Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amazon shortchanged drivers $61.7M in tips

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 344 posts

Re: Amazon shortchanged drivers $61.7M in tips

#321

Post by ntsplnkv2 »

mschuster91 wrote: post #308
ntsplnkv2 wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So is picking fruits and vegetables. There is endless labor supply. If one doesn't work out you find another. It doesn't matter how hard people in the business think it is - it requires no credentials or education and there is no bar. That's just reality - I feel for people who have to work in that industry, but that's just life. Your second argument is just, not a real argument. It ignores why the minimum wage could…

> It doesn't matter how hard people in the business think it is - it requires no credentials or education and there is no bar. That's just reality It is indeed. But still, someone working on a farm full time should be able to live off of that income. If the farm cannot pay a living wage, its products are too cheap. If the farm can't get more for their product because foreign competition undercuts them - well, that is…

Why?

You're asking a farmer to be subsidized by everyone else, but you're not saying why we should. Because economically, it's great that the farmer can have a living - not so great for the poor family that can't afford his overpriced produce.

Re: Amazon shortchanged drivers $61.7M in tips

#322

Post by ntsplnkv2 »

P_I_Staker wrote: post #309
ntsplnkv2 wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This doesn't work. Anyone can be a waitress or waiter. The labor is inherently low value because it's an easy job. Raising the minimum wage will just subsidize jobs that have less actual value and it will be a net loss to society. UBI could work because it redistributes the overly concentrated wealth gained from technology from the ultra rich across society. But raising the minimum wage does not.

No, it's "inherently low value" because most people can do it, and there will always be people desperate enough to do it. In fact they'll do worse jobs for less than a poverty wage, if given the opportunity. We could pack them into tiny boxes and send them underground to die of preventable diseases, then say they owe US money for the privilege. We enact labor laws because we can/have done this and find it distasteful…

> No, it's "inherently low value" because most people can do it, and there will always be people desperate enough to do it.

AKA, an easy job. A job that most people can do.

> The business and customer are getting an excellent deal because the model is anti-competitive....

No, they get an excellent deal because they're easy jobs that anyone can do. If being a waiter was like being a mechanic, they'd get paid more. Pretty basic.

> These people are giving up their entire lives basically. All you have is time on this earth, and they're asked to give all of that for nothing, so you can live in the lap of luxury. I don't want to live in a world without bartenders and servers. I consider their work valuable, and think they deserve fair pay.

I hear you - but raising the minimum wage hurts small restaurants a lot. And don't pretend like it doesn't. It will. They'll feel it instantly, and many will fail because of it. It's better to redistribute wealth in other ways. This drastic min. wage hike will just end up being a regressive tax on the poor.

Re: Amazon shortchanged drivers $61.7M in tips

#323

Post by ntsplnkv2 »

P_I_Staker wrote: post #310
mschuster91 wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Anyone can be a waitress or waiter. The labor is inherently low value because it's an easy job. Having done a stint in barkeeping myself, it's not an easy job at all and there are many people who aren't cut for it. You have to be resilient enough to deal with all kinds of customers (the "Karen" meme is based in way too much reality) and their issues no matter how you are feeling yourself, it's a job that's quite ta…

Yeah, I have to object to the OPs tone... maybe it was unintentional. Not only is OP wrong about servers (would you quit your corporate gig if the pay was the same? I 100% would not), but I actually don't want to live in a world without bartenders/servers. I'd hate to have my meals come out of a mailslot, or whatever.

The tone is baseline. You're objecting because you "feel bad about it." We rich westerners like to self loath a lot - a lot of loathing, little action. Of course we all "feel bad" about it. But half the posts in this thread are more "I don't want to tip this server whom I love very much and we need oh so desperately!" Pretty contradictory.

Everyone cares for everyone else, until it's their pocketbook. That's why it's easy to say "raise the minimum wage!", it's just the new "pass the back." No skin off the rich SV developers back, as he types on his $1100 iPhone made with slave labor in china, in his slave labor clothes, etc.

The argument about "would I do this job" is the wrong argument. The argument is, CAN I do this job. And yes I can, and yes, most people can. Most people can not be developers. So why bother with the worthless platitude.

Also to - it is a strawman to suggest I don't want a world without servers. I just suggested that over-subsidizing them is bad for society, as a whole.

