Re:Instacart paying 80 cents an hour because worker received...
by jeremyjh on Tuesday January 29, 2019 @11:00PM
(#19032528)
This is a distinction without a difference. There is no practical difference between paying less "because tip" and not paying the tip. The legal system is not staffed by robots, either. I don't see how they can defend a class action regardless of what words they've written on a TOS.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Instacart paying 80 cents an hour because worker received...
by Dylan16807 on Wednesday January 30, 2019 @12:45AM
(#19032984)
> There is no practical difference between paying less "because tip" and not paying the tip.
There is, because the pay can't go negative.
> The legal system is not staffed by robots, either. I don't see how they can defend a class action regardless of what words they've written on a TOS.
It depends on what the lawsuit is for. Normally we have things like "minimum wage" but those don't apply if you manage to convince everyone it's a contractor situation. If they can be classified as employees then there's all sorts of lovely anti-tip-taking law. But that's a big if. And I don't think contractors have tip laws? It's not generally illegal to say one thing about how your company allocates money coming in and then do another.