Minnesota restaurant adds ‘minimum wage fee’ to patrons’ bills

The family-owned Oasis Café in Stillwater, Michigan has made national news for a new ‘minimum wage fee’ it is adding to patron’s checks. The 35-cent fee appears as a line item on guests’ printed receipts, and, according to the restaurant, it helps offset the cost of a recent minimum wage increase for tipped employees. The business told WCCO-TV the increase will cost them about $10,000 extra a year. On radio this morning, Glenn explained why he “doesn’t have a problem” with the fee.

Get Glenn Live! On TheBlaze TV

“I actually don’t have a problem with this one,” Glenn said. “If you’re going to do it because of minimum wage, don’t build it in – put an extra fee so everybody knows.”

Below is a screenshot of a receipt from Oasis Café:

Screen Shot 2014-08-07 at 1.07.07 PM

It appears as though the fee has gotten mixed reviews from Oasis Café customers. While the patrons interviewed by WCCO largely accepted the businesses bid to stay afloat while complying with wage laws, the restaurant’s Facebook page has seen less positive feedback.

“You’re essentially blaming customers for the increase when you charge for it the way you do,” one commenter wrote.

It’s Oasis way of blaming our government for trying to set a fair living wage. It is political grandstanding,” said another.

Glenn, however, fully supported the business’s decision.

“Why are you complaining to them? Are they supposed to just eat that [cost],” Glenn asked. “This is the thing that kills me. People don’t understand how business runs. They really don’t have any idea… We are so poorly taught in our schools about what it means to be an entrepreneur.”

Watch the WCCO report about the fee below:

  • Eldjr

    What this business has engaged in is “transparency“. How would it be if every business detailed every tax on every bill? A business here in Maine [gas station] used to post a prominent sticker at each pump detailing the amount of tax per gallon the State and Federal authorities charge. It was disturbing to see.

    We should be disturbed like this more often.

    • Stoneysilence

      Many Gas stations around my area still post that info. I think it is about 40cents a gallon now.

    • tracysaconservative

      They all do, it is the law. Makes you want to walk.

    • roberta4343

      actually the gas taxs original purpose was to fund the roads those who use the road the most paid the most, but now with fuel efficiency rules by government the revenues dropped, but that shouldn’t deter anyone because no matter how you slice it is a voluntary tax, to me if the gas tax was exclusively for the roads like they are suppoed to I have no problem with it because to me this price is a bargain for having roads to just about anywhere you want to go. and before you go there I have a gas guzzler a truck. if gas tax is 40 cents then I fill up my truck and pay 12 dollars to the roads, quite a bargain when you consider a large pizza without delivery is about that price depending on how many toppings you put on. when I fill up 2 times a month that is 24 dollars, this is what it costs me to order a extra large pizza delivered. my complaint is with a progressive income tax, they should only take a small percentage of that because it is a direct tax, unconstitional and not voluntary. and the more you make the higher percentage they take until you reach one million then it goes down quite rapidly. see a trend here? is the income tax for purposes of revenue or for purposes of preventing wealth creation or accumulation by the average joe?

      • Today22011

        Michigan — A fill up is $40.00.; 2 X a month = $80.00 . For the Motor State, that is a lot of tax . Many roads are gravel and pot hole quickly.

        • xiromisho

          If the roads are that poor it sounds like the tax isn’t high enough – but I have the same issue in NY. Everyone complains about the pot holes, and wants the state to pay for their flat tired, but the second you mention an infrastructure tax, or increasing the gas taxes to pay for this, everyone votes it down… and we remain having pot holes. Unless you all want to go out yourself right now and pay someone to fix your local roads on an as needed basis, we need more funding for infrastructure.

          Everytime you see a net under a roadway, that’s a sign that we need more revenue in the infrastructure fund.

      • Eldjr

        Roberta, you made some excellent points; permit me to review and comment for general edification:

        “My complaint is with a progressive income tax, they should only take a small percentage of that because it is a direct tax, unconstitional and not voluntary.”

        Under the guise of ‘amending’ the Constitution [16th Amendment] they inverted its entire meaning.

        By the authority of “We the People” [which authority precedes the existence of all subsidiary authorities granted thereby] the Constitution and Bill of Rights simultaneously empowered and restrained our civil institutions [both Federal as well as State governments]:

        The U.S. [Federal] government was empowered to fulfill those purposes implicitly described in the Preamble, as explicitly established in the main body.

        Those powers [and ‘power’ means “ability to force”] are explicitly and definitely delimited by the main body of the Constitution, which comprises the specific and enforceable portion [the Preamble is not enforceable as law because it lacks the specificity of either positive or negative law, being a “statement of purpose” which must be [and is], defined and delimited by the explicit language of the “main body” [beginning with Article one, Paragraph one, and so on].

        The essence, or ‘spirit’ – intent – of the Constitution was to restrain the ability of one portion of the People to gain mastery over another through majority rule, and to prevent despotism by rulers civil OR religious.

        The 16 Amendment compressed the sphere of individual Liberty by expanding the power of government over volitional action. What was destroyed by the imposition of the progressive income tax? Domestic Tranquility, and ‘the Common Defense’. Individuals were no longer at peace with each other, as the employment of their industry or talents [and the fruits thereof] made them subject to disproportionate taxation based upon their degree of success. This made some citizens less equal than others. From there, “transfer payments” were instituted, redistributing lawfully-obtained property from one individual [or class] to another, in trade for political support [votes].

        So the Constitution was amended to make it an enforcer of moral judgments, and so it is to this day. Ask a Progressive why they confiscate the property of some, and hand it to others, and they’ll universally utilize moral language to justify their self-serving robbery. See how they answer this post for examples.

        “…is the income tax for purposes of revenue or for purposes of
        preventing wealth creation or accumulation by the average Joe?”

        The truth is that whatever the purpose of the progressive income tax, it is wrong, because it treats citizens unequally. The effect is to accomplish both of the outcomes you described, but we are not to judge the ‘goodness’ of a lop-sided law upon its accomplishment of [even laudable] outcomes, but based upon the overarching ideal of equal treatment before the law. The progressive tax pits ‘classes’ against one another.

        And as you adroitly observed, the progressive income tax is a “direct tax” which, before the inversion of Constitutional intent effected by the 16th Amendment, was directly opposed by the language of the original articles which it attacked. The very language of the 16th amendment reveals its enmity against those Constitutional protections that it effectively overturns:

        “The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived,

        without apportionment among the several States,

        and without regard to any census or enumeration.”

        Here’s what it effectively destroyed:

        Article I, Section 2, Clause 3: Representatives and direct [individual] taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers…

        Article I, Section 8, Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.

        Article I, Section 9, Clause 4: No Capitation [per person], or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.

        So it can be seen that the 16th Amendment effectively nullified these protections of individual Liberty, and empowered the civil government to ignore those portions of the Constitution that prevent direct meddling with individual lives, such as it now practices with impunity.

    • Andrew Olson

      How about he lists when rent goes up with an asterisk? How about insurance? How about delivery costs? Why just his employees getting a raise in the minimum wage? Kind of hypocritical.

      • BlueMN

        Minimum wage is your employers way of saying “If I could pay you even less, I would.”

        • dngiqw35

          Or an employee’s way of saying, “I can’t produce this much value, but the law says you have to pay more than I’m worth. “

          • BlueMN

            Unlikely since employers make their profit off of the excess value of the labor employees provide and they have shown they will pay starvation wages if they can get away with it.

          • Travis Leake

            wow, way to quote “Das Kapital”

          • gerry tierney

            Or You saying “I don’t have a close relationship with reality”.

      • Eleanor

        Minimum wage is the one that people stuck their nose into and bullied businesses in the public arena. They should recognize the results of their decisions.

        • gerry tierney

          WTF does that even mean?

      • Eldjr

        Actually, Andrew, listing the added governmental costs wouldn’t be a bad idea. I kind of like my telephone bill’s transparency. Have you looked at the “surcharges, fees and taxes” added to the actual cost of your telephone service [I speak to those with ‘land-lines’]?

