missing?

NO, potentially you'd make $4.26 under the new rules rather than $9.30 under the old rules.

QuoteRestaurants would have to promise that employees would make at least $9.98 an hour with tips to qualify for the new wage. That's something most servers say is impossible to predict in the food business.

Promises, promises.........who is going to police this?

Another 4 years of Obama and we will be wishing for days when we complained about these types of laws. The labor issues are out of control and we have brought forth a new era of the lawyer, Chuck and Eddie will be in your minds while you sleep soon!

yup, we should just reduce laborers to nothing at all........... just like Florida's legislature wants waiters and bartenders to make just $2.13 for an hour of their time. These waiters already get paid way toooo much in comparison to the CEOs of the restaurant chains.

Why even bother having fair wages! The greater the wage gap the better. snark

"Republicans will work hard to continue to increase the wage gap," that should definitely be their slogan.

Oh, and they should add: "the more we squeeze you, the better it is for you, cause it toughens you up"

inhumane and barbaric!

A banker left a 1% tip in defiance of 'the 99%' at a Newport Beach restaurant the other week, according to his dining companion and underling who snapped a photo of the receipt and posted it to his blog, Future Ex Banker. (Update: the blog is now offline.)

In posting the photo, the employee gave some background on his boss and the receipt:

(http://i.huffpost.com/gen/511964/BANKER-1-PERCENT-TIP-RECEIPT.jpg)

Mention the “99%” in my boss’ presence and feel his wrath. So proudly does he wear his 1% badge of honor that he tips exactly 1% every time he feels the server doesn’t sufficiently bow down to his Holiness. Oh, and he always makes sure to include a “tip” of his own.

The "tip" of his own in this case was to tell the server to "get a real job." Pleasant.




The whistleblower's Future Ex-Banker blog (now offline) included additional background on his boss, and some insight into why he would out his gross behavior, likely resulting in an employment status of current ex-banker:

I work in the corporate office of a major bank for a boss who represents everything wrong with the financial industry: blatant disregard and outright contempt for everyone and everything he deems beneath him. On top of that, he’s a complete and utter tool. At the same time, I’m still cashing paychecks, an admittedly willingâ€"albeit reluctantâ€"cog in the wheel of this increasingly ugly industry, so I’ve created this blog as a confessional of sorts. It won’t entirely clear my conscience, but hopefully it’ll help. I’m sure I’ll get fired eventually. Until then, enjoy.

UPDATE: In a conversation with the Huffington Post, Mike Wilcox, the vice president of operations for True Food Kitchen, gave some insight into how the company was treating the incident since the receipt began receiving attention online. Wilcox said that the restaurant was "absolutely" treating the receipt as real, but to confirm its authenticity for certain, they were in the process of tracking down both the physical receipt at the restaurant and the computer-generated copy in their credit card system.

"The first thing we're going to do is to make sure the server is taken care of," Wilcox said, "and make sure the server wasn't treated badly or insufficiently tipped." He explained that they would be asking Breanna, the server named on the receipt, if she recalled the table and how her service was. "If her service was up to the level" they assume their employees would deliver, Wilcox said, "they would do everything they can to make it up to her somehow." Referring to online comments posted about the receipt, Wilcox remarked, "people are asking us to ban the person from the restaurant -- if more information came through on who the person is I first would love to talk to him."

UPDATE II: As many have noted, a true 1% tip correctly rounded to the nearest penny would have been $1.34, leaving this tip just shy of that threshold, mathematically speaking.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/24/banker-1-percent-tip-receipt_n_1299280.html

Can we be sure that wasn't ChriswUF?   :D  (Although he does tip 20% even after griping about an $18 grilled cheese sandwich.)

The tab was over $100.  It was during lunch time.  There's stemware on the table.  He was at a restaurant that offers free WIFI.....

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 25, 2012, 12:49:37 AM
yup, we should just reduce laborers to nothing at all........... just like Florida's legislature wants waiters and bartenders to make just $2.13 for an hour of their time.

Statements like this are just so ludicrously dishonest.

This bill guarantees, by law, that servers will make at least $10 an hour.

Period.

It's a flat-out lie to keep saying that they will only be making $2.13 an hour.

If you don't think the guarantee will be properly policed, your problem should be with the Department of Labor, not with the restaurants themselves.

And, come on, a single businessman shorted a single waitress $17 on a lunch gratuity.

Rude and misplaced? Absolutely.

"Inhumane and barbaric"? Some children in Darfur might disagree.

It's not like this is indicative of society as a whole though, and let's face it, without that "1%", these servers aren't going to be getting a percentage of many $130 lunches.

Quote from: KenFSU on February 25, 2012, 07:48:06 PM

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 25, 2012, 12:49:37 AM
yup, we should just reduce laborers to nothing at all........... just like Florida's legislature wants waiters and bartenders to make just $2.13 for an hour of their time.

Statements like this are just so ludicrously dishonest.

This bill guarantees, by law, that servers will make at least $10 an hour.

Period.

It's a flat-out lie to keep saying that they will only be making $2.13 an hour.

If you don't think the guarantee will be properly policed, your problem should be with the Department of Labor, not with the restaurants themselves.

And, come on, a single businessman shorted a single waitress $17 on a lunch gratuity.

Rude and misplaced? Absolutely.

"Inhumane and barbaric"? Some children in Darfur might disagree.

It's not like this is indicative of society as a whole though, and let's face it, without that "1%", these servers aren't going to be getting a percentage of many $130 lunches.

That IS the problem..............it's becoming soooo indicative of America today.

No oversight or enforcements of rules in place, AND milking the workers out of every penny.

Ever read Barbara Ehrenreich's Nickel and Dimed?

http://www.amazon.com/Nickel-Dimed-Not-Getting-America/dp/0805063897

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 25, 2012, 10:58:29 PM
That IS the problem..............it's becoming soooo indicative of America today.

I'm going to say the problem is there's entirely too much complaining combined with an extra large side of apathy about problems that you have control over when you should be doing your part to fix them.  The picture below is NORMAL for me and most of the people I go out with because we weren't born with a silver spoon in our ass and most of the people I know have been in the industry and know for a fact that the $4+ and hour is fine, but we weren't doing badly at $2.13 either.*  I bet, Faye, that you're the typical 10-15 percenter, but prove us wrong and show us.  Put up or shut up!  If it's so "....inhumane and barbaric...." I'd like to see you make a difference and pay it forward instead of griping on behalf of an industry that you have ZERO knowledge about.

BTW, this was a to-go order, and no, I didn't get any change back.

(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7178/6930096339_bbc537fb9e_z.jpg)

*It's a rant, so I should be allowed a run-on sentence by the grammar patrol.   :P

Here is what puzzles me about our current political situation.  When we are talking about high-income earners, it is called 'class warfare,' but it is fair game to go after working people and labor unions?  We talk about 'shared sacrifice,' but we seem to only demand it from those who cannot afford to send high-priced lobbyists to wine and dine our friends in Tallahassee and Washington.  I am not some crazy-eyed socialist from Cuba, but a level-headed person who truly wants to know why we are treating working Americans like they are the new welfare queens.  I do not mind supply side economics as long as we are not turning 'trickle down' into 'trickle on people' economics....

Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on February 25, 2012, 11:26:50 PM

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 25, 2012, 10:58:29 PM
That IS the problem..............it's becoming soooo indicative of America today.

I'm going to say the problem is too much fucking bitching about problems and not enough doing your part to fix them. 

No, the problem is that Republicans continuously want to make it harder for the "little guy" while pampering the "big guy."

We might be doing the right thing personally..........as "Republicans" really love to use individual anecdotes, while continuing to condone systemic problems that are repeatedly made worse by the next Republican take away.

They always complain about Democrats and supposed hand-outs, now pejoritivly called "entitlements."

http://theglobalherald.com/the-myth-of-entitlements-and-class-warfare/25922/

Republicans themselves are masters at the take-away's, and then they pretend it's for our own good  ::)

They are robbing the poor and middle class to feed "the rich."

The 99% in servitude to the 1%..........it's your typical 3rd world scenario.

Jaxson just posted something while I as putting together my reply.

And as much as everyone here might think I'm ultra-liberal............when I lived in Europe I was a "Republican"............I voted for the VVD, which stands for For Freedom and Democracy.

Even in the US I have been a Republican in earlier years.........but things have gotten so much out of hand in the US that is run by the corporations and their lobbyists, that I cannot sit idly by and support a party that continues to make things worse for the average American.

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 26, 2012, 09:43:08 AM

Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on February 25, 2012, 11:26:50 PM

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 25, 2012, 10:58:29 PM
That IS the problem..............it's becoming soooo indicative of America today.

I'm going to say the problem is too much fucking bitching about problems and not enough doing your part to fix them. 

And as much as everyone here might think I'm ultra-liberal............when I lived in Europe I was a "Republican"............I voted for the VVD, which stands for For Freedom and Democracy.

Even in the US I have been a Republican in earlier years.........but things have gotten so much out of hand in the US that is run by the corporations and their lobbyists, that I cannot sit idly by and support a party that continues to make things worse for the average American.

Does that mean we are losing you??  :'(

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 26, 2012, 09:43:08 AM

Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on February 25, 2012, 11:26:50 PM

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 25, 2012, 10:58:29 PM
That IS the problem..............it's becoming soooo indicative of America today.

I'm going to say the problem is too much fucking bitching about problems and not enough doing your part to fix them. 

No, the problem is that Republicans continuously want to make it harder for the "little guy" while pampering the "big guy."

We might be doing the right thing personally..........as "Republicans" really love to use individual anecdotes, while continuing to condone systemic problems that are repeatedly made worse by the next Republican take away.

They always complain about Democrats and supposed hand-outs, now pejoritivly called "entitlements."

http://theglobalherald.com/the-myth-of-entitlements-and-class-warfare/25922/

Republicans themselves are masters at the take-away's, and then they pretend it's for our own good  ::)

They are robbing the poor and middle class to feed "the rich."

The 99% in servitude to the 1%..........it's your typical 3rd world scenario.

Jaxson just posted something while I as putting together my reply.

And as much as everyone here might think I'm ultra-liberal............when I lived in Europe I was a "Republican"............I voted for the VVD, which stands for For Freedom and Democracy.

Even in the US I have been a Republican in earlier years.........but things have gotten so much out of hand in the US that is run by the corporations and their lobbyists, that I cannot sit idly by and support a party that continues to make things worse for the average American.

Actually since 1960 the three branches of of the govt have been held by Dems 62% of the time. So the blame is not on the 1% or the 38% but squarely on the 62%.

Quote from: bill on February 26, 2012, 12:52:47 PM

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 26, 2012, 09:43:08 AM

Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on February 25, 2012, 11:26:50 PM

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 25, 2012, 10:58:29 PM
That IS the problem..............it's becoming soooo indicative of America today.

I'm going to say the problem is too much fucking bitching about problems and not enough doing your part to fix them. 

No, the problem is that Republicans continuously want to make it harder for the "little guy" while pampering the "big guy."

We might be doing the right thing personally..........as "Republicans" really love to use individual anecdotes, while continuing to condone systemic problems that are repeatedly made worse by the next Republican take away.

They always complain about Democrats and supposed hand-outs, now pejoritivly called "entitlements."

http://theglobalherald.com/the-myth-of-entitlements-and-class-warfare/25922/

Republicans themselves are masters at the take-away's, and then they pretend it's for our own good  ::)

They are robbing the poor and middle class to feed "the rich."

The 99% in servitude to the 1%..........it's your typical 3rd world scenario.

Jaxson just posted something while I as putting together my reply.

And as much as everyone here might think I'm ultra-liberal............when I lived in Europe I was a "Republican"............I voted for the VVD, which stands for For Freedom and Democracy.

Even in the US I have been a Republican in earlier years.........but things have gotten so much out of hand in the US that is run by the corporations and their lobbyists, that I cannot sit idly by and support a party that continues to make things worse for the average American.

Actually since 1960 the three branches of of the govt have been held by Dems 62% of the time. So the blame is not on the 1% or the 38% but squarely on the 62%.

No, the premise of doing everything based on spply-side economics since 1980 is what killed America as we knew it.

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 26, 2012, 12:57:21 PM

Quote from: bill on February 26, 2012, 12:52:47 PM

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 26, 2012, 09:43:08 AM

Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on February 25, 2012, 11:26:50 PM

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 25, 2012, 10:58:29 PM
That IS the problem..............it's becoming soooo indicative of America today.

I'm going to say the problem is too much fucking bitching about problems and not enough doing your part to fix them. 

True liberal logic. The guys you put in for 50 years have seriously effed up the entire system and when it starts breaking down blame the minority. But since you have screwed up everything so badly we are going to give you health care so you can fuck that up. But we will go back and blame Reps anyway.
No, the problem is that Republicans continuously want to make it harder for the "little guy" while pampering the "big guy."

We might be doing the right thing personally..........as "Republicans" really love to use individual anecdotes, while continuing to condone systemic problems that are repeatedly made worse by the next Republican take away.

They always complain about Democrats and supposed hand-outs, now pejoritivly called "entitlements."

http://theglobalherald.com/the-myth-of-entitlements-and-class-warfare/25922/

Republicans themselves are masters at the take-away's, and then they pretend it's for our own good  ::)

They are robbing the poor and middle class to feed "the rich."

The 99% in servitude to the 1%..........it's your typical 3rd world scenario.

Jaxson just posted something while I as putting together my reply.

And as much as everyone here might think I'm ultra-liberal............when I lived in Europe I was a "Republican"............I voted for the VVD, which stands for For Freedom and Democracy.

Even in the US I have been a Republican in earlier years.........but things have gotten so much out of hand in the US that is run by the corporations and their lobbyists, that I cannot sit idly by and support a party that continues to make things worse for the average American.

Actually since 1960 the three branches of of the govt have been held by Dems 62% of the time. So the blame is not on the 1% or the 38% but squarely on the 62%.

No, the premise of doing everything based on spply-side economics since 1980 is what killed America as we knew it.

You're still missing the point. 

Hourly pay for servers is only a fraction of their income, and if you ask them, it's not an item of contention.  The majority doesn't care if they make $4 or $2 (of course they prefer $4, who wouldnt') because the $200 - $300 they walk out of the door with each night is what they've earned.  The check every two weeks is more like a bonus.  And sure, there are slow nights that they may only make $75-$80 in tips, but if you dig deeper, it's a slow night, they're probably only at work for 4-5 hours and $15/hr isn't horrible. 

