Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Starbuck's calsss action lawsuit.

Expand Messages
  • George
    The question is, why is our federal government along with many state governments deciding who should share in the consumer s tip? Isn t it the consumer s right
    Message 1 of 3 , Jun 27, 2006
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      The question is, why is our federal government along
      with many state governments deciding who should share
      in the consumer's tip? Isn't it the consumer's right
      and responsibility to determine who should receive his
      tip? Isn't this the consumer's property property we are
      talking about? Tips are not intended for the government,
      they are intended for specific workers, those of the
      customer's choosing. By unjustly interpreting the laws
      on tips as laws that do not prohibit employers from
      mandating that the consumer's tip be pooled and shared
      among a group of workers, our government is depriving
      our citizens of their liberty to determine for
      themselves who should receive their tip which is
      guaranteed by our Constitution.

      Our laws along with the laws of every state in this
      country clearly instruct that employers may not take
      the tips costomers bestow on their employees. While
      our government clearly understands the meaning of the
      word "take" to mean employers cannot possess the tips
      consumers present, they continue to ignore the fact
      that the word "take", like the word "retain", includes
      controlling property, such as tips in this case.

      When employers are allowed to mandate that the
      consumer's tip must be pooled and shared among a group
      of workers, the employer is being allowed to "take"
      control of how the tips will be used. When employers
      are allowed to mandate that the consumer's tip must be
      pooled and shared among a group of workers, the
      employer is being allowed to take the tips customers
      have bestowed on a particular employee so that the
      employer may control who receives a share of such
      moneys, when clearly it should be the right of the
      customers to determine who should share in his tip.

      Businesses across our country are currently being
      allowed to steal the consumer's tip so that the
      business may share it among their workers. To cover-up
      such blatant crimes against our citizens, the courts
      have intervened and have claimed that it is the courts
      right to determine who can be included in the sharing
      of the customer's tip. Clearly if the courts can persuade
      the public into believing that it is the right of the
      courts to determine who should receive their tip, the
      evident taking of the consumer's tip will be less
      noticable.

      The truth of the matter is, customers are being
      deprived their right to control money that is their's.
      Our government is condoning and encouraging the theft
      of billions of dollars tips designated for specific
      workers whom the public has chosen of their free will.
      You cannot present a tip to a specific worker in most
      parts of this country, for our government believes
      that businesses should have legal right to take your
      tip away from your chosen recipient so that it can be
      shared with workers whom our government believes
      should recieve a share of your tip.

      Why would our government want to deprive our citizens
      of their constitutional right to determine who should
      be the recipient of their tip. Well this is just my
      opinion on this issue, but I can see not other reason
      other than to allow business owners to take the money
      for themselves. You see, if you cannot determine who
      your tip is intended for, anyone can claim it.
      Business owners are in a great position to claim your
      tip if you are deprived your right to determine who
      it belongs to. We are talking about billions of dollars
      in tips being given away each year and yet those giving
      these billions are intentionally being deprived their
      ability to determine who these moneys belong to. Who
      is depriving them of their ability to determine for
      themselves who this money belongs to? Of course, the
      business owners of this nation. Our government is
      blatantly allowing business owners an ability to
      deprive our citizens of their right to determine for
      themselves who the billions of dollars worth of tips
      belong to. Now, who do you think is trying to take this
      money for themselves? Obviously if you are being denied
      your ability to determine who should receive your tip,
      someone else is attempting to determine for you who
      should receive your tip. We are talking about money
      here. If someone is trying to spend your money, isn't
      it obvious that the person attempting to spend your
      moeny for you is looking to benefit himself to your
      money? Isn't it obvious that businesses who mandate
      that your tip must be shared are taking your money
      for their interests? Isn't it obvious that a
      government that would condone such practices, is a
      government who is turning a blind eye to the theft
      of your property.