        Here in the People’s Republic of Maine, the surcharges, fees and taxes almost exactly double the bill. The phone service is around $30 and the additional governmental “cut” runs around $32. The added costs include:

        Maine School and Library Fund (MTEAF) – .7% of instate charges (supports Internet connectivity)

        E911 Charge – $.45

        Connect Maine .25% of instate charges (supports broadband projects in un- and under-served areas)

        Maine Universal Service Fund (supports high cost phone companies) – 1.51% of instate charges

        Maine Service Provider Tax – 5.5% of instate charges (new name for sales tax on telecom services)

        Federal Universal Fund – 16.4% of interstate charges (changes quarterly)

        Federal Excise Tax – 3% of instate charges

        An informed customer is an empowered customer. If I choose to drop my land-line, I can save about 50% of my phone costs.

        But the main question is whether the customer should be made aware of the costs that are imposed by government as contrasted with those incurred as standard operating costs. Do we insist that we be kept ignorant as to why the bill goes up? If so, why?

        Where, Andrew, are you injured by seeing this figure on your bill; or why do you oppose others seeing it? Do you actually have any skin in the game? No offense, just curious.

        • Jeanne

          Isn’t Maine a Commonwealth? I know that Commonwealths have a lot more taxes.

          • Eldjr

            I don’t believe that Maine is a commonwealth, though it did split from Massachusetts, which is. Maine has a high tax burden though, because progressives have had almost unopposed rule here for more than 40 years until the current governor, LePage, and the recently empowered republican majority in the State House. Things are looking up, but the progressives are howling armageddon. They’re such an emotional lot.

          • lantanalenoxx

            LePage is an indulgence the people of Maine will pay for for decades.

          • s mcdonald

            hehe, too funny , as opposed to what your paying now for the last 40 years , of those in power. you sir are clueless. here in the communist republic of ct. we have had the same leadership for 40 years as well and they just, lie , cheat , steal from the general fund then write an illegal executive order to make it legal, and so on. we have among the highest state and local taxes in the nation. with an economy that never left recession. and talk of 15 dollar an hour minimum wage, when a skilled worker is making 18.00 . and places of business are making a 9 percent profit. way too many people on here like to comment showing how smart they are , and it is all just rhetoric , from textbooks , and college professors , none o it is real in the real world. a guy who runs a restaurant, like this is needing to to do a million dollars a year in gross business to have a shot at making a decent salary. way too many folks who do not understand what it takes to make a profit in business run thier mouths way too much.

        • lantanalenoxx

          Let’s see it on everything then is what we’re saying.

      • James Bond

        When the Federal or State Government mandates you must pay more for something in the course of doing your business it no longer becomes a line item on your balance sheet but a TAX and should be transparent to your clients as such.

    • lantanalenoxx

      Well then, let’s see a Koch brothers fee every time there’s an increase in the price of paper napkins.

      • Eldjr

        Good idea. We’ll list it right next to George Soros’ influence on monetary policy and its effect on the valuation of our currency.

  • landofaahs

    As long as it is voluntary I don’t mind. However if they automatically put it on my bill I will not patronize that place again. Free choice.

    • jmaster67

      You do realize that you’ll have to boycott every restaurant in the state, don’t you?
      All restaurants will have to raise prices to cover the additional expense.

      • landofaahs

        No you would not. It is one restaurant doing this on their own if I read this right.

        • jmaster67

          It is a state law. Every restaurant will have to comply. Prices will go up at all of them.

          • landofaahs

            I never saw that. I thought it was a decision of that particular restaurant. Could you show me where it is a stated law?

          • jmaster67

            It’s in the story:
            “it helps offset the cost of a recent minimum wage increase for tipped employees.”

    • Becky Stout

      But if they just raise the prices to accommodate the fee, you’ll gladly keep patronizing the establishment? Six of one, half a dozen of the other.

      • Linda Murray

        Stupid is as stupid does, Becky! Some people… like landofaahs, don’t THINK before they react! If they just raised the prices you MIGHT get charged more in the long run. Cuz I could see them raising the price of those waffle fries on the bill, by a dollar without hearing a peep!

        • Ferrari fan

          oh you’ll hear a peep, maybe even a whine or complaint about how everything is going up. at least this way it’s a flat charge on the bill, not an addition to every item on the menu.

          • Linda Murray

            What I’m sayin’ is… the NON-thinkers like landofaahs will holler LOUDER about the flat charge than they will about the increase in price of one item.

          • jmaster67

            or an increase in the price of every item.

          • landofaahs

            You’re obviously too stupid to see that this is a publicity stunt in a very liberal area designed to bring in business from retards who want to feel like they are “making a difference”. I would cut prices if I were the competition and after the idiots wake up price will take over in choice as it most always does.

          • Too Many Idiots

            Pot, meet the stupid kettle.

          • landofaahs

            By the way, I posted later that I did not realize the minimum wage increase was law but thought it was a voluntary act by the restaurant for which I admitted my mistake. Thanks for the kind words but I must admit that in previously standing up for your reputation, I now regret having done so.

          • FishLady

            No Lanofaahs, it’s a liberal and Obama move so he can continually drain the middle class so they can support all of the illegals which have been flowing through our borders for the last 6 years. He will get his voters regardless of who he has to step on. The minimum wage isn’t going to be anything in comparison to what Obama’s Affordable Care Act is going to cost those who thought they were getting it for free. This minimum wage is going to be a national wage, even for those that are in our country illegally, the ones that can not speak the English language, the ones that have not even been trained to do the job they are being hired to do, the ones that do no care if they get your order right or not. This is for those that are working and do not give a darn about their job as they are only their for their paychecks. Where I live you would not believe what takes place in some of the places I use to go to but now you couldn’t give me a free meal to eat there again.

        • landofaahs

          It’s not forced on other restaurants. This is a publicity stunt. Otherwise why wouldn’t they just raise all prices without explanation. The higher prices would cause the competition to take business away from them. Think before you shoot from the lip moron.

          • Too Many Idiots

            Advice you should take for yourself.

      • landofaahs

        If restaurants have a choice and are not forced then I see nothing wrong with it. It really is a stunt though because all they would have to do is raise the price of all meals by that particular percentage without any explanation. But they put it there for publicity.

    • Alison Freisz-Steward

      So if they just increase the menu price of there items without telling you why (and at $.35 you would never notice) that’s okay? It’s better if they just don’t share what they’re doing if its an “involuntary” charge?? Essentially that’s what you’re saying correct? Then we go and complain that prices are so high and we don’t know where our money is going…ignorance is bliss I guess

      • landofaahs

        IT’S VOLUNTARY and only one restaurant is doing it. Let them raise their prices. You can choose another restaurant and believe me over time they will and the publicity stunt will fail.

    • Too Many Idiots

      I guess you freely chose not to use your brain with that comment.

      • landofaahs

        I would choose another restaurant. Don’t you realize there are more than one restaurant? You brainless twerp.

        • Too Many Idiots

          You’re too stupid to realize the other restaurants simply raised the price of their food to accommodate the wage increase and I’m the brainless one? Wow. Sign you up for Mensa. Moron.

    • Coast Mom

      But the restaurant doesn’t have free choice on whether to accept the minimum wage hike – yes you have free choice, to not eat at restaurants.

      • landofaahs

        This is one restaurant as I read it. This is not a law but one restaurant using a publicity stunt to drum up business. Vote with your feet and go to another restaurant.

        • Too Many Idiots

          Major reading comprehension failure. But congratulations on continuing to show your ignorance.

    • Rob

      They could easily make it voluntary as long as the government made it voluntary for them to pay more.

      If they raise the price of the food, then a party of 4 pays 4 times as much extra, even though it takes almost of the same amount of the wait staff’s time. If it’s one charge per transaction, this is closer to the actual cost, and likely less money, especially if you’re dining with others. After all, if you would spend 45 minutes at a restaurant with 4 others, and you’d spend close to that by yourself (or, at least, certainly more than 1/5 of it), then why should you have to pay 5 times as much (that is, 5 times as much food is 5 times as much increase if it is built into the price).

      Minimum wage is based on time, not quantity purchased, and as such, fees to cover the cost of minimum wage make much more sense if they are done on a per-transaction basis.

      • BaseballGrrl

        That’s what I was thinking – this actually does seem more fair and a number they could’ve easily derived from statistics of the number of customers in the past in relation to increase in cost. Seems fair enough to me.

      • FishLady

        But tips are based upon quantity/total amount of purchase and at times they try to get away with us paying a tip on the tax!

    • jimmyv65

      other places are putting it on your bill, they are just not itemizing it like this place is, unless you grow all of your own food, you are paying for it somehow

  • landofaahs

    I liked the gas station in the 70’s that gave a cash back discount per gallon for use of cash since credit cards charge a percentage and people who pay cash are now paying the extra cost.