You have to realize that they are in a commision driven industry, and you're limiting their potential by trying to apply the euro model here.  Essentially, you're guaranteeing them money, but you're also limiting their potential - yet you, as a business owner / customer, are going to expect the same level of service.  Really?  If I already know that I'm guaranteed to ONLY getting 17% of your bill, then why do I really give a shit about your tea being full?  I want you to hurry up and leave so the next table of 17% can sit down. 

Servers are salespeople - if you limit their income, you take away their incentive to sell. 

Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on February 26, 2012, 01:39:37 PM
You're still missing the point. 

Hourly pay for servers is only a fraction of their income, and if you ask them, it's not an item of contention.  The majority doesn't care if they make $4 or $2 (of course they prefer $4, who wouldnt') because the $200 - $300 they walk out of the door with each night is what they've earned.  The check every two weeks is more like a bonus.  And sure, there are slow nights that they may only make $75-$80 in tips, but if you dig deeper, it's a slow night, they're probably only at work for 4-5 hours and $15/hr isn't horrible. 

You have to realize that they are in a commision driven industry, and you're limiting their potential by trying to apply the euro model here.  Essentially, you're guaranteeing them money, but you're also limiting their potential - yet you, as a business owner / customer, are going to expect the same level of service.  Really?  If I already know that I'm guaranteed to ONLY getting 17% of your bill, then why do I really give a shit about your tea being full?  I want you to hurry up and leave so the next table of 17% can sit down. 

Servers are salespeople - if you limit their income, you take away their incentive to sell. 

"...the $200 - $300 they walk out of the door with each night..."
"...there are slow nights that they may only make $75-$80..."

I'm curious about these numbers. Can you share your sources?

It is not the case that all servers make at least 75 dollars on a slow shift. Maybe some do, sometimes. But certainly not all, all the time.

I made far less than that during slow shifts, when I waited tables during the summers, just five years ago. Just two months ago I waited tables during winter break, at a high volume restaurant in South Beach, hoping to supplement the horrible pay that I make as an adjunct instructor (and no health insurance, mind you). I made about 50 bucks in tips during each of the two 6 hour lunch shifts I worked. I thought it would be a lot more. That about paid for my gas to drive down there. I also know full time servers that make far less than 75 bucks on some slow shifts.

There's also the matter of hours worked.

Suppose a server does make 80 dollars on a slow shift. There's a big difference between making that during a 4 hour lunch shift (typically 11 am - 4 or 5 pm) versus making that during an evening shift, which tends to run longer--sometimes 8 hours or even more if it's a late night place.

So, depending on how long the shift is, that 80 dollars could be considered pretty good...or pretty damn bad.

Hospitality work and teaching college have two very unfortunate things in common. Too many people think individuals employed in these positions make a lot more money than they actually do. *Some* servers, bartenders, and college professors (some tenured ones) make a very good living. Many do not.

Whether this is right or wrong that they make such crap money sometimes is not my main point. My main point is this: it's important to get the numbers straight.

Sources
http://chronicle.com/article/Accidental-Activist-Collects/130854/

Quote from: Purplebike on February 26, 2012, 03:20:43 PM
I'm curious about these numbers. Can you share your sources?

I have a few different groups of people that I hang out with and most are in the service industry, ranging from casual to fine dining.  I have been in the SI on and off for over a decade, so I also have first hand knowledge, and my experience ranged as well.  I will say, that I don't know of anyone that works in a diner-style establishment, i.e. Waffle House, but I can make a fairly educated guess based on thier volume.

Quote from: Purplebike on February 26, 2012, 03:20:43 PM
It is not the case that all servers make at least 75 dollars on a slow shift. Maybe some do, sometimes. But certainly not all, all the time.

I made far less than that during slow shifts, when I waited tables during the summers, just five years ago. Just two months ago I waited tables during winter break, at a high volume restaurant in South Beach, hoping to supplement the horrible pay that I make as an adjunct instructor (and no health insurance, mind you). I made about 50 bucks in tips during each of the two 6 hour lunch shifts I worked. I thought it would be a lot more. That about paid for my gas to drive down there. I also know full time servers that make far less than 75 bucks on some slow shifts.

South Beach is a bad example to draw your experience from.  It is an area that is 'stuck'.  Most restauants there already automatically grat the customers due to the amount of international travelers that come through town.  The restaurants that don't.... well, you're hoping that the group of 20 somethings, travelling from Spain, realize that tipping isn't automatic over here and that 10% isn't considered typical.   You're also dealing with touristy environment, so the majority (assumption) of the diners are there while in town, and really don't care because chances are, they'll never see you again.  I've been down there, and I wouldn't want to work there, and yet, I can also say that I've never been WOWed by the service anytime I've eaten there, either.

Quote from: Purplebike on February 26, 2012, 03:20:43 PM
There's also the matter of hours worked.

Suppose a server does make 80 dollars on a slow shift. There's a big difference between making that during a 4 hour lunch shift (typically 11 am - 4 or 5 pm) versus making that during an evening shift, which tends to run longer--sometimes 8 hours or even more if it's a late night place.

So, depending on how long the shift is, that 80 dollars could be considered pretty good...or pretty damn bad.

The only ones that I know of working longer shifts are the shift leaders / head servers / working managers, whatever you want to call them, or people who have taken the next step - they typically also get paid a different hourly rate than the run-of-the mill worker as an incentive to do a better job and move their way up through the company.  My last real job serving, it was Rio Bravo, so it was a while back, but I was scheduled a lead shift Thursday - Sunday, and my regular hourly rate then was $3.50 (50% more than the rest of floor, $2.13, but as I said, that didn't matter).  At 11:00 I clocked out as a server and back in as a floor manager at $9.50.   There is room for advancement if one seeks it.  It was also my job to make sure we had enough servers on the floor and to send them home when they weren't needed.  Typically on a busy night you have extra people that tend to only work a short shift - volume.  If you were the new guy and you didn't really apply yourself, you found yourself working tues. / wed / lunch shifts / bad sections and getting cut early.  It's a different world, as you've found out, but if you push, you can get what you need.

Quote from: Purplebike on February 26, 2012, 03:20:43 PM
Hospitality work and teaching college have two very unfortunate things in common. Too many people think individuals employed in these positions make a lot more money than they actually do. *Some* servers, bartenders, and college professors (some tenured ones) make a very good living. Many do not.

Whether this is right or wrong that they make such crap money sometimes is not my main point. My main point is this: it's important to get the numbers straight.

Sources
http://chronicle.com/article/Accidental-Activist-Collects/130854/

Sure.  And my numbers are based on what I see around me today.  My main point is that server pay isn't regulated by the government, it's regulated by individuals who dine out.  Faye seems to think that the evil repubs are out to hurt the workers when, to someone who's around it daily, it doesn't mean a hill of beans.  I'm sorry, life's not fair, and the people who are unable or unwilling to better themselves shouldn't get 'bailed out' because they suck at life.  You said that you were a server for two shifts and only made about $50 per.  How were the others doing?  The one's who had been there for months and years?   Seems a fair question.