      I am a tip earner and have worked in the service
      industry for nearly 30 years. As a worker who
      customarily and regularly receives tips from the
      public, I am hereby accusing my government of aiding
      and abetting criminals in efforts to steal my
      property, my tips. If our government continues to
      interpret the laws on tips as laws which do not
      prohibit employers from stealing my tips through
      employer mandated tip pooling scams, I will
      continue to implicate my government as a party to
      such crimes. My tips are being stolen. I hereby swear
      to God that my tips are being stolen and that such
      injustices are the fault of our federal government
      for they have either intentionally or unkowingly
      allowed my employer to steal my tips by incorrectly
      interpreting the laws on tips as laws that do not
      prohibit employers from mandating that tips be pooled.

      Federal law states clearly that an employer must allow
      the tipped employee to "retain" all tips. I cannot
      retain my tips when my employer is being allowed to
      force me to contribute them to a pool where they will
      be shared among other workers without my consent.

      The word "retain" is defined as, to keep to keep in
      possession or use. I am not being allowed the use of my
      tips when my government blatantly disregards federal
      law and allows my employer to use my tips for a tip pool.
      I am not being allowed possession of my tips when my
      government is allowing my employer to take my tips
      away from me so that they can be shared with other
      workers.
    • George
      While California law is said to expressly allow tip-pooling, there are two differing interpretations of what tip pooling actually is. The correct
      Message 2 of 3 , Jul 4, 2006
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        While California law is said to expressly allow tip-pooling,
        there are two differing interpretations of what tip pooling
        actually is. The correct interpretation is that tip pooling
        is an employee's constitutional right to share his property
        with other workers of his choosing. The incorrect
        interpretation of tip pooling is that is the business's
        right to share the consumer's tip with workers who the state
        of California is authorized to determine are entitled to the
        consumer's tip. Now, I don't think anyone would disagree with
        me that it is, and should be, the right of the consumer to
        determine who should receive his tip, not the state of
        California's right nore any state's right.

        Who ever is behind the deceptive conclusion that California
        state law expressly allows employer mandated tip pooling is
        either clearly mistaken or is blatantly lying, for while
        state law may allow voluntary tip pooling, allowing employer
        mandated tip pooling would not only deprive consumers of
        their liberty to determine for themselves who should receive
        their tip, it would also abridge the privileges or immunities
        of citizens of California.

        By incorrectly interpreting section 351 of California's labor
        code as allowing employers to mandate that the consumers tip
        will be shared among a group of workers, California is
        forcing it's courts to determine for the consumer who should
        receive his tip and, in doing so, are depriving the citizens
        of the state of California their constitutional right to
        determine such matters for themselves.

        In the meantime employers are getting away with stealing tips
        from the workers who actually receive tips from consumers.
        I believe California is aiding and abetting business owners
        in the theft of billions of dollars in tips individual workers
        have received from the public by interpreting their laws as
        laws which allow employers to take the tips consumers have
        bestowed on individual workers so that they may be shared with
        the workers who the state of California fraudulently deems are
        legally entitled to the consumer's tip.

        Only the consumer has a right to determine who is legally
        entitled to the tip he presents. As such, California has no
        authority to determine who may share in the consumer's tip,
        and as such, California law cannot expressly allow employers
        to mandate that tips must be pooled, for such would
        necessitate California violating the privileges and
        immunities of citizens of California by depriving the citizens
        of California of their constitutional right to determine for
        themselves how their money is spent.

        Please see,
        Dunahoo v. Huber, 185 Iowa 753 (1919) (statute violates the
        state privileges & immunities clause because there was no
        reasonable grounds for allowing employers to accept tips and
        prohibitting employees from accepting tips when "engaged in
        like services".") Ex Parte Farb, 178 Cal. 592 (1918) (statute
        violates the due process provisions of the U.S. Constitution
        and the freedom of contract provision of the California
        constitution). Anti-tipping statutes were repealed in
        Arkansas, Mississippi, South Carolina and Tennessee in 1925,
        1926, 1922, and 1925, respectively.

        It should also stand to reason that laws which deem the
        consumer's tip to be property of a group of workers would
        be laws which violate the state privileges & immunities
        clause because there is no reasonable grounds for allowing
        a group of workers to accept tips and prohibitting
        individual employees from accepting tips when "engaged in
        like services.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.