    • Ferrari fan

      stations here have a cash price and a credit price because of the fees they have to pay with credit.

  • http://truthofg.blogspot.com/ Connor Kenway

    I love the idea just to see how much the government screws us every time we do anything.

  • SueJer

    Due to government intervention, we are forced to raise menu prices to cover the increase in minimum wage. So sorry. Contact barack obama and thank him for his intrusion!


    • jmaster67

      I like the Oasis idea better. I wish every business itemized taxes and fees. That would do more than Freedomworks could ever hope to accomplish.

  • Racso

    Reminds me of the Fuel Surcharge I see on most everything anymore. I don’t see a problem with letting people know what they are paying for.

    • Cheyren

      Ever look at your cell phone bill and the fees they have on those? I am not even sure what they all are for??? I am mixed about showing the fees. Sometime it upsets me because I feel like business start adding any type of fee they want after a while.. surcharge for this, …tax for that…anything to make it “look” like the starting price is cheaper than the competition until you get the final bill with all the “fees”. It is coming to where we have to start asking businesses what “fees” are in addition to the cost? and ever notice price for things is “negotiable” but the “fees” are not….

      The baggage fee with airlines probably best example… they are making millions a year now with it and you must pay it… but you can get your ticket to fly at all different rates.

      When will consumers demand that we don’t want MORE fees added to our bill. Tell me the “price” I need pay upfront!!! and we can go from there and decide. Not make me think it is lower until I get the bill and it has 4 additional fees on it that I was not aware were going to be there when we started.

  • Leah Page

    Minnesota, not Michigan, right? Typo in the above 😉

    • chefz774

      Living in Michigan myself, I wondered about that too. If the restaurant was located in Grand Rapids, I could understand, because we both have one of those, but otherwise I don’t understand why the error.

    • Amber Johnson

      It is Minnesota.

  • AsSeenOnTv

    What they are doing is making a political statement. I don’t disagree.. They are saying, see you voted for a wage increase and this is what it is going to cost you. Personally I think they should base it off of how long your rear is in one of their seats.

    • jmaster67

      That’s asinine. They don’t pay you for being there. You pay them to eat there.

      • zemla

        It is not asinine. Unless it’s empty. But when busy, you who pays once yet stays “extra long” may be a deterrent to potential new customers, thus the restaurant loses their business because you want to sit there and drink coffee and chit chat all night….maybe not you personally, but a lot of folks who have worked in restaurants know of “those types”

  • Mary Casanova

    This is fair and straight forward. The COULD (as it is their right) jack up all entrees .50, all appetizers .25 and all drinks .25. That would add $2 to a two person bill. I’d rather pay the 35 cents.

    • Richie Whitmore

      They could also jack up the prices .10, .5 and .5 and make more and no one would notice. It’s about making a statement, not about what is “best for business”

      • BaseballGrrl

        yes – but I think it is an important statement to make – hopefully a wake-up call to all the non-thinking people that have been fighting for the increase. I thought it seemed obvious that a hike in wage would equal a hike in prices, but that didn’t seem to occur to them. I work at a place where I make more than minimum, so I see no wage increase, but I do see the price hikes. That makes me get poorer so they can get what? a bigger number on their check? It’s a ridiculous “problem solver” so I’m glad someone is pointing that out so blatantly.

    • FishLady

      I live right outside of Washington, DC and I can tell you the prices of the food has already gone up here and I know the minimum wage will be added on top of that. What cost me and my family a month ago to go out to eat has now gone up $20 for the very same meal, not including the tip. As the prices of the food goes up so does the total cost of the meal, which in turn means the tip you are now supposed to give, regardless of the service or other screw ups, is then increased which means the wages are going up, the tips go up and the owners and corporations continue to get richer and richer and the consumer will eventually stop eating out as much as they did before.

  • Flower Power

    Did anybody catch the headline says Minnesota and the story says Michigan?

    • gingerdog

      I noticed that, as well. It is a Minnesota story. Stillwater is in Minnesota, and WCCO-TV is a Minnesota station.

    • BaseballGrrl

      Oh my gosh! That totally changes the entire point of the story!! What a crock!

  • Duurp O’Fallon

    More of the Obama hope and change … this time with little hope. Isn’t it just wonderful democrats what you have done by voting in a man that changed the world of many?

  • Cameron Channell

    Seems fair. Anytime your costs go up, those costs naturally get passed on to the consumer. This is no different than businesses who add a fuel surcharge when gas prices increase. Yes, they may be making a political point, but what’s wrong in knowing where your money is going, and why prices increased?

    • FishLady

      Unfortunately the consumer is the one, in my opinion, that always get the short end of the stick and has to pay for these things. I mentioned above in a post that I wonder just how much of the cost of these increases does corporate absorb or the profits that they make decrease, or is it just the consumer’s/patron’s responsibility to keep up these things? I do feel sad for the servers/cooks/etc.

  • McRCN

    That is one way of doing it. The other way is just increasing the price of the food and drinks. Better than just making the portions smaller anyway. The bottom line is the customer is always going to pay for the increase.

  • Richie Whitmore

    That last girl is going to be a prophet for the future. Wait until Wal-Mart gets a chance to try this out and cut wages on people. Business interests above treating people right, as usual.

  • Alisa Lisa Isbell

    If it is put on the receipt and you know where it is going , have to watch though if the places that do, do this ,is not making more money from this than they are passing on to their workers . There will be some that will try and keep a little for themselves .

  • Michael Keller

    I find it funny how the headline say Minnesota and the article says Michigan. Either way I still support this. Why increase your prices for “no apparent reason” and give everyone more reason to think your a greedy establishment?

    • NoU4EN

      Oasis Cafe is in Stillwater, Minnesota. Stillwater is a tourist city. Celebrities Jessica Lange and Sam Shepard live in the area.

  • http://www.mrchrisg.com/ mrchrisg.com

    I could never understand tipping. Businesses need to pay their employees, not me directly as a customer. Do the math and adjust your cost effectively. Pay minimum wage to your workers and make no tips allowed.

    • Sam701

      They do get paid $2.13/hour. Tipping is just traditional. You also don’t have to leave a tip. It is completely voluntary.

      • http://www.mrchrisg.com/ mrchrisg.com

        Not so, many places put a gratuity charge on your bill!

        • jmaster67

          If they do that with e they are cheating themselves. I am a good tipper. I used to work in and run a restaurant. If they want to add it in, then they’ll only get that amount. If they want to let me tip voluntarily, they’ll get more.

        • Sam701

          Only if it’s a certain # of people. It’ll be on a sign somewhere “x% gratuity will be added for parties of ‘y’ or more”

    • allbuss84

      But then they will actually make less money since they are not paying any taxes on cash tips. No FICA saves 7.5% and no income tax saves another 15+%. They want higher wages plus more tip. Higher wages = higher prices = higher tips. win, win, win- for them.

      • http://www.mrchrisg.com/ mrchrisg.com

        Yes, I worked as a cook at a place once and none of the wait staff declared all their tips! If they made $100.00 for their shift, they would put down $10.00 as tips. So they don’t pay their fair-share! As the cook, I had to pay all my taxes. They would also come into the kitchen and ask me to help deliver food and bus tables. I asked for half their tip money, and they would get mad at me for not helping them!

        • NoU4EN

          45 years ago tips weren’t reportable until the 70’s and then when it became a line item for filing taxes, everyone fudged down the amount. Even back in the late 60’s I was going home with $40 for four hours work. Now I routinely give 20% to anyone who delivers a service (restaurants, hair stylists, pizza delivery etc). In MN, most restaurants automatically add 15-18% gratuity for parties of six or more. Considering that a restaurant server is normally assigned five tables with an expected two turnovers (10 tables a night), and the cost of a moderate meal for two is $45, that comes out to $9.00 per table – or $90 per night in tips. My birthday last year, we went a Steak House in Minneapolis for a once-in-a-lifetime experience where four dinners, a bottle of wine, and a couple of beers cost nearly $500 with an additional $100 for a tip. If I wasn’t so old, I would go back to waiting tables at a nice restaurant where I know I could easily haul home $200 a night.

          • zemla

            I’ve known many gals with degrees who won’t stop bartending for exactly this reason…they make more

      • Carly’s Mom

        In Kentucky the must report all tips for taxes. Of course Kentucky tries to tax everything and we never see where the money goes.