I just think this discussion has gotten too complicated.  Regardless of whether a given server makes $20K a year or $100K a year under the current scenario, if they work a full 40 hour week, they're going to make about $2,000 less annually if the bill goes through. 

And I don't know anybody, regardless of income level, that would be cheerful about a $2,000 a year paycut.

Quote from: Purplebike on February 26, 2012, 03:20:43 PM

Hospitality work and teaching college have two very unfortunate things in common. Too many people think individuals employed in these positions make a lot more money than they actually do. *Some* servers, bartenders, and college professors (some tenured ones) make a very good living. Many do not.

Whether this is right or wrong that they make such crap money sometimes is not my main point. My main point is this: it's important to get the numbers straight.

Sources
http://chronicle.com/article/Accidental-Activist-Collects/130854/

Thank you for your contribution purplebike.

You just know how it is with Republicans............if you feel you're not making enough...........you are just not working hard enough.

I see that you are working three adjunct instructor jobs at the same time..........without healthcare coverage.

When I lived in GA, I too worked two adjunct instructor jobs at the same time, and worked as a pharmacy tech at Walmart at night.

Perimeter College and Brenau University teaching Economics.

It was grueling, what with raising 5 kids on my own of which one was and still is a quadriplegic.

But as Republicans say........we should all suffer and work the flesh off our bones, because that's the tough luck society they want for the majority of us.

Quote from: Brian Siebenschuh on February 26, 2012, 04:38:24 PM
I just think this discussion has gotten too complicated.  Regardless of whether a given server makes $20K a year or $100K a year under the current scenario, if they work a full 40 hour week, they're going to make about $2,000 less annually if the bill goes through. 

And I don't know anybody, regardless of income level, that would be cheerful about a $2,000 a year paycut.

Great bottomline Brian.

Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on February 26, 2012, 04:03:42 PM

Quote from: Purplebike on February 26, 2012, 03:20:43 PM
I'm curious about these numbers. Can you share your sources?

I have a few different groups of people that I hang out with and most are in the service industry, ranging from casual to fine dining.  I have been in the SI on and off for over a decade, so I also have first hand knowledge, and my experience ranged as well.  I will say, that I don't know of anyone that works in a diner-style establishment, i.e. Waffle House, but I can make a fairly educated guess based on thier volume.

Quote from: Purplebike on February 26, 2012, 03:20:43 PM
It is not the case that all servers make at least 75 dollars on a slow shift. Maybe some do, sometimes. But certainly not all, all the time.

I made far less than that during slow shifts, when I waited tables during the summers, just five years ago. Just two months ago I waited tables during winter break, at a high volume restaurant in South Beach, hoping to supplement the horrible pay that I make as an adjunct instructor (and no health insurance, mind you). I made about 50 bucks in tips during each of the two 6 hour lunch shifts I worked. I thought it would be a lot more. That about paid for my gas to drive down there. I also know full time servers that make far less than 75 bucks on some slow shifts.

South Beach is a bad example to draw your experience from.  It is an area that is 'stuck'.  Most restauants there already automatically grat the customers due to the amount of international travelers that come through town.  The restaurants that don't.... well, you're hoping that the group of 20 somethings, travelling from Spain, realize that tipping isn't automatic over here and that 10% isn't considered typical.   You're also dealing with touristy environment, so the majority (assumption) of the diners are there while in town, and really don't care because chances are, they'll never see you again.  I've been down there, and I wouldn't want to work there, and yet, I can also say that I've never been WOWed by the service anytime I've eaten there, either.

Quote from: Purplebike on February 26, 2012, 03:20:43 PM
There's also the matter of hours worked.

Suppose a server does make 80 dollars on a slow shift. There's a big difference between making that during a 4 hour lunch shift (typically 11 am - 4 or 5 pm) versus making that during an evening shift, which tends to run longer--sometimes 8 hours or even more if it's a late night place.

So, depending on how long the shift is, that 80 dollars could be considered pretty good...or pretty damn bad.

The only ones that I know of working longer shifts are the shift leaders / head servers / working managers, whatever you want to call them, or people who have taken the next step - they typically also get paid a different hourly rate than the run-of-the mill worker as an incentive to do a better job and move their way up through the company.  My last real job serving, it was Rio Bravo, so it was a while back, but I was scheduled a lead shift Thursday - Sunday, and my regular hourly rate then was $3.50 (50% more than the rest of floor, $2.13, but as I said, that didn't matter).  At 11:00 I clocked out as a server and back in as a floor manager at $9.50.   There is room for advancement if one seeks it.  It was also my job to make sure we had enough servers on the floor and to send them home when they weren't needed.  Typically on a busy night you have extra people that tend to only work a short shift - volume.  If you were the new guy and you didn't really apply yourself, you found yourself working tues. / wed / lunch shifts / bad sections and getting cut early.  It's a different world, as you've found out, but if you push, you can get what you need.

Quote from: Purplebike on February 26, 2012, 03:20:43 PM
Hospitality work and teaching college have two very unfortunate things in common. Too many people think individuals employed in these positions make a lot more money than they actually do. *Some* servers, bartenders, and college professors (some tenured ones) make a very good living. Many do not.

Whether this is right or wrong that they make such crap money sometimes is not my main point. My main point is this: it's important to get the numbers straight.

Sources
http://chronicle.com/article/Accidental-Activist-Collects/130854/

Sure.  And my numbers are based on what I see around me today.  My main point is that server pay isn't regulated by the government, it's regulated by individuals who dine out.  Faye seems to think that the evil repubs are out to hurt the workers when, to someone who's around it daily, it doesn't mean a hill of beans.  I'm sorry, life's not fair, and the people who are unable or unwilling to better themselves shouldn't get 'bailed out' because they suck at life.  You said that you were a server for two shifts and only made about $50 per.  How were the others doing?  The one's who had been there for months and years?   Seems a fair question.

Thanks for taking the time to reply to my post. If I understand your correctly, you mean to illustrate and argue that some make good money, some do not. And that those who move up into management positions tend to make better money. I agree with both claims.

My only concern with some of the claims in your previous post was that they painted a rosier picture of many servers' experiences than is actually the case. 

Your thoughts?

"I'm sorry, life's not fair, and the people who are unable or unwilling to better themselves shouldn't get 'bailed out' because they suck at life."

Suck at life? Really? :(

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 26, 2012, 04:42:33 PM

Quote from: Purplebike on February 26, 2012, 03:20:43 PM

Hospitality work and teaching college have two very unfortunate things in common. Too many people think individuals employed in these positions make a lot more money than they actually do. *Some* servers, bartenders, and college professors (some tenured ones) make a very good living. Many do not.

Whether this is right or wrong that they make such crap money sometimes is not my main point. My main point is this: it's important to get the numbers straight.

Sources
http://chronicle.com/article/Accidental-Activist-Collects/130854/

Thank you for your contribution purplebike.

You just know how it is with Republicans............if you feel you're not making enough...........you are just not working hard enough.

I see that you are working three adjunct instructor jobs at the same time..........without healthcare coverage.

When I lived in GA, I too worked two adjunct instructor jobs at the same time, and worked as a pharmacy tech at Walmart at night.

Perimeter College and Brenau University teaching Economics.

It was grueling, what with raising 5 kids on my own of which one was and still is a quadriplegic.

But as Republicans say........we should all suffer and work the flesh off our bones, because that's the tough luck society they want for the majority of us.

