Greedy restaurant slammed by internet over hidden living wage fee added to bill
A disgruntled patron posted a receipt from a recent trip to a restaurant that charged its guests a mandatory 'living wage fee' on Instagram threads — and the internet was incensed.
4 Despite the clarification at the bottom of the receipt, the original user captioned their post: 'WTF is a living wage fee?'
@ ant.really.do.this / Instagram
Tipping culture has long been a point of contention for Americans, and as prices continue to rise, the practice has become an even more controversial topic.
But now it seems that businesses are taking things too far by tacking on extra fees such as this one — and people aren't happy about it.
4 'It's your job,' respond many in this camp when it comes to tip-demanding employees.
FornStudio – stock.adobe.com
'Price increase without having to update the menu,' claimed one reply on the post.
'[This] means I'm never eating at that restaurant again,' said another.
Meanwhile, another commenter proposed an entirely separate issue of debate: the pooling of tips. 'If I wanna tip a person, I wanna tip that individual, not the entire team. This is unfair to the server and to me.'
However, a few lonely restaurant-goers cut the restaurant, which remained unnamed in the post — and the growing industry trend — some slack, and fired back at fellow commenters.
'Y'all have been asking for no tipping, this is what it looks like. It could reflect in drink/food prices, but then you all would say the place was too expensive. No one is trying to trick you — if they were transparent about the service fee, STFU,' one empassioned viewer responded.
4 'Consumers pay wages via prices,' one user commented, acknowledging the lack of consequence for this specific charge as opposed to increased menu prices.
MargJohnsonVA – stock.adobe.com
'Just include [the fee] in the cost of the food and drinks, like the rest of the world is doing, and pay the workers properly. Sincerely, a guy from Europe,' one aggrieved commenter suggested under the post.
This response was the sole sentiment that united incensed restaurant patrons on both sides of the debate. 'Mind your European business,' advised one reply, while another said: 'Hey, stay out of our insanity!'
For some small, family-owned restaurants, implementing charges like this living wage fee might allow the business to stay afloat and support their employees — especially amid a cost-of-living crisis.
Durham, North Carolina-based Lula & Sadie's is one spot that charges a living wage fee to combat 'rising overhead costs, slim industry profit margins and a minimum wage that won't budge,' per the family-operated restaurant's website. 'The fee is transparently listed on our menus, website and posted around the restaurant.'
Though local laws vary greatly in terms of tipping and charging policies in restaurants, New York City Consumer and Worker Protection rules, state that 'restaurants cannot charge a surcharge or other fee in addition to listed food or beverage prices,' but they can 'charge a bona fide service charge, but only if the charge is conspicuously disclosed to consumers before food is ordered.'
4 With general costs rising, both businesses and consumers struggle to meet new standards.
Kittiphan – stock.adobe.com
Examples of 'bona fide service charges' include splitting a meal on multiple plates, minimums per person and mandatory gratuity for large dining parties.
That being said, 'living wage fees' are often considered service charges, depending on how they're disclosed and absorbed by the business.
'There is no law in New York State that specifically prohibits automatic gratuities. However, it is incumbent upon any restaurant including an automatic gratuity charge to provide—in advance—clear and conspicuous notice that an automatic gratuity charge will be levied and all terms associated with the automatic charge. If consumers are not provided advanced notice, [they] may have a claim under the NYS Deceptive Acts & Practices law, ' New York State's Division of Consumer Protection told News10NBC.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
an hour ago
Conservation group makes $60M land deal to end mining threat outside Okefenokee Swamp
SAVANNAH, Ga. -- A conservation group said Friday it has reached a $60 million deal to buy land outside the Okefenokee Swamp from a mining company that environmentalists spent years battling over a proposed mine that opponents feared could irreparably damage an ecological treasure. The Conservation Fund said it will buy all 7,700 acres (31.16 square kilometers) that Alabama-based Twin Pines Minerals owns outside the Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge in southeast Georgia, halting the company's mining plans. 'It's a big undertaking, but it was also an existential threat to the entire refuge," said Stacy Funderburke, the Conservation Fund's vice president for the central Southeast. 