        • http://www.mrchrisg.com/ mrchrisg.com

          Everywhere you’re supposed to report ALL tips, but usually they don’t. See my post below…

    • Scott Gilreath

      Then you would get lousy service from your server because they are just there to make a paycheck. When tips are involved, the server strives to give you the best possible service to maximize the tip they receive…I for one, would not go to a restaurant that doesn’t allow tips and pays their servers a flat hourly wage. If I get excellent service, i pay as much as 25% in tips and don’t have a problem with it. If I get bad service, the server might get 10%. Servers prefer the tipping system better anyway because they know the better service they give, the better the tip…with the exception of a few a**holes out there that never tip well no matter what.

  • Karma

    To the complainers: You will pay it, one way or another. Those fries will just cost $1.25 instead of $1.00, and the burger will be more too. At least this way, you can see what the consequences of dumb economic choices are.

    • Amber Johnson

      yes and like I said above, the ones complaining were out there picketing that it be raised……you can’t fix stupid and m state seems to have a lot of stupid in i.

    • FishLady

      I will just eat at home because I do know how to cook I just do not want to. Unfortunately there will be more and more people who will have the same mind set at I have. It is sad but I just can not allow my self to pay between 25 – 40% in tips and increases to my tab just to have someone else to cook and serve me. I do wonder at times and I am not being rude when saying this, how much of a decrease does the owner or corporation take when increases/expenses go up? I keep seeing more restaurants being built under Great American Restaurants for example, while the prices go up and the patron’s become more and more responsible for their employees pay. My daughters used to be servers so I am not knocking the servers what so ever and I am a VERY generous tipper although things are just starting to get out of control, thank you Obama, for the patron!! My opinion only! Smiles!

  • Eldjr

    The minimum wage.

    Progressives call it “a living wage” in order to bamboozle folks into voting for them, but it was never intended to be a living wage. My son just got a job working for “minimum wage”. He actually griped about “only getting $.$$/hr.”

    I reminded him that he was getting more than he was worth to the company that
    hired him, because he’s as yet unable to return to them a profit at least equal to what they’re paying him.

    I advised him to “make yourself indispensable: do more, do it longer and better than
    the other guy and your pay will go up. Not only that, but when the time comes for workforce reduction, who will be the one they keep? Not the guy who puts out the bare minimum, but the one who’s “indispensable”: the one who does more, does it longer, and better than the rest – in essence, the best employee”. These are the ones who receive pay increases and promotions, and eventually end up in charge. Fortunately, my son [19] still thinks his old man is [fairly] smart, and agreed to put forth a strong effort.

    I had some friends [brothers] who went from Maine to Florida to live for a while. They both got jobs. One worked for a building contractor, the other at a fish market. Both of them advanced rapidly through the philosophy of “Indispensibility”. The
    one working at the fish market was in charge in two months, only the Sole Proprietor was over him. The other workers were envious and one of them challenged him to a fight after hours, claiming that my friend had “taken over”; that somehow he had gotten promoted “unfairly”.

    Unfortunately the challenger ended up on his tookis with a busted nose.

    Not only could my buddy work better, he could fight better, too. He was foreman for a few years, until they moved back to Maine.

    The entire point is that the so-called “living wage” is a huge progressive lie. A mandated ‘minimum wage’ will and can never be a ‘living wage’ because it directly inflates the most basic cost of goods and services; and when the “living wage” earner goes to the store to buy something they find the price of everything has gone up, and even though the amount of dollars in their paycheck has increased, they have no more buying power than before.

    So they’re on a treadmill that just speeds up the faster they run, and as the “living wage” increases, fewer untrained workers get jobs, and the jobs that are available receive lower benefits and fewer hours.

    And all of it is spoon-fed to the young and uneducated [redundant] who buy the progressive snake-oil claim that the minimum wage is supposed to be a “living wage” adequate to support a family; a lie that is put on their plate by
    Progressives who couldn’t care less about the futility of the formula as long as they’re the recipients of the support [votes] of struggling citizens trying to “live the American Dream” on the stale crumbs that fall from the Progressive feasting table of political privilege.

    It would be better all round if each one’s ‘minimum wage’ were determined by their own choice and economic circumstances. More businesses would emerge, and competition for workers would raise the price of labor without the coercive “central planners” sticking their defiling fingers into the batter. But, of course, then the Progressive would have less to sell and would have to produce better ideas or go out of business.

    • mspatdev

      I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU. I tried to tell people on and off the internet exactly what you have said about raising the minimum wage. I hope all of the non-believers are really satisfied with there new wages. I hope that you have been shopping and especially at the food markets on your own money that are higher now then before. The rest of us live on a certain income and we can’t even afford shopping. Not only the Progressives, but the liberals are in with this mess. I kept telling them that obammy and his minions needed to have classes in Economics 101 and higher along with Math.

      • Eldjr

        Yes, and thanks.

        Marx based his philosophy upon the feudalism of old Europe and its logical outcome – the French Revolution. The intractable class structure – the fruit of the union of Church and State [Divine Right] – the privileges of ‘nobility’, etc. meant that no improvement of living conditions was possible. The “rich” [aristocracy] indeed aggrandized themselves on the backs of the “poor” [serfs].

        Having rejected the principles of the Reformation [individual conscience, individual liberty, individual responsibility], the French Aristocracy held to their “Divine-Right entitlements” until the wretchedness of the people grew so intolerable that they arose in a cataclysm of murderous desperation. 1789 saw the commencement of the breakdown of civilization until not only was the Aristocracy overthrown, but also God. The results were terrible: even the seven-day week was overthrown – for a time – in favor of a ten-day week called, “Decade”. The wild celebrations engaged in on their “Tenth Day” are recalled in our word, “decadence”. This was Marx’s object of study [and, not surprisingly, the root and eventual outcome of Progressivism, which is based upon Marxist philosophy].

        And Marx largely dismissed the American Revolution [which embraced Reformation principles], preferring an atheistic all-powerful State in place of individual conscience, individual liberty, and individual responsibility under a Creator who made each human being with equal and unalienable rights – certainly not the least of which is the individual’s right to trade their property for another’s property if both agree upon like value [recalling that property is but the tangible product of one’s expenditure of time, effort and ability].

        A government that interposes itself between individuals for the purpose of dictating the terms of property exchange [except to protect the Creator-given rights of those individuals], oversteps its authority and makes itself equal to [indeed superior to] the Creator; thus invalidating its authority by overruling the fundamental rights of the People under whose authority it exists in the first order.

        But these thoughts [admittedly distilled in a less-progressive age] are foreign – and dangerous – to the established order.

        I like what Orwell wrote: “In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a radical act.”


          Not many people know all of that. The perfect example of the difference is the XYZ affair. After the French Revolution, central planners became bold enough to refuse our diplomats. We had to give a tribute to the new French State. This not sitting well with the US, sparked an undeclared war between France and the US.

          This is the second half of centralized planning. The people who are at the head of it enrich themselves very easily and can maintain power as long as they keep giving away things to the great unwashed. They soon run low on funds and need to begin extortion to maintain the programs that the people thirst for. Marx didn’t make mention to this, but Lenin understood this problem. His solution was to make people scared of external threats and to quickly punish anyone who fomented decent within the body politic. This was Stalin’s primary purpose until Lenin died.

    • leia_tyndall

      Very well stated. Thank you!

    • Guest

      Good comments! A “mandatory” minimum wage is an ASPIRATION killer, another way to entitle. The art of oppression.

      • Eldjr

        A fascinating term, “Aspiration”: Its primary meaning is “To breathe”. It has been said that ‘to breathe is to live’. Indeed, a fetus is not recognized as a human being until it draws its own breath [hence PBA].

        So then, if ‘to breathe is to live’, and ‘aspire’ means ‘to breathe’, then the mandatory minimum wage that opposes Aspiration also opposes Life.

      • xiromisho

        if you’re “Happy” about being paid minimum wage you’re insane. And the father’s son was NOT happy with minimum wage. He aspired to be MORE because he wanted more money. Wanting more money is the aspiration, and if someone working minimum wage complains about it, then it’s doing fine.

        $15 is too high, 10 is an acceptable level, but it really should be determine by local government, not federal. Folks working in NYC make $15 already, and it’s not a livable wage. Give that same income to someone in the middle of the Kansas dust bowl and they won’t know what to do with it.

    • Gerald Corsiglia

      And off to social Darwinism we go.