Faye--yeah, I don't know how I would make ends meet if I had kids, too! It's tough at times. Luckily I have simple tastes. And I love what I do. :)

"You just know how it is with Republicans............if you feel you're not making enough...........you are just not working hard enough."

I think perhaps some Republicans take that view, but a lot of them do not. Lots of overgeneralizations going on in these discussion forums! Which is why I don't jump in often, and lurk instead. In my classes, we play fallacy hang man. lol....if / when students overgeneralize in class, in support of a claim, hangman ensues! :)

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 26, 2012, 04:42:33 PM

Quote from: Purplebike on February 26, 2012, 03:20:43 PM

Hospitality work and teaching college have two very unfortunate things in common. Too many people think individuals employed in these positions make a lot more money than they actually do. *Some* servers, bartenders, and college professors (some tenured ones) make a very good living. Many do not.

Whether this is right or wrong that they make such crap money sometimes is not my main point. My main point is this: it's important to get the numbers straight.

Sources
http://chronicle.com/article/Accidental-Activist-Collects/130854/

Thank you for your contribution purplebike.

You just know how it is with Republicans............if you feel you're not making enough...........you are just not working hard enough.

I see that you are working three adjunct instructor jobs at the same time..........without healthcare coverage.

When I lived in GA, I too worked two adjunct instructor jobs at the same time, and worked as a pharmacy tech at Walmart at night.

Perimeter College and Brenau University teaching Economics.

It was grueling, what with raising 5 kids on my own of which one was and still is a quadriplegic.

But as Republicans say........we should all suffer and work the flesh off our bones, because that's the tough luck society they want for the majority of us.

On the contrary, conservatives(Reps sometimes) are very compassionate and donate to charity more than most. What they do not like is the abuse that goes on in the system. I am sorry that it cannot be equitable to who needs what but that is part of the problem. The Federal government cannot and is not the arbiter of what is fair. The take rights(taxes) and transfers them to others. They do this, like most things they do, in a poor and wasteful way. The people that abuse get more and the ones that play by the rules get shafted. When 50% of the population are net takers there is a problem. When you subsidize something you get more of it. 

Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on February 26, 2012, 04:03:42 PM
I'm sorry, life's not fair, and the people who are unable or unwilling to better themselves shouldn't get 'bailed out' because they suck at life.

Such typical Republican lingo!

So now, getting better pay for our work is considered being "bailed out"

BTW, I'll tell my quadriplegic son who is "unable to better himself" that he "sucks at life." :o

PS, purplebike, as an instructor in Philosophy.............I understand that you would give people the benefit of the doubt, however I am not willing to let a general Republican philosophy that wreaks havoc on the majority of our lives stand without pointing out its extremism.

Truthfully, I do not think these people are aware of how much extremism and self-centeredness they carry with them. I will not be "considerate" with their "inconsiderateness"

Walking in someone else's shoes is not one of their strong points in their hardline philosophy.

Quote from: bill on February 26, 2012, 05:19:26 PM
What they do not like is the abuse that goes on in the system.

The Federal government cannot and is not the arbiter of what is fair.

Yeah, lets also do away with traffic lights, because some people run them......besides it's not fair that the government gets to decide who and when someoe should stop at an intersection.  :o

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 26, 2012, 05:29:20 PM

Quote from: bill on February 26, 2012, 05:19:26 PM
What they do not like is the abuse that goes on in the system.

The Federal government cannot and is not the arbiter of what is fair.

Yeah, lets also do away with traffic lights, because some people run them......besides it's not fair that the government gets to decide who and when someoe should stop at an intersection.  :o

So what is enough? How much of my rights(money) do I have to give up?

Quote from: bill on February 26, 2012, 05:38:26 PM

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 26, 2012, 05:29:20 PM

Quote from: bill on February 26, 2012, 05:19:26 PM
What they do not like is the abuse that goes on in the system.

The Federal government cannot and is not the arbiter of what is fair.

Yeah, lets also do away with traffic lights, because some people run them......besides it's not fair that the government gets to decide who and when someoe should stop at an intersection.  :o

So what is enough? How much of my rights(money) do I have to give up?

You are not giving up anything...........you are contributing to society so the government can buy our traffic lights (so to speak), and we all are safer for it.  ;)


As long as you are not paying more than other comparable civilized societies, I wouldn't worry.

Are we ignoring the fact that the bill had democratic support as well, particularly from Bill Montford, who cast a Yes vote?

Just checking.

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 26, 2012, 05:45:31 PM

Quote from: bill on February 26, 2012, 05:38:26 PM

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 26, 2012, 05:29:20 PM

Quote from: bill on February 26, 2012, 05:19:26 PM
What they do not like is the abuse that goes on in the system.

The Federal government cannot and is not the arbiter of what is fair.

Yeah, lets also do away with traffic lights, because some people run them......besides it's not fair that the government gets to decide who and when someoe should stop at an intersection.  :o

So what is enough? How much of my rights(money) do I have to give up?

You are not giving up anything...........you are contributing to society so the government can buy our traffic lights (so to speak), and we all are safer for it.  ;)


As long as you are not paying more than other comparable civilized societies, I wouldn't worry.

If it is money I have given that I cannot use I have certainly given up the right to use it. If I have to perform a procedure for free that I usually get payed for I lose that right. What is enough?

Let's try this again, and we'll start at the beginning:

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 17, 2012, 01:05:21 PM
As always Republicans are intent on killing the little guy, even as we barely have a middle class any more. ::)

For a socialist, you seem a little too pre-occupied about the whole class thing, it's unhealthy.  Life will never be fair.  Some people will always make more and have more opportunities, some will have less. 

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 17, 2012, 01:15:22 PM
Most young servers and bartender actually ARE in school, but now have to drop out of school because their pay will no longer be enough--------> hence the dumbing down of America

I really feel sorry for my daughter who is a server while she works on becoming a lawyer.

Why are you allowing her to subject herself to such inhumane and barbaric treatment?  She should apply at the Gold Club.  I know several girls there who are working there way through law school, too.  I don't know what their minimum wage is, but most are driving nicer cars.   ;)  (PM me, I'll forward their #s)

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 17, 2012, 04:58:58 PM
Everyone looses. It's a race to the bottom..........exploiting our servers......making them work more hours for the same pay, so they can kiss any type of schooling they might be pursuing goodbye, and stay permanently stuck in an underclass.

Decreasing menu prices, or restaurant owners just pocketing more profits.........what do you think will happen?

I already know.

Tell her to get out now, while she can or she's going to have to kiss that attorney schooling goodbye.  And just out of curiousity, how many restaurant owners ARE the middle class that employ these 100s of servers?  Not every restaurant is operated by Darden, and not every owner of a franchise is a millionaire.

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 20, 2012, 01:48:51 PM

Quote from: Captain Zissou on February 20, 2012, 12:55:30 PM
people have to earn their stripes first. 

Yup, and it builds character to make it harder and harder to earn your stripes. ::)

Who needs economic security anyway?

Why are Republicans intent on making things harder and harder for the little guy, while going overboard with protecting mega-corporations?

How far must this race to the bottom go?

