[batlash]

Originally Posted by batlash

Actually, if you read on - he stated that if he found an establishment that did "mistreat" their employees by not satisfying the minimum standards set by law, that he'd stop frequenting there as a matter of principle.

Originally Posted by Cretaceous Bob

Yes, I know he said he'd stop going on principle. But I find his principles questionable, and I directly referred to that part of his paragraph in my post. I saw he said it, and addressed it. I guess you can't read.

You never really addressed it. Like most of your arguements, you called the guy an asshole & a douche rather than have a coherent arguement to back yourself on. As for his principles - refusing to go to a restaurant that doesn't treat their staff properly is a LOT more principled than someone who would paper over such bad corporate behavior by applying the difference yourself. Your method just rewards and encourages such bad behavior by the establishment to continue.

Originally Posted by Cretaceous Bob

As far as the Wal-Mart thing goes, that's totally not applicable. Wal-Mart does not have a system that can be fixed by the customer at the time of transaction. And my point wasn't that shitty people wouldn't fill his place, my point was that, if all people like this asshole were removed, the restaurant industry would either sustain its faulty system on the people who are willing to tip consistently and properly, or it would fail and the prices would be raised. There are only good consequences from assholes quitting eating out, is the point.

It's actually completely appliceable. Wal-Mart does have a system that can be fixed by the consumer - STOP FUCKING SHOPPING THERE - see - very simple. If enough people stop shopping there because they won't accept such practices, bad behaving companies will be forced to address such issues and correct their actions.

About 5 years ago in Montreal, SEARS removed all traces of english from in-store signage and would only post french ones ( despite being allowed by law if used together with a few adjustments ). People protested and boycotted SEARS on this issue, and guess what - they CORRECTED the problem rather than lose sales and clients.

Originally Posted by Cretaceous Bob

But furthermore, you know it is customary to tip. You know the assumed amount is deducted from paychecks. The wait staff is there expecting tips. You know this, but you have no problem dicking them over simply because some part of the transaction was left optional, so you're going to hold that over their heads. You're supposed to pay it, regardless of minimum wage or not, end of story.

There's a big difference in a customary practice and a required practice. Lets assume minimum wage laws are respected & applied to the wait staff. In that case CUSTOM dictates that it should be paid... not that it's required. If the service is really bad in this case - and is clearly due to the server, should bad performance of one's job be rewarded just because it's custom?

Originally Posted by Cretaceous Bob

Another example of comparing this to another matter that cannot be solved in the transaction itself. If, when you bought the shoe, you could pay additional money to cause the person who made the shoe to receive a fair wage, then that situation is applicable. I agree sweat shops are bad, and buying Nike makes people guilty, but in this situation you are more guilty. Not just as.

You're actually MORE guilty by purchasing the NIKES because you're supporting the behavior and not contributing to correcting it.

Originally Posted by Cretaceous Bob

Again, you're protesting to paying a fee which would be included in your bill if you did not pay it. This is not the same as Wal-Mart or a sweat shop. It would be the same if everyone else was voluntarily paying the people who made their shoes the difference between their real wage and a proper wage, and some jackfuck comes in and decides, since it is not required of him, he will refuse to pay the difference.

Actually your arguement the whole time has been we should subsidize waiters for the possible losses they endure to bad employment conditions because their employers won't. By your own arguement, every time we buy a pair of Nikes - we should send a check to cover the difference in wages to some 11 year old kid in some 3rd World Country.

Originally Posted by batlash

Actually, the way for the system to correct itself is NOT raising prices, but the government levying heavy fines & penalties against companies that do not respect that minimum labour, health & safety standards - and close the fuckers down if they have to.

Originally Posted by Cretaceous Bob

Oooooh, our government has to oversee every single fucking restaurant rather than just reprinting some menus? Shut the fuck up.

ACTUALLY - that's the government's job - to make sure that employees are treated fairly. That's why they have a labour standards act.