'We've done larger deals for larger acres, but dollar-wise this is the largest deal we've ever done in Georgia." Twin Pines President Steven Ingle confirmed the sale through a spokesman, but declined to comment further. Twin Pines of Birmingham, Alabama, had worked since 2019 to obtain permits to mine titanium dioxide, a pigment used to whiten products from paint to toothpaste, less than 3 miles (5 kilometers) from the southeastern boundary of the Okefenokee refuge near the Georgia-Florida line. The Okefenokee is the largest U.S. refuge east of the Mississippi River, covering nearly 630 square miles (1,630 square kilometers) in southeast Georgia. It is home to abundant alligators, stilt-legged wood storks and more than 400 other animal species. The mine appeared to be on the cusp of winning final approval early last year. Georgia regulators issued draft permits in February 2024 despite warnings from scientists that mining near the Okefenokee's bowl-like rim could damage its ability to hold water and increase the frequency of withering droughts. Twin Pines insisted it could mine without damaging the swamp. Regulators with the Georgia Environmental Protection Division agreed, concluding last year that mining should have a 'minimal impact' on the refuge. The decisions by Georgia regulators played an outsize role in the Twin Pines project after environmental rollbacks during President Donald Trump's first term stripped the federal government of any oversight. Advocates battling Twin Pines said there is still a potential threat to the Okefenokee, with thousands of acres of privately owned land remaining unprotected. Georgia lawmakers have batted aside multiple attempts in recent years to prohibit mining near the refuge. 'There's maybe 30,000 acres that's still vulnerable outside the Okefenokee on Trail Ridge that needs to be conserved,' said Rena Ann Peck of the Georgia River Network. Josh Marks, an Atlanta environmental attorney who fought the mining project, called the land sale 'a huge victory.' But he also called on conservationists to redouble efforts for a state law protecting the Okefenokee and to keep pressure on other companies to refrain from mining near the refuge. Funderburke said the steep purchase price for Twin Pines' land was driven largely by its mineral-rich soils that would have been highly valued by other mining operations. Reaching a deal became more urgent with the company so close to obtaining its final permits. 'It became pretty clear once a draft permit was issued last year that this was the final exit ramp' to stopping the project, Funderburke said. He said his group was closing Friday on about 40% of the property that includes the 820-acre (332-hectare) site for which Twin Pines' had sought its mining permit. The Conservation Fund plans to close on the rest by the end of July. Funderburke said he hopes there is eventually a deal for the land to pass into government ownership and protection. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which oversees the Okefenokee refuge, in January approved a plan to expand the refuge by buying up to 22,000 acres (8,900) along its perimeter from private owners. The proposal included land owned by Twin Pines. Negotiations with the Conservation Fund might explain why Twin Pines had yet to follow through on a financial commitment required before Georgia regulators could make a final decision on its mining permit. The Environmental Protection Division recently confirmed Twin Pines had been notified in February 2024 that it needed to set aside $2 million for future restoration of the mining site. The company never followed through in the 16 months before the sale was announced.
The Hill
2 hours ago
- The Hill
How Senate Republicans want to change the tax breaks in Trump's big bill
WASHINGTON (AP) — House and Senate Republicans are taking slightly different approaches when it comes to the tax cuts that lawmakers are looking to include in their massive tax and spending cuts bill. Republicans in the two chambers don't agree on the size of a deduction for state and local taxes. And they are at odds on such things as allowing people to use their health savings accounts to help pay for their gym membership, or whether electric vehicle and hybrid owners should have to pay an annual fee. The House passed its version shortly before Memorial Day. Now the Senate is looking to pass its version. While the two bills are similar on the major tax provisions, how they work out their differences in the coming weeks will determine how quickly they can get a final product over the finish line. President Donald Trump is pushing to have the legislation on his desk by July 4th. Here's a look at some of the key differences between the two bills: The child tax credit currently stands at $2,000 per child. The House bill temporarily boosts the child tax credit to $2,500 for the 2025 through 2028 tax years, roughly the length of President Donald Trump's second term. It also indexes the credit amount for inflation beginning in 2027. The Senate bill provides a smaller, initial bump-up to $2,200, but the bump is permanent, with the credit amount indexed for inflation beginning next year. Trump promised on the campaign trail that he would seek to end income taxes on tips, overtime and Social Security benefits. Also, he would give car buyers a new tax break by allowing them to deduct the interest paid on auto loans. The House and Senate bills incorporate those promises with temporary deductions lasting from the 2025 through 2028 tax years, but with some differences. The House bill creates a deduction on tips for those working in jobs that have customarily received tips. The House also provides for a deduction for overtime that's equal to the amount of OT a worker has earned. The Senate bill comes with more restrictions. The deduction for tips is limited to $25,000 per taxpayer and the deduction for overtime is limited to $12,500 per taxpayer. The House and Senate bills both provide a deduction of up to $10,000 for interest paid on loans for vehicles made in the United States. And on Social Security, the bills don't directly touch the program. Instead, they grant a