It does not violate the law for shift supervisors to share in the tip jar, ruled a California court of appeal [Central California Business Times; earlier at Point of Law]
Chronicling the high cost of our legal system
Cato Institute
Individual liberty, free markets, and peace: the world's premier libertarian think tank. Publishes Cato at Liberty, where I blog on contemporary policy issues.
Schools for Misrule
Get your copy today! My new book tackles the question of why so many bad ideas come from the law schools. "Cutting-edge commentary, hard-hitting, witty, astute." -- Publisher's Weekly. "Excellent... A fine dissection of these strangely powerful institutions" -- Wall Street Journal.
{ 2 trackbacks }
{ 3 comments }
Perhaps those baristas-supervisors should have considered spilling some of that unnecessarily hot coffee on themselves before filing their claim.
I think the issue of whether fifty bucks worth of tips should be split six or seven ways — which is the issue here — should go to the Hague. And perhaps the Galactic Federation Courts. Expense should never be an objection is pursuit of perfect justice. Particularly when the lawyers are up for one-third of an eighty-six million dollar award on contingency.
Bob
Todd: I think it was a non-barista-supervisor who filed the suit. His beef was that the semi-supervisors were forcing a seven- instead of six-way split, thus taking money out of his pocket.
Comments on this entry are closed.