This entire thread has been about servers and minimum wage.  Personally, if you're worried about making minimum wage you're really not trying to accomplish anything useful.  I read it here somewhere, maybe we should push to have minimum wage raised to about $60/hr - it would really help me out and I would probably be less disagreeable over the whole situation.  There's no race.  It's life. 

Quote from: stephendare on February 26, 2012, 09:45:46 PM

Quote from: bill on February 26, 2012, 05:55:59 PM

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 26, 2012, 05:45:31 PM

Quote from: bill on February 26, 2012, 05:38:26 PM

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 26, 2012, 05:29:20 PM

Quote from: bill on February 26, 2012, 05:19:26 PM
What they do not like is the abuse that goes on in the system.

The Federal government cannot and is not the arbiter of what is fair.

Yeah, lets also do away with traffic lights, because some people run them......besides it's not fair that the government gets to decide who and when someoe should stop at an intersection.  :o

So what is enough? How much of my rights(money) do I have to give up?

You are not giving up anything...........you are contributing to society so the government can buy our traffic lights (so to speak), and we all are safer for it.  ;)


As long as you are not paying more than other comparable civilized societies, I wouldn't worry.

If it is money I have given that I cannot use I have certainly given up the right to use it. If I have to perform a procedure for free that I usually get payed for I lose that right. What is enough?

Bill did you protest when Bush led us into a three trillion dollar war that was funded by debt?

Did you speak out when he bailed out the banks in the last months of his administration?

Did you start voting democrat when Reagan tripled the national debt?

Did you demand better accountability and some demonstrable proof that cutting a trillion dollars in taxes from america's wealthiest individuals would result in a better economy?

Republicans ran up more than 3/4s of the present national deficity, which requires 15 percent of the entire national budget, just so that we can pay the interest on it every year.

Did you vote to stop this disaster in the making?

Are you doing everything in your power to drive the republicans responsible for the reckless spending of your tax money out of office? 

If you arent, then I guess you havent really had enough of your income taken by these idiots.

wait wait, I thought you were a reagan republican stephen?

Quote from: Brian Siebenschuh on February 26, 2012, 04:38:24 PM
I just think this discussion has gotten too complicated.  Regardless of whether a given server makes $20K a year or $100K a year under the current scenario, if they work a full 40 hour week, they're going to make about $2,000 less annually if the bill goes through. 

And I don't know anybody, regardless of income level, that would be cheerful about a $2,000 a year paycut.

Based on the high quality service I have always received at your establishments I can only assume that you do not pay your staff minimum wage but well above it.  I assume you do this to hire and keep the best and most highly motivated staff.  Minimum wage is just that... the minimum required by law.  Like many professions the cream rises to the top... a good server not satisfied with the pay and quality of service being delivered at restaurant "A" will seek better pay and opportunity at a place like yours.  This is a good thing... 8)

So Stephen, now that you have given up on the Republicans economic agenda does that mean that you only support their current social agenda?    :o  ;D

Knowing you, I know you don't.  You need to start calling yourself a "Hog-on-Ice Independent" like I do.  Let's start the Hog On Ice Party and have a big ol' razorback as our emblem to join the asses and the hephalumps.

Quote from: stephendare on February 26, 2012, 09:45:46 PM

Quote from: bill on February 26, 2012, 05:55:59 PM

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 26, 2012, 05:45:31 PM

Quote from: bill on February 26, 2012, 05:38:26 PM

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 26, 2012, 05:29:20 PM

Quote from: bill on February 26, 2012, 05:19:26 PM
What they do not like is the abuse that goes on in the system.

The Federal government cannot and is not the arbiter of what is fair.

Yeah, lets also do away with traffic lights, because some people run them......besides it's not fair that the government gets to decide who and when someoe should stop at an intersection.  :o

So what is enough? How much of my rights(money) do I have to give up?

You are not giving up anything...........you are contributing to society so the government can buy our traffic lights (so to speak), and we all are safer for it.  ;)


As long as you are not paying more than other comparable civilized societies, I wouldn't worry.

If it is money I have given that I cannot use I have certainly given up the right to use it. If I have to perform a procedure for free that I usually get payed for I lose that right. What is enough?

Bill did you protest when Bush led us into a three trillion dollar war that was funded by debt?

I did not sit in a park and smoke pot and piss on cop cars but have always urged fiscal responsibility with all pols. Bush 5 million in 8 years=bad Barry 5mm in 3 years =worse

Did you speak out when he bailed out the banks in the last months of his administration?

Yes and it was a mistake. Barry has compounded it

Did you start voting democrat when Reagan tripled the national debt?

No he got the country started again which lead to more taxpayers which Clinton got to enjoy

Did you demand better accountability and some demonstrable proof that cutting a trillion dollars in taxes from america's wealthiest individuals would result in a better economy?

Since they do not help the economy why not take all their money. Give it to all those non-producers and it will run the government for a few months

Republicans ran up more than 3/4s of the present national deficity, which requires 15 percent of the entire national budget, just so that we can pay the interest on it every year.

This was wrong then and now Barry is doubling down on stupidity

Did you vote to stop this disaster in the making?

I did what I could but you pinkos still elected Barry.

Are you doing everything in your power to drive the republicans responsible for the reckless spending of your tax money out of office?

Yes I did. 

If you arent, then I guess you havent really had enough of your income taken by these idiots.

Quote from: stephendare on February 27, 2012, 12:19:12 PM
Bill, you seriously don't really understand either how our budget works, or how badly the Republicans screwed all of us, both fiscally and financially.  If you would like some research material to inform yourself on these Republican Deficits and the devastating effect that they are having on all of us, then I will be glad to point you in the right direction.

The Democrats restructured welfare and have been responsible for the largest cuts in spending in history.

The Republicans, on the other hand not only ran up the deficit, but refused to allow americans to pay for it at the least expensive rate----direct taxation.

Instead they borrowed trillions and trillions of dollars from the Chinese and other foreign powers at steep interest rates so that Americans will be forced to pay double that amount in interest before the debts are retired.

Nice move.

In order to save a few dollars in tax revenue now (for the wealthy only, mind you) they committed us to decades of interest payments above and beyond what it would have cost us to finance it ourselves.

And you think Barak Obama is the problem?

Wow.

Suffice it to say I can walk circles around you on any issue. I acknowledged that what the Reps have done is not good. What Barry is doing is worse. That you think we can tax our way out of this shows what a light weight you are.

Quote from: stephendare on February 27, 2012, 01:04:17 PM
Well I wholly agree with you that you can probably walk around and around in circles, Bill.

You have demonstrated it perfectly.

Sorry did not have time to hit spell check. Out trying to do my share so we can give it to the non producers

Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on February 26, 2012, 06:37:25 PM
This entire thread has been about servers and minimum wage.  Personally, if you're worried about making minimum wage you're really not trying to accomplish anything useful.  I read it here somewhere, maybe we should push to have minimum wage raised to about $60/hr - it would really help me out and I would probably be less disagreeable over the whole situation.  There's no race.  It's life.

You can have your daughter work at the Gold Club.

A living minimum wage is a really good foundation to a thriving economy........just look at all those western European nations that are doing quite well.

Yup that stop phrase: "that's life"

Nobody is served by exploitation..........and don't give we that crap about supply and demand......the invisible hand.......as an economist I know that simplistic model doesn't work in a complex society, yet it is used to let the masses believe in laisez faire exploitative nonsense.

