In the U.K's City AM
publication of Wednesday, May 4th 2016 under the Forum section Ryan Bourne
(Head of Public Policy at The Institute of Economic Affairs) seemed to be
commercially driven in that article. He tried to justify the bid by restaurants
to deduct tips from the wages of waiters. He noted that the "diverse
nature of the restaurant trade means that imposing these sorts of regulatory
strait-jackets can have unintended consequences". If there are going to be
consequences it is likely that they will be in forms of revolt and paybacks for
being forced to pay the Living Wage and unable to make up for it from tips. To
cut a long story short the tips do not belong to restaurants, they are not and
should not possibly be in the trade to cash in tips, the patrons can be charged
more to make up for the increased labour costs. What belongs to them is what
the patrons pay for the meals and if they wish to add the value of the
experience to the cost of the meals they can do so and it really cannot be
regulated. They have the freedom to set their prices, but the tips do not
belong to them, they belong to the waiters regardless of whether the restaurants
are high-end or have casual chefs. What is wrong in this issue is that the
restaurant trade is trying to modify its model and it is has come up or will
come against Social Norms. He ended the article that Social Norms are important
in market economies but should not be imposed by law. The restaurant trade
should notice that they are trying to adopt a model that will not pay them as
it will come against Social Norms. If the Norm is not imposed legally or at
least through other policy means; would it not obvious that the restaurants
will be taking away what does not belong to them?
---Ugo Unamka
No comments:
Post a Comment