Alleged Exploitation at Las Iguanas

[discodown]

I haven't worked in hospitality for over a decade but when I did I never heard of anything like this. There were two usual ways of distributing tips

 

Either a 'trunk' where all the tips went in and all kitchen and front of house staff got an equal share.

 

Or the waiting staff tipped out a percentage every night (usually 20 or 25%) and the kitchen staff would get their share of the tipping out money once a week or month.

 

It seems to me both are better ways of doing it than this

[slordy71]

They are made by Nestle who are boycotted by lots of people.

 

why would you boycott Nestle??

 

---------- Post added 02-09-2015 at 14:50 ----------

 

tips are for good service and hospitality not for the food as chefs get paid way more salarywise.

[Obelix]

The article also says that waiters earn £60 a night in tips on top of their wages. That doesn't sound too bad for a low skill job.

 

It seems that Las Iguanas have tried to put in a system that's fair to backroom staff but unexpectedly catches out a server under certain circumstances.

 

The article and the petition are a bit confused but it seems that the company uses a percentage of sales to make sure that the kitchen and cleaning staff get something as well as the staff who serve customers.

 

Many restaurants pool all tips from all servers and share is out between all the staff. Las Iguanas let the servers keep their tips less a percentage of sales. Sometimes a crap night or a crap server won't do very well in tips so they lose out.

 

It looks like their system needs tweaking instead of trashing. Then they will avoid the melodramatic Guardian headlines.

 

But it's dead easy to avoid the headlines...

 

All monies in tips be they on the till receipt or left in cash go into the tips pot.

 

Tips monies shared out at the end of the shift according to whatever formula you want. Some places weight more towards front of house if they are paid less than back of house staff.

 

IT's not difficult to sort this stuff out.

 

---------- Post added 02-09-2015 at 14:54 ----------

 

why would you boycott Nestle

 

Because lots of people get het up and bothered by "news" from the 1970's that's incorrect, unfactual and irrelevant.....

 

Bit like the way people slaver about Monsanto without actually knowing anything about it.

[sgtkate]

why would you boycott Nestle

 

Off topic, but here's why: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestl%C3%A9_boycott

 

In brief, Nestle aggressively and illegally market baby milk powder in Africa. It's so bad that they even have a UN resolution against them to cease and desist activities. However the UN has no legislative powers against them so cannot enforce it.

 

Nestle specifically 'gift' formula milk to new mothers telling them it will be better for the baby than breast milk. They give the mother about a months supply which happens to be about when the breast milk will stop being produced naturally forcing the mother to buy the formula from Nestle or have their baby starve. Many cannot afford the prices of the formula milk so are forced to water it down ultimately causing horrendous maln0urishment and death, all so Nestle can profit.

 

---------- Post added 02-09-2015 at 15:24 ----------

 

But it's dead easy to avoid the headlines...

 

All monies in tips be they on the till receipt or left in cash go into the tips pot.

 

Tips monies shared out at the end of the shift according to whatever formula you want. Some places weight more towards front of house if they are paid less than back of house staff.

 

IT's not difficult to sort this stuff out.

 

---------- Post added 02-09-2015 at 14:54 ----------

 

 

Because lots of people get het up and bothered by "news" from the 1970's that's incorrect, unfactual and irrelevant.....

 

Bit like the way people slaver about Monsanto without actually knowing anything about it.

 

Really? So sure about that? Perhaps go and Google the UN laws that Nestle has broken and been cited in doing so by the UN...

 

Anyway this thread is not about Nestle so lets get back on topic.

Edited September 2, 2015 by sgtkate

[TJC1]

 

Because lots of people get het up and bothered by "news" from the 1970's that's incorrect, unfactual and irrelevant.....

 

Bit like the way people slaver about Monsanto without actually knowing anything about it.

 

I know you like to clamp down on misleading information. If anyone wants to understand how monsanto harms sustainable agriculture here is a good site....

 

http://www.ucsusa.org/food_and_agriculture/our-failing-food-system/genetic-engineering/eight-ways-monsanto-fails.html#.VecWZxpFC2c

 

To quote

 

several ways monsanto fails sustainable agriculture...

 

#1: Promoting Pesticide Resistance

 

Monsanto's RoundupReady and Bt technologies lead to resistant weeds and insects that can make farming harder and reduce sustainability.

 

#2: Increasing Herbicide Use

 

Roundup resistance has led to greater use of herbicides, with troubling implications for biodiversity, sustainability, and human health.

 

#3: Spreading Gene Contamination

 

Engineered genes have a bad habit of turning up in non-GE crops. And when this happens, sustainable farmers—and their customers—pay a high price.

 

#4: Expanding Monoculture

 

Monsanto's emphasis on limited varieties of a few commodity crops contributes to reduced biodiversity and, as a consequence, to increased pesticide use and fertilizer pollution.

 

#5: Marginalizing Alternatives

 

Monsanto's single-minded emphasis on GE fixes for farming challenges may come at the expense of cheaper, more effective solutions.

 

#6: Lobbying and Advertising

 

Monsanto outspends all other agribusinesses on efforts to persuade Congress and the public to maintain the industrial agriculture status quo.

 

#7: Suppressing Research

 

By creating obstacles to independent research on its products, Monsanto makes it harder for farmers and policy makers to make informed decisions that can lead to more sustainable agriculture.

 

#8: Falling Short on Feeding the World

 

Monsanto contributes little to helping the world feed itself, and has failed to endorse science-backed solutions that don't give its products a central role.