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 27, 2012, 11:21:26 PM

Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on February 26, 2012, 06:37:25 PM
This entire thread has been about servers and minimum wage.  Personally, if you're worried about making minimum wage you're really not trying to accomplish anything useful.  I read it here somewhere, maybe we should push to have minimum wage raised to about $60/hr - it would really help me out and I would probably be less disagreeable over the whole situation.  There's no race.  It's life.

You can have your daughter work at the Gold Club.

A living minimum wage is a really good foundation to a thriving economy........just look at all those western European nations that are doing quite well.

Yup that stop phrase: "that's life"

Nobody is served by exploitation..........and don't give we that crap about supply and demand......the invisible hand.......as an economist I know that simplistic model doesn't work in a complex society, yet it is used to let the masses believe in laisez faire exploitative nonsense.

Must be why you're such an advocate for minimum wage rights....  I guess if that's all you ever desire to achieve then someone needs to fight on your behalf.  Kind of an oxymoron isn't it... complex minimum achievers.

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 25, 2012, 06:52:30 PM
inhumane and barbaric!

A banker left a 1% tip in defiance of 'the 99%' at a Newport Beach restaurant the other week, according to his dining companion and underling who snapped a photo of the receipt and posted it to his blog, Future Ex Banker. (Update: the blog is now offline.)

In posting the photo, the employee gave some background on his boss and the receipt:

(http://i.huffpost.com/gen/511964/BANKER-1-PERCENT-TIP-RECEIPT.jpg)

Mention the “99%” in my boss’ presence and feel his wrath. So proudly does he wear his 1% badge of honor that he tips exactly 1% every time he feels the server doesn’t sufficiently bow down to his Holiness. Oh, and he always makes sure to include a “tip” of his own.

The "tip" of his own in this case was to tell the server to "get a real job." Pleasant.




The whistleblower's Future Ex-Banker blog (now offline) included additional background on his boss, and some insight into why he would out his gross behavior, likely resulting in an employment status of current ex-banker:

I work in the corporate office of a major bank for a boss who represents everything wrong with the financial industry: blatant disregard and outright contempt for everyone and everything he deems beneath him. On top of that, he’s a complete and utter tool. At the same time, I’m still cashing paychecks, an admittedly willingâ€"albeit reluctantâ€"cog in the wheel of this increasingly ugly industry, so I’ve created this blog as a confessional of sorts. It won’t entirely clear my conscience, but hopefully it’ll help. I’m sure I’ll get fired eventually. Until then, enjoy.

UPDATE: In a conversation with the Huffington Post, Mike Wilcox, the vice president of operations for True Food Kitchen, gave some insight into how the company was treating the incident since the receipt began receiving attention online. Wilcox said that the restaurant was "absolutely" treating the receipt as real, but to confirm its authenticity for certain, they were in the process of tracking down both the physical receipt at the restaurant and the computer-generated copy in their credit card system.

"The first thing we're going to do is to make sure the server is taken care of," Wilcox said, "and make sure the server wasn't treated badly or insufficiently tipped." He explained that they would be asking Breanna, the server named on the receipt, if she recalled the table and how her service was. "If her service was up to the level" they assume their employees would deliver, Wilcox said, "they would do everything they can to make it up to her somehow." Referring to online comments posted about the receipt, Wilcox remarked, "people are asking us to ban the person from the restaurant -- if more information came through on who the person is I first would love to talk to him."

UPDATE II: As many have noted, a true 1% tip correctly rounded to the nearest penny would have been $1.34, leaving this tip just shy of that threshold, mathematically speaking.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/24/banker-1-percent-tip-receipt_n_1299280.html

An update... :o ::)

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2012/02/27/wealthy-banker-leaves-one-percent-tip-nasty-note-for-waitress-in-newport-beach/

QuoteRestaurant Calls Photo Of Banker’s 1 Percent Tip, ‘Get A Real Job’ Message A Hoax

NEWPORT BEACH (CBS) â€" A wealthy banker set off public outrage after he allegedly followed up a $133 meal by leaving his waitress a one percent tip and a personal tip â€" “Get a real job”. But the restaurant where it supposedly happened said it is all a hoax.

According to Huffington Post, CNN and several other news sites, a person claiming to be an employee of the “wealthy” banker took a photo of the receipt and posted it on a blog, “Future Ex-Banker”. The blogger paired the photo with their own caption:

“Mention the ’99 percent’ in my boss’ presence and feel his wrath. So proudly does he wear his 1 percent badge of honor that he tips exactly 1 percent every time he feels the server doesn’t sufficiently bow down to his Holiness. Oh, and he always makes sure to include a ‘tip’ of his own.”

The blogger surmised that the post would probably mean losing his or her job. Not surprisingly, soon after the blog started getting a lot of public attention it was taken down.

The post set off a hailstorm of online comments that touched on the 1% vs. 99% class warfare embodied by the Occupy movement.

The Huffington Post posted a correction to their story, indicating that the restaurant called the blog’s photo “altered and exaggerated”.

The restaurant told CBS2/KCAL9 that they have been receiving hundreds of phone calls and e-mails from people outraged over the reported story. They have confirmed that the receipt was changed and that the original receipt lists the meal as just over $30, with a 20 percent tip and no message aimed at the waitress.

Still doing my part to make it a better world, Faye.  You're still.............  complaining?  BTW, we were seated and gone in less than an hour, so that's $9.17 for 40 minutes and we weren't her only customer. 

(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7193/6798298556_8b0d4a11dd.jpg)

It was a hoax Stephen...

QuoteRestaurant Calls Photo Of Banker’s 1 Percent Tip, ‘Get A Real Job’ Message A Hoax

NEWPORT BEACH (CBS) â€" A wealthy banker set off public outrage after he allegedly followed up a $133 meal by leaving his waitress a one percent tip and a personal tip â€" “Get a real job”. But the restaurant where it supposedly happened said it is all a hoax.

According to Huffington Post, CNN and several other news sites, a person claiming to be an employee of the “wealthy” banker took a photo of the receipt and posted it on a blog, “Future Ex-Banker”. The blogger paired the photo with their own caption:

“Mention the ’99 percent’ in my boss’ presence and feel his wrath. So proudly does he wear his 1 percent badge of honor that he tips exactly 1 percent every time he feels the server doesn’t sufficiently bow down to his Holiness. Oh, and he always makes sure to include a ‘tip’ of his own.”

The blogger surmised that the post would probably mean losing his or her job. Not surprisingly, soon after the blog started getting a lot of public attention it was taken down.

The post set off a hailstorm of online comments that touched on the 1% vs. 99% class warfare embodied by the Occupy movement.

The Huffington Post posted a correction to their story, indicating that the restaurant called the blog’s photo “altered and exaggerated”.

The restaurant told CBS2/KCAL9 that they have been receiving hundreds of phone calls and e-mails from people outraged over the reported story. They have confirmed that the receipt was changed and that the original receipt lists the meal as just over $30, with a 20 percent tip and no message aimed at the waitress.

Quote from: BridgeTroll on March 01, 2012, 03:07:48 PM
It was a hoax Stephen...

So my copy-catting is not real copy-catting???