Re: Amazon shortchanged drivers $61.7M in tips

#324

Post by ddingus »

ddingus wrote: post #314
lotsofpulp wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve always seen a “No Tip” option in the US. And if I didn’t, I certainly wouldn’t patronize them. 10% for a cashier giving you your order is insane. Am I supposed to be giving a 10% tax to all of my cashiers now?

Yes, me too. This one did not gave it, though a button did skip. Un indicated.

Missed edit window!

That should read, "This one did not give the option on screen. Button that worked was not indicated in any way."

Sheesh

Re: Amazon shortchanged drivers $61.7M in tips

#325

Post by andrei_says_ »

vladvasiliu wrote: post #116
andrei_says_ wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people who steal the difference between a living wage and a tip-subsidized wage? Subsidized by us, who pay twice?

> The people who steal the difference between a living wage and a tip-subsidized wage? The people who could "steal the difference" are usually the owners, right? Not sure why GP put the owners and kitchen staff in the same bucket. From my experience as a client in bars (without actual kitchens) in Paris, France, where tipping "isn't expected but kinda is" [0], most of the time tips are split between wait staff. So I…

Yes, the owners who do not pay their staff because they get it to be subsidized by tips.

This now includes Uber, Lyft, Instacart etc. getting filthy rich from employing AI to maximize human exploitation and misery.

Because they can.

Re: Amazon shortchanged drivers $61.7M in tips

#326

Post by viraptor »

lettergram wrote: post #288
viraptor wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not sure why GP put the owners and kitchen staff in the same bucket. Because the parent was talking about rewarding good job. The kitchen staff and the owners are both a factor in your good time and invisible during that time. If that's a honest opinion about the purpose of tips, then I don't see why owners/managers shouldn't share the pool. They run the place, created the environment, hired the people interacting…

Many kitchens or even chain restaurants do share the pool... they won’t share with the owner or managers, but the crew working will. Kind of astounding reading all these comments because I don’t think any have worked in a kitchen (or perhaps a fast food joint)

Many do, many don't, and changes are interesting. I've seen the reaction of front staff being told kitchen will share their tips - let's say they were not happy.

Re: Amazon shortchanged drivers $61.7M in tips

#327

Post by efwfwef »

leetcrew wrote: post #307
owlmirror wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've worked as a waiter during my university time and tips were the best thing in the world for someone that did not need any real qualifications. My wage alone would have barely covered my expenses but with tips I paid all of my living costs and could put aside a bit for my future. It was a system I liked as an employee since even when there were few customers I had not to worry too much about getting laid off immed…

vouched this because it more or less matches my experience as a server. also want to second this point. do not "protest tipping" by refusing to tip employees who expect at least 15% to make ends meet. you're not making a point; you're just screwing over some random person. also this ties into something that a lot of people don't seem to take into account when arguing for abolishing tipping. servers tend to like tippi…

> you're just screwing over some random person

Their employers is screwing them over, not me. I am not.

You want to force me to tip you? Make it mandatory then.

Re: Amazon shortchanged drivers $61.7M in tips

#329

Post by mschuster91 »

ntsplnkv2 wrote: post #321
mschuster91 wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It doesn't matter how hard people in the business think it is - it requires no credentials or education and there is no bar. That's just reality It is indeed. But still, someone working on a farm full time should be able to live off of that income. If the farm cannot pay a living wage, its products are too cheap. If the farm can't get more for their product because foreign competition undercuts them - well, that is…

Why? You're asking a farmer to be subsidized by everyone else, but you're not saying why we should. Because economically, it's great that the farmer can have a living - not so great for the poor family that can't afford his overpriced produce.

Then the government should take care that minimum wage is high enough that people can afford healthy food.

Re: Amazon shortchanged drivers $61.7M in tips

#330

Post by yibg »

ryanbrunner wrote: post #231
ddingus wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recently visited a place where it was forced hard. If one did not know the POS device, it is baked in. And, the cashier tells the customer to go ahead and pay, then walks away to fetch their order, leaving them no obvious option other than to select 10, 15 or 20 percent, or the awkward position of asking how to manage the tip. I have not gone back. I tip, because of the system and the position the labor is in, but…

Are you not from North America? It's more or less impossible to find a restaurant that doesn't have that integrated on their POS systems in the U.S. or Canada. Honestly, 10/15/20 are fairly conservative suggestions, I feel like I see them start at 15% pretty much all of the time.

I recall seeing some places (forget which exactly) where the default options start at 18%. Something like 18, 20 and 25. And this is for a place with no real service I think (you get your food, find your own table and put away your own tray).
Post reply on HN