      • Eldjr

        Indeed! And are we not told that the education of our children is now for the benefit of business, that “we” [America] might ‘better compete’ in the “Global Marketplace”?

        “Social Darwinism” is the pseudo-scientific philosophy that declares the “the fittest society survives”. Germany assayed to implement this ‘social evolution’ through armed conflict and conquest. The modern ‘social Darwinist’ implements this philosophy in the arena of Global economic competition. The policy of harnessing the civilian population to the economic interests of the State is called, “Fascism”, and the entire world is swirling around that drain. Russia is now a fascist State upholding and feeding its corporate interests, as is China; both having seen the inherent weakness of Communism. The United States, in order to meld with Russia and China, is strengthening the power of central government over the lives of the citizens; and while the rhetoric decries ‘corporations’ and the ‘one percent’, the truth is that Progressive administrations [Every administration since Coolidge – even Reagan “bailed out” the Savings and Loans] have no problem whatever supporting the corporations that will slip between the Federal sheets, so to speak, using taxpayer dollars to “bail out” businesses “too big to fail”.

        It’s not a nice truth; but it’s the truth.


          Don’t forget the bond market. That is the worst part of the Federal Governments entanglement with private business. We have an industry built around our mechanism for creating currency. Note that I use the word currency and not money. The Federal Reserve Bank is the beginning of the problem. The Treasury sells bonds to private banks, in order to gather currency at the Treasury. The Fed buys up US Treasury bonds from these private banks with checks written on an account with a zero balance. When they do this currency springs into existence. This process is exacerbated by fractional reserve lending. It created a monetary system that means we can never pay down our debt, because every dollar that exist was borrowed into existence. This means that every dollar out there has interest due on it.

        • Gerald Corsiglia

          To call this a progressive issue falls short. Money is at the heart of this and its injection into politics. Politicians aren’t doing their jobs for the people as much as they are for the lobbying firms that want to hire them after their job is done.

          Your post earlier doesn’t escape the concept of social Darwinism. To say that minimum wage jobs shouldn’t be livable (some states working two or three minimum wage jobs isn’t livable) is elitist. The effect of minimum wage on inflation is also almost non-existent. Look to the corporations and Wall Street for the reasons behind inflation.

          • Valerie Cudnik

            “The effect of minimum wage on inflation is also almost non-existent.”

            You need to do is look at the data following the last time the minimum wage was raised (2007). Leave out the cost of housing (it was already skyrocketing by then) and imported goods (for obvious reasons), and you’ll see a significant increase in prices, especially in service industries.

            (I don’t actually object to an increase in the minimum wage, I just accept the reality that things will cost more.)

          • FishLady

            I do not feel it is my responsibility to pay an employee a minimum wage fee for their employer. I already pay a 20% tip to those working in a restaurant because they rely on that money as income. If I am now going to be paying a minimum wage fee increase so these employees will be making $15+ an hour then I will no longer pay the tip. What it is appearing to be to me is that the owner/corporations that own the restaurant(s) continue earning their profits and the patrons are picking up the increases in the minimum for their employees. I made $1.75 an hour when I was working back when I was in high school. I do not care what anyone has to say, but, I believe $15 an hour for an untrained person regardless or age, legal status, living situation, marital status is way more then they should be paid, even if I was the one going to work. The service that is received at most fast food restaurants and even sit down restaurants in minimally satisfactory and now I am expected to pay for the increase in the minimum wage for their employer along with a tip. I’ll eat at home from now on!!! It’s either tip or increase in minimum wage. By the way, I am not sure if a lot of people know the meaning of the word “TIPS. Tips means “to insure proper service” and used to be given at the beginning of the meal to ensure just that. Now it has become almost a requirement regardless of the service. I am about being fair and to me this is not fair!

          • David Snyder

            You pay for it regardless. You seem to have missed that point. Whether they give it to you itemized on the receipt like this place or they just raise the cost of their menu by 0.10 per item, either way you the customer is paying for it. Always have, always will. This place is just making it obvious why…

          • FishLady

            No, I didn’t miss it as I know if they do not put it on the receipt then it will be noticed in the increased of the food prices and alcohol prices, which I have noticed which is now why I will need to refresh my cooking skills. We usually eat out 5 out of 7 nights a week and now that will not happen. Just another move to make our country weak!

          • Eldjr

            I don’t clearly understand a couple of your remarks, and would like you to elaborate:

            “To call this a progressive issue falls short.” – Falls short of what? What is your current definition of ‘Progressivism”?

            “Politicians aren’t doing their jobs for the people as much as they are for the lobbying firms that want to hire them after their job is done.”

            What do you judge is the “job” that politicians are supposed to do “for the people”?

            What are politicians supposed to do “after their job is done”?

            Are lobbying firms that work for “cause-justice” exempt from your criticism, or are they all equally bad?

            What do you mean by “…escape the concept of social Darwinism.”? – How does one escape a concept, and why would they need to?

            “To say that minimum wage jobs shouldn’t be livable (some states working two or three minimum wage jobs isn’t livable) is elitist.”

            I find this one profoundly wrong-headed.

            You have either utterly missed my earlier point, or simply deny the living reality that the higher the cost of any commodity [and labor is a commodity], the less of it is purchased [unless progressive policy forces one to buy something they don’t want or need].

            My perspective is hardly elitist. Do we both understand the same meaning of the term? The meaning I use refers to an attitude of moral or intellectual arrogance, where the ‘elitist’ moves to make other peoples’ decisions for them because they don’t think folks will make the ‘right’ choices.

            I got this from www*thefreedictionary*com/elitist:

            1. The belief that certain persons or members of certain classes or groups deserve favored treatment by virtue of their perceived superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources.
            a. The sense of entitlement enjoyed by such a group or class.
            b. Control, rule, or domination by such a group or class.

            Where does my earlier post reveal my philosophy as belonging to these definitions?

            And, according to my economics professor, Inflation occurs when the proliferation of denominated currency outstrips the value of the productivity for which it is traded.

            So from the “top end” it happens when a government adds “fiat currency” [no intrinsic value, such as precious metals] to the overall supply without a commensurate increase in productivity,

            And from the “bottom end” it happens when remuneration outstrips productivity – such as Detroit’s union contracts, for example, and the arbitrary advancement of the “minimum wage” – again without commensurate increase in productivity.

            Of course, increasing tax rates and the “closing of loopholes” [new taxes not previously assessed] add to the decreasing actual value [purchasing power] of the “fiat currency” as well, but the Progressive never counts this as contributing to inflation or the ‘cost of living’ because they believe that they can just arbitrarily increase the amount of money in the economy by printing it, or by mandating increases to the so-called “living wage”.

    • roberta4343

      is it possible the real reason for the living wage is so people have more money thus can pay more taxes? or are they trying to destroy wealth creation in this country?

    • shablee


      • Eldjr

        Someone, through no fault of their own dies at 25 years old as the result of an accident. Is that “fair” [meaning, progressively, “desirable”]? Should everyone else’s lives be shortened?

        I’m handsome [and smart] and Bubba is not. Should I be held down and scarred or lobotomized to make life “fair” [equal outcomes]?

        Of course not. Life is whatever it is. I personally believe that God oversees all circumstances, and invites us to overcome them by faith in His power and grace. What comes next [for the faithful] will be more than worth what is now, and those who spend their lives contending for power, honor and resources – no matter how much of each they might wrest from others – will die not being able to hold what they have seized, and not having eternal life, either.

        And are thus more to be pitied than censured.

