Starbucks ordered to pay back stolen tips given to supervisors

RSS
Email

0 Kudo

Author	Comment
G money		#21	[-]
Member Posts: 979 (03/24/08 09:37) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	So does the MGM letter state that MGM will never force dealers to share tips with pit clerks, cages personel, security guards, poker dealers, sports book writers or other hourly employees working in the casino? You all act like the only threat dealers are facing is that of casino's sharing their tips with supervisors. Wouldn't sharing your tips with other types or employees be as detrimental to your incomes as sharing your tips with floor supervisors. What good is a letter stating the casino will not share your tips with supervisors when our state laws are being interpretted in a manner that allows employers to share your tips with, pretty much, anyone they want. The point I am making is, this issue is not about supervisors sharing in the dealer's tips, it's about employers mandating tip pooling. Ever since a judge ruled that NRS 608.160 does not act to prohibit an employer from mandating tip pooling as a condition of employment, dealers have been at risk of having their tips taken and shared with other workers. The problem we now face has nothing to do with Wynn's inclusion of team leaders in his tip pool. The problem we now face has to do with a judges ruling that employers may take our tips and share them among workers.
sincity21dealer	Letter from the casino	#22	[-]
Member Posts: 54 (03/24/08 10:20) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	G money. The letter states: "Dealer tips are your income. The money you earn belongs to you, and you alone. Our company will not implement any type of tip-sharing program at any of our resorts. This commitment extends to all of our casinos and will be instituted as policy at City Center when it opens in 2009. You have my word!" Signed by J. Terrence Lanni, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer I think that paragraph pretty well covers all departments. I wish we could go for our own, G money. This particular paragraph even sounds like he's saying we can go for our own. However, we all know that's not what he meant. We have to pick our battles, and right now that's keeping everybody else out of our pockets. Last Edited By: sincity21dealer 03/24/08 10:45. Edited 2 times.
G money		#23	[-]
Member Posts: 979 (03/25/08 10:22) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	There is only one battle and that is against the ruling which allowed employers to mandate tip pooling. If you attempt to battle against anything other than the ruling that was handed down in the Moen case you are fighting the wrong battle. The ruling handed down in the Moen case allowed employers to control their employee's tips. If you want to be foolish and make this a battle with Wynn you will surely lose. It's a battle with the ruling issued in Moen. Steve Wynn is doing nothing other than what that court ruling allowed him to do. The ruling allowed employers to force employees into sharing tips. If you truly want to win this battle you will have to overturn that ruling. Will it mean dealers will be able to go table for table? Yes. Will it mean that all dealers will have to go table for table? No. We not only have to pick our own battles, we have to pick the right battle and insure that our adversaries are not diverting us from real battle. If you want to play Don Quixote, have a good time by yourself. Who are these others who are attempting get into our pockets, Sir Quixote? I see only casino owners and a few judges in our pockets.
G money		#24	[-]
Member Posts: 979 (03/25/08 11:10) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	I hope the managers at Starbucks win their appeal, that is, if it's actually the managers appealing the case. Please let me explain. The managers at Starbucks have a very good basis for appealing the ruling. Why should they be prohibitted from receiving tips from the public? Doesn't prohibitting certain workers from receiving tips also deprive customers of giving certain worker's tips? Why and how would state laws prohibit managers from receiving tips? If California's laws actually prohibit managers/agents from receiving tips then the law would also prohibit customers from tipping managers/agents. State laws cannot deprive our citizens of their constitutional liberty. The managers have a great appeal against this ruling if they go at it the right way. The appeal should not be in regards to whether or not they can be included in a tip pool. No one should be able to insist that they be included in a tip pool. However. they should be able to receive tips directly from customers. This ruling actually suggests that managers cannot receive tips. How much of that $100+ million dollars in tips was intended for managers? While managers will not be forced to pay back the tips they received, managers will, from this day forward, be prohibitted from receiving tips. While I do not think the managers at Starbucks should be appealing the part of the ruling that requires Starbucks to pay back 100 million to the baristas, I do believe they should be appealing the part of the ruling that suggests that managers cannot receive tips. The managers were just as much victims in this injustice as the baristas. No one should be forced to pool their tips. This case was not about who can or can't be included in an employer mandated tip pool. This case was about why employer mandated tip pooling is not being prohibitted. Not only does employer mandated tip pooling hurt those who receive tips from the public, it also hurts employers who attempt to adopt such practices. The ruling failed to address the true issue. The issue is, why are our laws being misconstrued in a manner where workers and their employers are being injured? If employer mandated tip pooling were properly prohibitted, Starbucks would not be paying back $100,000,000 and the managers at Starbucks would not be appealing the court ruling in an attempt to seek justice. Last Edited By: G money 03/25/08 01:48. Edited 3 times.
sincity21dealer		#25	[-]
Member Posts: 54 (03/25/08 01:56) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	G money. How do you intend to fight this Moen battle of yours? It's not just a battle with Wynn. I was referring to all business owners who have tipped employees, not just Wynn when I said everybody else. BTW, Sir Quixote wouldn't apply to me. I'm a woman. Last Edited By: sincity21dealer 03/25/08 02:16. Edited 2 times.
starbucks		#26	[-]
Member Posts: 200 (03/25/08 05:00) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	we can all just wait and see at this point with the wynn, april 7th supreme court date outcome... hopefully for wynn dealers, this starbucks case will set a good precedence.... hopefully at least become able to get back into the toke count room... i know many that would be the slightest bit more comfortable with that reconnection ... other than that, i hope for more, but at this point we will have to see. godspeed, good luck, and karma!
cardmechanic		#27	[-]
Member Posts: 63 (03/25/08 08:21) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	"Wait and See"? Sure, then if/when the gavel drops in Wynn's favor, then you can lose your tokes the next day. By the way, how's your job security, benefits, seniority, etc... Unfortunately, the Starbucks case is in CALIFORNIA and NOT Nevada. Nevada will not have ANY other State tell it what to do, just as California will not let Nevada tell them what to do. The ONLY precedent set is for CALIFORNIA workers. If Nevada were to follow other State Laws, then there would not be the mess that is, but the idea of separate States is to allow them to set their own laws as long as they are not violating the U.S. Constitution. Yeah, "wait and see" if you lose your tokes, then if you do, oh well, it will be to late to do much about it except MAYBE negotiate what % you lose. I have an idea, why don't we all pull the trigger on a loaded gun and "wait and see" if it fires. Under water it probably won't, but above ground, maybe it will. Two different locations, two different results. Who knows, maybe it will be a blank. Last Edited By: cardmechanic 03/25/08 08:25. Edited 1 times.
starbucks		#28	[-]
Member Posts: 200 (03/25/08 11:03) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	when it comes to this court case... have to wait to see what happens on april 7, 2008... GODSPEED to us, the dealers, at Wynn....
cardmechanic		#29	[-]
Member Posts: 63 (03/26/08 10:42) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	I just read on another website/bulletin board (don't know if I am allowed to mention the address) that there is going to be a "rally" on April 7th at the Clark County Regional Justice Center from 9:30am-12:30. They also have flyers available to print out to pass out at your work. They also said there will be "picket signs" available at the "peaceful" rally.
scoobydoo90	HaveNoFear reappearance...	#30	[-]
Member Posts: 82 (03/26/08 11:22) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	I thought HaveNoFear (apparently now going by cardmechanic) was banned...looks like he's trying to drum up interest in their bulletin board.

Yuku free message boards

Starbucks ordered to pay back stolen tips given to supervisors

Quick Reply