Quote from: FayeforCure on February 17, 2012, 01:15:22 PM
Most young servers and bartender actually ARE in school, but now have to drop out of school because their pay will no longer be enough--------> hence the dumbing down of America

I really feel sorry for my daughter who is a server while she works on becoming a lawyer.

Stephen, this is Faye's point.

My point is that WE are the ones who pay servers salaries - their hourly wages are inconsequential.  Who cares about the asshat in the picture, whether it's real or fake, take care of what you can take care of.

Stephen, you have it backwards.  People with wealth tend to become arrogant and feel privileged.    ;D

+1!  I guess you have to be really wealthy to be able to hire domestics these days.

Quote from: Dog Walker on March 01, 2012, 05:33:21 PM
Stephen, you have it backwards.  People with wealth tend to become arrogant and feel privileged.    ;D

Really?  The ones that I know are humble and generous.  "Arrogant and privileged" sounds like a generality and stereotype to be used by Faye... not you...

I find it soooo hilarious that the same people who vehemently defend CEO pay, will let the servers starve........ie be reduced to beggars.

Quote from: FayeforCure on March 02, 2012, 12:07:41 PM
I find it soooo hilarious that the same people who vehemently defend CEO pay, will let the servers starve........ie be reduced to beggars.

They only starve if you don't do your part.

Quote from: FayeforCure on March 02, 2012, 12:07:41 PM
I find it soooo hilarious that the same people who vehemently defend CEO pay, will let the servers starve........ie be reduced to beggars.

First of all, you're right.

Hemming Park would be a much better, safer place without all those servers.

Secondly, a CEO bears the responsibility of an entire company on his back. The Applebee's CEO, just as an example, is ultimately reponsible for 30,000 employees. He's also responsible for appeasing the investors who finance said company, allowing said 30,000 employees to draw a paycheck every two weeks. He has worked his butt off to get where he is, has invested heavily in education and training, and obviously has a tremendous amount of business acumen and knowledge to land where he has landed.

Without a good CEO (and CFO), a company is doomed.

You can't equate the job (and subsequently the pay) that a CEO does with that of a high school dropout (or college student) walking around with a Diet Coke pitcher and asking if the diner would like french fries or slaw.

The Applebee's CEO made approximately 2.2 million dollars last year.

A full time server at Applebees, making $10 an hour as the bill requires, would earn around $21,000 a year annually.

So the CEO earns approximately 100 times more than the server.

Sounds about right to me.

Remove 100 servers from the company, no one notices.

Remove the CEO position, and you have no Applebees.

Quote from: KenFSU on March 02, 2012, 01:18:46 PM
The Applebee's CEO made approximately 2.2 million dollars last year.

A full time server at Applebees, making $10 an hour as the bill requires, would earn around $21,000 a year annually.

So the CEO earns approximately 100 times more than the server.

Sounds about right to me.

Remove 100 servers from the company, no one notices.

Remove the CEO position, and you have no Applebees.

Wow, what a distorted view. BTW what happened to CEOs making about 50 times what the average worker made? That's how it used to be.

Replacing one person is a whole lot easier than replacing 100 servers. Losing 100 servers would be immediately felt by the customers, and it would ruin Applebees reputation.

There are a lot of Stephanie Kopelousos' running around, who will work any job for $177,000.

Applebees would still be around, just like Florida's Dept of Transportation is still around.

Quote from: FayeforCure on March 02, 2012, 01:38:58 PM

Quote from: KenFSU on March 02, 2012, 01:18:46 PM
The Applebee's CEO made approximately 2.2 million dollars last year.

A full time server at Applebees, making $10 an hour as the bill requires, would earn around $21,000 a year annually.

So the CEO earns approximately 100 times more than the server.

Sounds about right to me.

Remove 100 servers from the company, no one notices.

Remove the CEO position, and you have no Applebees.

Wow, what a distorted view. BTW what happened to CEOs making about 50 times what the average worker made? That's how it used to be.

Replacing one person is a whole lot easier than replacing 100 servers. Losing 100 servers would be immediately felt by the customers, and it would ruin Applebees reputation.

There are a lot of Stephanie Kopelousos' running around, who will work any job for $177,000.

Applebees would still be around, just like Florida's Dept of Transportation is still around.

Faye's entire statement is laughable.

Quote from: FayeforCure on March 02, 2012, 01:38:58 PM

Quote from: KenFSU on March 02, 2012, 01:18:46 PM
Applebees would still be around, just like Florida's Dept of Transportation is still around.

If the Florida Dept of Transportation was a private business, it would have been gone bankrupt years ago.

Quote from: KenFSU on March 02, 2012, 01:44:53 PM

Quote from: FayeforCure on March 02, 2012, 01:38:58 PM

Quote from: KenFSU on March 02, 2012, 01:18:46 PM
Applebees would still be around, just like Florida's Dept of Transportation is still around.

If the Florida Dept of Transportation was a private business, it would have been gone bankrupt years ago.

Not necessarily..........many private busineses also survive terrible CEOs, but they never survive terrible customer service (by cutting 100 waiters). In Fact many private companies have to not only absorb losses created by these terrible CEOs, they also have to absorb the cost of the golden parachutes given to these terrible CEOs, who are then rehired by the next "private" or Government outfit..

Quotethey also have to absorb the cost of the golden parachutes given to these terrible CEOs

We are talking about the local restaurant business, right?   :o

Did Ray Kroc get a golden parachute from the golden arches?

I find Faye very difficult to respond to as her argument seems to be all over the place.

QuoteI find Faye very difficult to respond to as her argument seems to be all over the place.

Faye is passionate, same with Timken, and passion is a good thing out here.

Quote from: mtraininjax on March 02, 2012, 03:56:08 PM

QuoteI find Faye very difficult to respond to as her argument seems to be all over the place.

Faye is passionate, same with Timken, and passion is a good thing out here.

I don't disagree.  I also don't disagree that significant issues exist.  I just think its foolish to blame it all on the Republicans (or conversely on the Democrats).  They are damn near the same thing.

QuoteI just think its foolish to blame it all on the Republicans (or conversely on the Democrats).

Well, at least you do not have to try and figure out which side that the argument is for out  here!  :o

Quote from: mtraininjax on March 02, 2012, 03:43:14 PM

Quotethey also have to absorb the cost of the golden parachutes given to these terrible CEOs

We are talking about the local restaurant business, right?   :o

We're talking about the fallacy that poorly run private enterprises would go out of business whereas poorly run government enterprises don't get that kind of "market" correction. (KenFSU stated that: If the Florida Dept of Transportation was a private business, it would have been gone bankrupt years ago.)

My contention is that there are MANY poorly run private enterprises that, due to their monopoly/oligopoly position or other factors, also stay in business and absorb the cost of terrible CEOs.

"private" is not by definition better than "government" as so many Republicans fail to understand.

BTW thanks mtraininjax for the compliment about my passion.

Quote from: mtraininjax on March 02, 2012, 03:59:16 PM

QuoteI just think its foolish to blame it all on the Republicans (or conversely on the Democrats).

Well, at least you do not have to try and figure out which side that the argument is for out  here!  :o

;) but I'm not on the side of Democrats either............I'm really only in support of progressives like Alan Grayson, who isn't afraid to say it like it is.


Though I like Dems general philosophy, they often roll over and play dead when it comes to standing up for the people in face of the relentless attack from Republicans.