    • Stephan Ferrell

      The point about rising costs of goods and services due to raising min wage is correct… the same principle applies to illegal immigration as well. If all of the illegals were removed from the country, and Us citizens filled all of the jobs they currently do for far less than minimum wage, the cost of so many things (mainly food and construction) would skyrocket overnight… some illegals in our country is actually a good thing. Many of the jobs illegals hold are not jobs that many people with options want anyways, there is a reason the employer is willing to take the extreme risk involved in hiring an illegal immigrant…

      • Kimberly – O – H – I – O

        Stephan, You are not going to life hearing this…. First… I am absolutely against ILLEGA IMMIGRANTS ad they do not deserve any level of job in OUR COUNTRY. Now clearing that up… I worked for a concrete construction company 12+ years as office operations manager. ALL our employees were compensated equally for their job duty… even immigrants with proper documentation. The company has good wages and good benefits and EVRYONE got the same with the same amount of work. Prior to the crash of the economy, many employees were lazy and done everything possible to get out of a honest day’s work. Many thought after being there a few years… a lot of jobs were beneath them…refused to do the “chit work” we were not all about titles and positions. Many employee pushed extra work and duties and responsibilities onto the Latino’s and would sit under a tree or in a truck waiting for quitting time. The Latinos done their work and hardly complained or talked back… over time they learned everyone’s jobs and specialties beyond laborers. When the economy crashed… some people were let go, mainly last in first out… but many Latino’s also had seniority. When times got tough, all employees had to work a little harder to make up for less crew just to get the work done. They were paid for the hours they worked but EVERYONE was expected to work with no more gravy jobs or too many supervisors and not enough workers. This was a company 60+ years family owned approximately 50 employees. To get awarded work we had to be competitive for the new low ball contract amounts so all costs mattered. If construction contracts were open- everyone cut the other down to near breaking even if not doing the work at cost! A lot of old time employees didn’t get it… was paid higher wage for their years at the company but expected to work less. Suddenly crews were getting less and less done. Some of the higher paid employees who produced less were let go… some of the Latino’s were also let go. It ended with keeping about 20 employees…more whites than Latino’s. Many former employees were angry but they should have been angry at themselves. They put themselves out of a job and job in construction were near extinct! Of the employees remaining, the few Latinos worked circles around the white employees, stepped up done what was necessary and not 10% the complaining as the rest. Before you think the company was evil, I will tell you… the owners-brothers lost 2 million dollars from 2009 to 2011 just keeping the company in business and the remaining employees working… they weren’t making $$$ on American backs… if anything… the Latino’s. Americans need to get back to the work ethnic their parents carried and give fair work for the wages paid and appreciate all opportunities… the good the bad and he ugly! The legal Latino’s in the country do and will work and work hard because they know the opportunity they have being in America and the legal one’s are not going anywhere. In Columbus Ohio, quality rules over cheap quantity and the Latino’s earn a good wage because not only do they work, but do an excellent job in quality and don’t take the half ass route. Latino’s in drywall for home building make high dollar and sought after for quality and keeping on schedule- on time. One can’t hate on them for fulfilling a honest day’s work for a honest day’s wage.

    • Alexander Dent III

      You justify not giving an employee a raise and then tell them you are doing them a favor by keeping prices low. You may have your son BSed but don’t piss on some ones head and tell them it’s raining.

      • Eldjr

        Thanks, Perfesser Dent, for your dissertation.

        But businesses don’t exist to “give” anything to anybody. They exist to fulfill the desires and expectations of their creators/owners, not a cadre of disgruntled and self-righteous onlookers. I’m going out on a limb to guess you aren’t a Sole Proprietor, invested partner, or Class “A” stockholder?

        Commodities are bought and sold, and remuneration is earned, being traded for adequate labor [and what’s adequate is determined by the employer, not the employee – unless said employee decides that their labor, ideas, ambition,or skills are worth more than is offered, in which case they move on or build their own business where they can get what they want for rewards].

        So in the real world wages and salaries are earned, being traded – by mutual agreement – by the employee and the employer.

        When the “minimum wage” is elevated to beyond the employee’s productivity, ambition or skills, their output is in the “Liability” column of the balance sheet, and may not be worth keeping unless their output improves enough to move them to the “Asset” column.

        And when that employee’s output moves to the Asset column I’ll pay him more to keep him.

        The “minimum wage” – sold as a “living wage” – is a progressive lie.

        Arbitrarily inflating the “minimum wage” increases the overall cost of goods and services. If you can’t do that math, you should be refunded for your edger-macation: somebody ripped you off.

        And by the way, the unions that ‘negotiate’ elevated wages get a pay cut every time their progressive ‘friends’ push their Birkenstocks a couple inches deeper up their collective butts by closing the gap between their ‘negotiated wages’ and the “living wage” folks. How do you feel about that? To make up the loss, the union ‘negotiates’ even higher wages and benefits, increasing costs and expanding the money supply even more; then the “living wage” goes up again, rebooting the endless cycle.

        Real wages go up when there are more jobs than workers. Period. Just printing dollars makes each one smaller if there’s no increase in productivity to “buy them”. Yes, we “buy dollars” when we trade our productivity [real value] for them, then we trade them for stuff [somebody else’s product].

        The only sustainable way to stave off inflation is to allow the currency to build and maintain its own value as a stable medium of storage reflecting the value of the worker’s productivity.

        Let governments meddle with the money supply as a means of delaying the “roosting of their bad monetary policy hens”, and the debts you incurred yesterday are repaid with dollars that are shorter tomorrow. I know it’s a complicated concept but read slowly [move your lips if you have to].

        Central planning [govt. controlled wages and prices] leads only to moribund productivity and fatally slow reactions to changes in supply or demand. All ensuing economic decisions are political decisions gummed up by the tar of multi-level bureaucracy, political correctness, and regulatory “turf wars”.

        The collapse of the *Wiemar Republic demonstrated the suicidal policy of runaway currency-creation as the means of fueling [or recovering] an economy, and the former Soviet Union’s disintegration demonstrated the fruit of centralized planning.

        Read about Wiemar:


        So you can burp and fart all you want about “giving” employees pay increases, etc., and call the truth “BS”, but I bet if you had somebody working for you who couldn’t pull their weight you’d lay them off as soon as you could, and the sputtering you do about “pissing on some ones head and tell them it’s raining” is the sound of O-Bom-Ba’s pathological “BS” promises about Healthcare claiming that you can keep your health insurance, keep your doctor, and save an average of $2000 per year.

        All of it urine labeled as lemonade. But the progressive “believer” will drink it and smile because somewhere, somebody else is getting screwed even worse than they are [or at least that’s what they’re told].

        Here’s what folks did with their Deutschmarks as a result of “Quantitative Easing” during the Wiemar Republic:

  • MaxColdest

    Good advice Eldjr! as for me and my house……. BOYCOTT!!!

  • Alan Drucker

    I have no problem with the fee, if i see it on my bill, i will not be back


      What if they just adjusted the cost of every item on their menu to cost about $0.20 more. You probably wouldn’t even know they did it. They would have actually made more money than they will this way. the way they are doing this, takes less of your money and informs you where the added costs are going. I don’t like paying more for stuff either, but we can’t expect the business owner to not pass the cost of the minimum wage off to you.

      • Alan Drucker

        Simply math, i will order 4 items per meal. thats a dollar with the tip every time i eat out. How many times a week do you eat out…. Me about 520 a year, that my 500 dollars. I expect the business to reduce expenses and fire someone. only real inflation should drive costs up.

      • FishLady

        Why? We are already paying most of their expenses of their servers as it stands now. Do you feel that the consumer should pay for all of this increase in the minimum wage or should some of this come out of the profits being made by the owners/corporations which own the restaurants?

    • jmaster67

      Where will you go? All the restaurants in the state will have some price increase which will be on your bill (although hidden).

      • Alan Drucker

        I am sorry but there needs to be a line drawn. i will not spend my money to support a business that does not reduce employees first then let inflation drive the cost

        • jmaster67

          That’s fine, but every restaurant in the state will be raising something on their menu. You’ll have to eat at home.

          • Alan Drucker

            Point missed, i am not local and i will not be spending my vacation budget on any area with a $10 min wage. So amazed that this state will take this lying down….Ah yes, Al Franken…It makes sense now.

          • jmaster67

            I understand your point now. I had assumed you were a local. Thanks for clarifying.

          • FishLady

            I am with Alan but you are right also jmaster67. The increases are coming everywhere even if it isn’t law now. The businesses see it is a very good possibility it is going to happen so they have already started raising their prices – I live in Northern Virginia and I am seeing it all over the place here. I will start eating at home as I was eating out 5 out of 7 nights a week. Unfortunately, I will have to start cooking again too!!! :-(.

    • http://www.woundconsultations.com Sue Ellen Hull

      So you would just punish them for being open and up front instead of hiding the increase in the prices of the menu items. Aren’t you the bold one.

      • Alan Drucker

        I would not spend my vacation dollars anywhere that has a $10.00 Min wage.

