Just ask…
 

First of all always review the bill for proper charges. Question any additional charges, there may be a valid reason…
Remember that tipping is a substantial part of your server’s income and should represent your satisfaction with the quality of their service. It is a luxury to have your meals prepared, served and dishes cleared/washed, so respect all the staff for their labors and courtesy.
In our current environment with all the difficulties hiring good people I reward my servers with higher than normal tips (30-35% or more) for their willingness to work for me. A bonus for a job well done!
Respect that shortages in staffing cause delays in service and don’t penalize the staff, unless they are rude or incompetent… (a big tip isn’t always deserved).
Enjoy being served and share your bounty, it is rewarding in the end!

(Historical note: TIPS were often paid in advance “To Insure Prompt Service” {TIPS})

People who continue to work while others opt out for whatever reason (great resignation, recipients of entitlement funding, etc) are not owed unusually high tips (30-35%). You are not the norm if you are doing this. Tipping has gotten way out of control! Every register flipped back at you demands a tip even if you order at a counter, pick your food up yourself and buss your own table. I leave a tip commensurate for the service. Like it is meant to be.

Tipping has gotten out of hand. When I stand at a counter to get my food than take a cup to get my drink and than bus my table, exactly why should I now be tipping anyone?

No server is worth a 30-35% tip!

You can change a courtesy charge but not a credit card service charge according to my credit card processor when I ran my business.

Why should I care if the "service charge" is paid to the server? If the restaurant is charging for it, they are conveying to the customer that it replaces the tip, and they should be paying it to the server. If they don't, isn't that between the restaurant and the server?

My husband and I leave a minimum of 30%.

This is why *I* care:

I believe the price I pay for my meal goes towards paying the server the legally mandated minimum wage. I believe the tip I leave for the server is in addition to that minimum wage. If the "service charge" is actually used to pay the minimum wage then:

1. The restaurant misled me as to the real cost of my meal - instead of being charged $40 I was really charged $47.20

2. While I was led to believe I was putting $7.20 extra into the server's pocket, that money really went into the owner's pocket.

3. I unintentionally end up "stiffing" a server who provided decent service and that matters to me a lot

It is not correct that the tip is added to the minimum wage. Tipped employees are usually paid much less than the minimum wage, and the restaurant is allowed to apply the tip income to make up the difference between the lower wage and the mandated minimum wage. The court case, cited by the OP, ruled that the service charge could not be treated as tip income for the purpose of making up the difference between the lower income and the minimum wage.

I understand your point, but I don't think the restaurant can have it both ways. If they are charging a service charge for service, I don't think they should keep that money, and then to expect the customer to pay an additional fee in the form of a tip to the server. Just my opinion.

I believe (here it is) that there is a minimum wage for most workers and a separate, lower minimum wage for tipped workers; the idea being that tips would make up the difference between the two. I believe in the Miami case the restaurant owner successfully argued that the service charge was not a tip and could be used towards the minimum wage.

I agree that the restaurant should not keep that money and then expect the customer to pay an additional tip. However, I believe that is exactly what the ruling was in the Miami case. (and one of the posted links listed similar rulings in the past).

You and I seem to agree on how things *SHOULD* work which is why I care that the sometimes don't actually work that way.

I'm confused. Yes, the service charge can apply to the minimum wage, but only if it is paid to the servers as income. But, if the service charge were to be counted as tip income, it could also be applied to make up the minimum wage. Tipped income is the property of the server, not the restaurant. The restaurant is not allowed to keep any tip income. But, since the service charge was ruled not to be tip income, then it is the property of the restaurant. The bottom line is that restaurant servers must be paid at least the mandated minimum wage, either as a salary or as a salary plus their tip income.

Yes, we agree on how things should be, but I am not going to lose any sleep worrying about how much money restaurant servers make.

My bad, I misread it as 25%... Regardless, it's certainly a lot more than 1 cent... :icon_wink:

"Gross Revenue" ≠ Profit...

exactly, i'm with you. this leaves a bad taste in the mouth, no pun intended

Amazon did something similar like this and it cost them $61 million in wage reimbursement it’s offsetting the labor cost of employer the servers won’t be making $6.85 hourly!
“ At the start of the Amazon Flex program, the company paid drivers at least $18 per hour plus 100% of customer tips. But in late 2016, the FTC says Amazon made secret changes to the program without telling drivers or customers. Rather than passing 100% of tips on to drivers, Amazon pocketed about a third of each tip to offset the guaranteed minimum Amazon promised to drivers. As the complaint explains it, “[F]or a one-hour block offering $18-$25, if Amazon’s base rate in the particular location was $12, and the customer left a $6 tip for the driver, then Amazon paid the driver only $12 and used the full customer tip of $6 to reach its minimum payment of $18 to the driver.” In other words, despite representations to drivers and customers, Amazon took a sizable portion of the tips customers expressly earmarked for drivers and used the money to reduce its own labor costs.”