      • FishLady

        I am not wanting to punish the server, the bartender or those people it is just that I am getting tired of the owners and the corporations constantly passing on their expenses to the consumers. I would be willing to pay some of it but I am darn tired of paying all of it. Tipping is expected now and I can tell you that depending on the service and attitude of the server that is how I base my tipping which is usually 23%. It the problem is with the food then I will speak to the manager because the server should not be punished because of something the kitchen is doing. My daughters used to be servers so I feel for them and how people didn’t tip them, but, if they were not doing their job because they just didn’t care but only wanted the tips they should not have gotten tipped either!!! I’m just going to eat at home, thank Obama!!!

    • Alan Drucker

      I am sure now that they are getting $10 an hr, the service is bad as nt relying on tips.

  • Jim

    My new credit card macHine,shows a 59 cent charge on every debit charge now,finally after 30 urs,people have to pay for therselves charging food. Best day ever,and it sabes my busniess 500 to 600 a month,its great.

  • Tracie Kennedy

    So what do their servers make now? $3/hr? Restaurants rely on the public to pay their employees anyway…

    • NoU4EN

      In MN the minimum wage for tipped employees is $2.13 an hour. If the employee doesn’t make enough tips to equal $6.15 per hour, the employer must make up the difference. That being said, as a former waitress a local bar & grill and also in an private club from the late 60’s/early 70’s, I always brought home at least $10 an hour in tips alone for my 4-6 hour shift and some nights it was $25 an hour.

  • Shauna

    My daughter waits tables in a mom and pop restaurant in MN. Guess what they did to offset thewage increase? They’re taking 3% off the top for “credit card processing fees”. Obviously the wage increase is serving her well. :/

  • Rex Pax

    Why not put all the other details about the cost of the materials, the rent,..etc and tell us also how much profit they are making?

  • Jeff Lambeau

    Switzerland’s minimum wage is the equivalent of $25/hr and their GDP per capita is the second highest in the WORLD. America can only wish to be that efficient.

  • wbaltzley

    Actually, I think it would behoove all businesses to list the labor cost on their receipts–that way consumers can see how much of their purchase goes to support the economy. It would also be nice if they could see what percentage of their payment goes to foreign countries…but that might be too much to ask.

  • Chris

    These customers complaining are idiots. Proof that basic economics, accounting and finance classes should be required teaching. Every business passes on their costs. Profit is simply the difference between market value and costs of goods sold. He should point out the additional COGS being due to politicians interfering with private businesses. Kudos to him for doing so.

  • Amber Johnson

    I live in Minnesota and many of the people complaining that restaurants are doing this are the same ones that were protesting the minimum wage be raised. You can’t have your cake and eat it to…..people in this state want and expect the government to take care of them but then when businesses do things to counteract that to stay open they complain. Between the people complaining about this and Jess Ventura my state is an embarrassment.

    • garysvent

      Don’t forget the Vikings. And the Twins. And the Iron Ore Dentist governor (forget his name). And all the idiot things said and written by overpaid so-called professors at places like the U and Hamline.

      Come to think of it, the Vikings and the Twins aren’t even in the running when compared to the politicians here. Al Frankenstein is a good example.

    • BlueMN

      To be fair, we did finally get rid of Norm “Sock Puppet” Coleman, and Michele “Squirrel Bait” Bachmann will be gone soon too, so things are getting better!

      • FishLady

        You think so….just wait. Nothing in this world is for free and just wait until you see what and how you are going to pay if things continue to go on the way they are now. You will be on your knees pray[ng for Bachmann to be reelected again.

    • FishLady

      I am just wondering how much of a cut in the profits does headquarters or the owners of these restaurants take so the consumer doesn’t have to absorb all of the cost? I mean the owners/corporations already expect us to tip their employees between 15% – 21% to supplement the servers income as it is now. TIPS means, TO INSURE PROPER SERVICE and this used to be paid at the beginning of the meal. Now tipping means that the employer doesn’t have to pay their employee as much and the service usually sucks!!

  • Rob

    The same people that complain about this are the same ones demanding nutrition information be mandated, and airline and bank disclosures in the name of transparency.

  • Bounder1

    Tell me before I order. I won’t pay this fee if am told when I check out.

    • FishLady

      And……..????? As an American citizen I have the right to ask that question and know where my money is going if I am buying something.

  • Jesse Sather

    The thing is, if they had simply increased the cost of their products, as I would assume they did in the past when their costs increased, people would complain about the increased cost to eat there. I, personally, would rather know what it is I’m paying for, and I think many people would.

    • FishLady

      I appreciate what you are saying, although, when they continue to raise the prices because of the minimum wage and other expenses the consumer will no longer be able to afford to go out to eat and when enough people stop going out to eat because they are not going to pay $20 for a hamburger at McDonalds (yes I am exaggerating a tad bit, giggle) who will suffer then? BTW, I have not eaten at McDonalds since my 23 year old son was in grade school! Gross!

  • Ralph Moore

    Their waitresses need to claim their true tips…I work for family buffet /steakhouse(use your imagination and imagine a huge Golden Cow) and our servers are paid 2.13 an hour.If their tips don’t equal current minimum wage we are required to pay the difference.The worst among them average at least 15 dollars an hour but they claim just enough to make it 7.25

  • David Clough

    I figured the cost of french fries kept going up each time minimum wage went up. So if I go there to eat french fries, no difference, I still end up paying more.

  • robertg222

    Well the customer is where the money comes from so why not itemize it.

  • tracysaconservative

    Is it Michigan or Minnesota? Anyway, If Minimum wage keeps going up. I would be better off to quit my job as a flight attendant. We have seen nothing but cuts. Keeping an eye on this, even thou any tax and fee is BS. Look at fast food receipts, they have been charging a “eat in” tax for years, even if you take out.

  • Robert John Pease


  • poundsand

    I would choose not to frequent that restaurant; if I did choose to do so I would refuse 100% to pay their “minimum wage fee.” They could, well, go pound sand!

    • Nathan S.

      You’re paying it every place else; they just don’t call it out specifically. Labor is the #1 expense of any business and that is always built in to the price of the products and services. If Gov’t raises minimum wage, prices go up. No way around it.

    • jmaster67

      Why are you against the working man?

  • Natalie Shaw

    i don’t see a problem with it if it keeps that business open and i liked going there. i would want to help the business owners with this cost. now, big franchises might be a different story, but mom and pops need some help. i wouldn’t even be opposed to paying 10.00 a month the help with our deficit. if everyone did that, it would strengthen America. it would mean that we are taking stock… makes a person feel entitled.

  • imjustbob

    Show me one cost or show them all.
    Hot dog menu cost .10c – then start adding the fees. Shipping .10c Receiving .10c Cold storage .10c Cooking .10c Serving .10c Air conditioning .10c Rent .10c Parking lot .10c.
    It will help the manager dispute customer complaints. So it was hot in here? We will comp you .10c off bill. So you got a bad parking space? we will comp you .10c off the bill.
    I always thought those freeloaders who complained about stuff shouldn’t get their meal paid for …. LOL

    • imjustbob

      Let’s include the wait staff too. Suggested tip 10.00 minus the 6.50 I’m already paid = revised suggested tip 3.50 – the 35c fee already listed on check. [3.15]
      Previously the thinking was … Suggested tip 10.00 minus 6.15 I’m already paid revised suggested tip [3.85].
      Since this is going to effect their tip then let them do fees too. Flat tire on way to work fee .10c Taking cab so someone will serve you .10c You made me get 5 glasses of water fee .10c You stayed all day 2hrs past my shift fee .10c

    • FishLady

      And I guess you believe that the hamburger and chicken you are eating is just what they say it is, hee, hee!!

  • Neal Wong

    I like this. It makes patrons aware of the effects of minimum wage or any government mandated charge on the business. My opinion on the minimum wage issue is that the minimum wage is a entry level salary. It is the employees responsibility to prove to employers that they are worth more then the minimum wage they are earning. I have worked jobs for minimum wage with this understanding and worked to get a raise and if my employer was not recognizing my growing worth as an employee I then looked for another job stating my now increased employability that I gained from my current job. If you give people their earnings based solely on what is mandated by the government and not on what they bring to the job or their performance then what is the motivation to improve and gain a higher wage. It is like the saying. Give a man a fish and YOU feed them but teach him to fish and HE feeds HIMSELF.

    • StopHyperbole

      Seeing as how wages are part of the cost of doing business, why are they not itemizing things like the gas bill when rates go up? How about electricity? When their food and equipment suppliers start charging more, why is that not itemized on the bill?

  • landofaahs

    Eat at home. Or go across the border and patronize them.

  • landofaahs

    Sorry folks. I didn’t realize this was a new law and was under the idea that it was a choice by the restaurant. I admit my mistakes. Anyway. Solution? Don’t eat out. Teach them a lesson.

    • Sam701

      Either that, or un-elect people that put in these ridiculous minimum wage laws. Nobody ever got successful by giving more money to Poors.

  • Joe Baumeister

    Airlines been doin it forever….

  • chief2000

    My wife and I are very generous when it comes to tipping 20%-40% but if I ever saw this charge on a restaurant bill I would not tip the waiter and explain why I wasn’t because I don’t agree with the charge. Then I would I ask to speak to the manager/owner to let him know I will never be coming back to his/hers establishment again. Purely principle…

  • todmac

    The other option is to reprint every menu and add ten cents so that the printing cost would also be offset. I think that their method is more honest and cost effective in the long run.

  • jbyntn

    If you have a problem with this, deduct it from your 5% tip you leave!

  • Heather Gitersonke

    Question: Has anyone else noticed that they are obviously talking about Minnesota and NOT MICHIGAN??

  • gerry tierney

    I wonder how he will like the “minimum customer” fee he’s gonna be paying”?

  • gerry tierney

    I dare you all to try to live on minimum wages sometime.
    But to do that you’d have to have some math skills, and by you position on the minimum wage discussion, it is quite apparent that you don’t.

    • Eldjr

      The main point you are avoiding here, is that the “living wage/minimum wage” that progressives sell to the public is a cynical lie; a lie that seems to have ‘sucked you in’.

      Not one of those progressive politicians who advocate the lie of the “living wage” believe that any family [let alone single person] could live on a “minimum wage” at ANY level, no matter how much money it is.

      Why not?

      Because those progressive politicians know that the basic cost of goods and services is the foundational dynamic that drives the entire cost-of-living schedule, but they feed the math-challenged low-information voter a line of bs about “giving” the workers “a raise” out of the private-sector’s pockets.

      Does anyone believe that the additional cost doesn’t reflect in the product’s final price? And since we’re talking here about a Federally-mandated across-the-board minimum wage increase, we’re talking about an increase in the overwhelming majority of goods and services that everyone – including the minimum-wage recipients – buy. So they don’t really get ahead. The Emperor has no clothes. And let’s not forget that the ‘negotiated-wage’ tier feels the minimum-wage tide climbing up their pantlegs and demands a wage-increase of their own, just to stay ahead. Prices go up again.

      Real Life:

      I had a progressive candidate come into my yard one day as I was doing
      some yard-work. At the time, she was “Green”, but she later called herself a “Democrat”, then because she couldn’t get traction against the local favorite, the next election cycle found her listed as “Independent”.


      She smiled and handed me her “Green Party” brochure and shook my hand. “I’m so-and-so, and I’d like your support as candidate for State house Representative for this region.”


      “Well, what’s your platform?”

      “Well, I believe that our children should have a quality education, that we should preserve and protect our environment, create good jobs, and provide for a “living wage”.

      “Well, I’m interested in the “living wage”; How do you define that?”

      “Well, a “living wage” is an amount of money earned per-hour that will support an average Maine family”

      “Okay, well, right now the “minimum wage” is $5.15 per hour; how much more than that would be needed?

      “Well, I don’t know, specifically, it would have to be studied to see how much would be needed.”

      “But what do you think, maybe $8.50 per hour?”

      “That would be a good start…”

      “A good start…” Hm..

      “Well… Currently my “living wage” is $15.75 per hour…”

      “Right, okay..”

      “Right, well, I can’t make my obligations on less than that amount. Do you think everyone should get $15.75 per hour?”

      “Yes! Absolutely!”

      “Ma’am… Do you have any idea what a loaf of bread would cost if everyone was getting $15.75 per hour?”

      “Well… you wouldn’t be able to just let them charge anything they wanted to for a loaf of bread!


      “Ma’am… in less than 3 minutes you’ve gone from State-controlled wages to State-controlled prices, like in the Soviet Union.”

      “Well, I don’t…”

      “Really, Ma’am, I’ll tell you honestly… I can’t and won’t take a job for less than I’m making right now; $15.75 is my minimum wage. I don’t think there ought to be such a thing as a “minimum-wage” law…”

      [Voice pitch significantly higher] “Well! I just don’t agree at all, and I’m leaving before I get angry!!”

      [too late… stalks off]

      “Hold on, I’ve got a couple more questions!”

      “Forget it!”

      Yep… that’s what happened.

      Politics 101: A+
      Individual Liberty: N/A
      Economics: F-

  • Rimmy

    people continue to complain bout wages, people keep demanding higher wages. Companies have to offset and absorb that cost somehow. IT always comes down to charging more for their services or products, which hurts everyone. You keep demanding higher wages, the company keeps raising the price of the products.. in the end the issue WILL NEVER go away!!! vicious cycle

    If apartment complex’s, renters, etc.. would STOP continuous hiking up of individuals rent they wouldn’t need to be paid more, If food producers would STOP hiking up prices faster than we can keep up, then they wouldn’t need to be paid more. If our government would get off their high horses and drill our own land for oil and produce our own gas, we could lower the price gouging at the gas pumps.

    It all comes down to people who refuse to live within their means!! or Greed… those with simply just want more, without any care of who they hurt to get it.

  • matthew kish

    and apply this to the big chains and the costs will be passed on.. and liberal’s please those fast food owners work hard long hours and make no more than any other one owning a small business, they take all the financial risk and the bigger companies will just pass along the added costs to customers ..advertised or not.

  • John

    What kind of selfish bstards begrudges a working man and woman $10 an hour
    No wonder everyone wants to get on welfare. One minute your hypocrites are saying people are lazy and the next minute you want hard working people to work for $3 an hour ? It is bat-shit and no wonder people don’t wan to work for a living

  • John

    There are people in America who are so rich that it boggles the mind and you lot
    are worried about a worker at McDonald’s might make a little bit of money for working like a dog all day long. I hope Jesus strikes you all down.

  • http://www.jamicat.com jamicat

    Lets just subdivide the bill all the way down the line, a-y and the profit is z.. Z is the money “WE STOLE FROM YOU”…MUHAHAAAAHAAHAAAA!!!!! -_-

  • Russell Smith

    All the whiney little crybaby liberals on here making me regurgitate a little. Get over your egotistical know it all liberal mentality and take a look at the whole picture, the greys in between. Sick of you holier than thou morons thinking you know everything and attacking the business owners. God if you all could think for yourselves for a moment and stop letting MSNBC dictate to you how you should live your life you might just be happier for one brief moment of your poor existence of a life. (That trolling enough?)

  • Kalona Immortal

    Did anyone notice the article says it’s in Michigan while the headline and video state it’s in Minnesota

  • legaliis

    Should any one complain “…You’re essentially blaming customers for the increase,,,,” then I ask well who elected these nitwits?

    Source: http://www.glennbeck.com/2014/08/07/minnesota-restaurant-adds-minimum-wage-fee-to-patrons-bills/?utm_source=glennbeck&utm_medium=contentcopy_link

  • lantanalenoxx

    No one would complain if they just added a surcharge or 1% to the menu prices, but the way they do it makes a political statement about paying people a living wage. The people running this restaurant must hate their employees as much as they hate Democrats.

  • xiromisho

    So… the fee they have determined to be the cost of minimum wage is $0.35 on a $21 bill? That’s… 1.6 cents on the dollar. That’s a 1.67% “Tax” or “Fee” – I hate (love) to say this, but if your business is doing so very bad that you cannot handle an additional 1.6% increase in operational costs, then you likely should just close your doors and be done with business. But Kudos on finding a1.67% tax/fee and complaining about it. I bet you saw that and stiffed the waitress who does not get minimum wage, but still make the bulk of her income on tips alone.

  • billrich2

    This reminds me of the time that Obama closed the White House. This is just another scare tactic designed to frighten the sheeple into opposing a minimum wage hike. Why can’t these businesses, instead, change their business model to absorb the increase in wages? Instead of immediately putting this increase off on their customers, why can’t they pay their people well and then advertise that fact? I know of many businesses that do just that. I am not talking about large corporate businesses, I am talking about small, independent businesses that pay their employees above minimum wage because they realize that their associates are the back bone of their businesses.

The 411 From Glenn

Sign up for Glenn’s newsletter

In five minutes or less, keep track of the most important news of the day.