larger tax deduction for Americans age 65 and older. The House sets the deduction at $4,000. The Senate sets it at $6,000. Both chambers include income limits over which the new deductions begin to phase out. The caps on state and local tax deductions, known in Washington as the SALT cap, now stand at $10,000. The House bill, in a bid to win over Republicans from New York, California and New Jersey, lifts the cap to $40,000 per household with incomes of less than $500,000. The credit phases down for households earning more than $500,000. The Senate bill keeps the cap at $10,000. That's a non-starter in the House, but Republicans in the two chambers will look to negotiate a final number over the coming weeks that both sides can accept. The House bill prohibits states from establishing new provider taxes or increasing existing taxes. These are taxes that Medicaid providers, such as hospitals, pay to help states finance their share of Medicaid costs. In turn, the taxes allow states to receive increased federal matching funds while generally holding providers harmless through higher reimbursements that offset the taxes paid. Such taxes now are effectively capped at 6%. The Senate looks to gradually lower that threshold for states that have expanded their Medicaid populations under the Affordable Care Act, or 'Obamacare,' until it reaches 3.5% in 2031, with exceptions for nursing homes and intermediate care facilities. Industry groups have warned that limiting the ability of states to tax providers may lead to some states making significant cuts to their Medicaid programs as they make up for the lost revenue in other ways. The Medicaid provision could be a flashpoint in the coming House and Senate negotiations. Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., was highly critical of the proposed Senate changes. 'This needs a lot of work. It's really concerning and I'm really surprised by it,' he said. 'Rural hospitals are going to be in bad shape.' The House bill would allow companies for five years to fully deduct equipment purchases and domestic research and development expenses. The Senate bill includes no sunset, making the tax breaks permanent, which was a key priority of powerful trade groups such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Republicans in both chambers are looking to scale back the clean energy tax credits enacted through then-President Joe Biden's climate law. It aimed to boost the nation's transition away from planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions toward renewable energy such as wind and solar power. Under the Senate bill, the tax credits for clean energy and home energy efficiency would still be phased out, but less quickly than under the House bill. Still, advocacy groups fear that the final measure will threaten hundreds of thousands of jobs and drive up household energy costs. The House bill would allow millions of Americans to use their health savings accounts to pay for gym memberships, with a cap of $500 for single taxpayers and $1,000 for joint filers. The Senate bill doesn't include such a provision. The House reinstates a charitable deduction for non-itemizers of $150 per taxpayer. The Senate bill increases that deduction for donations to $1,000 per taxpayer. Republicans in the House bill included a new annual fee of $250 for EV owners and $100 for hybrid owners that would be collected by state motor vehicle departments. The Senate bill excludes the proposed fees. ___
2 hours ago
How Senate Republicans want to change the tax breaks in Trump's big bill
WASHINGTON -- House and Senate Republicans are taking slightly different approaches when it comes to the tax cuts that lawmakers are looking to include in their massive tax and spending cuts bill. Republicans in the two chambers don't agree on the size of a deduction for state and local taxes. And they are at odds on such things as allowing people to use their health savings accounts to help pay for their gym membership, or whether electric vehicle and hybrid owners should have to pay an annual fee. The House passed its version shortly before Memorial Day. Now the Senate is looking to pass its version. While the two bills are similar on the major tax provisions, how they work out their differences in the coming weeks will determine how quickly they can get a final product over the finish line. President Donald Trump is pushing to have the legislation on his desk by July 4th. Here's a look at some of the key differences between the two bills: The child tax credit currently stands at $2,000 per child. The House bill temporarily boosts the child tax credit to $2,500 for the 2025 through 2028 tax years, roughly the length of President Donald Trump's second term. It also indexes the credit amount for inflation beginning in 2027. The Senate bill provides a smaller, initial bump-up to $2,200, but the bump is permanent, with the credit amount indexed for inflation beginning next year. Trump promised on the campaign trail that he would seek to end income taxes on tips, overtime and Social Security benefits. Also, he would give car buyers a new tax break by allowing them to deduct the interest paid on auto loans. The House and Senate bills incorporate those promises with temporary deductions lasting from the 2025 through 2028 tax years, but with some differences. The House bill creates a deduction on tips for those working in jobs that have customarily received tips. The House also provides for a deduction for overtime that's equal to the amount of OT a worker has earned. The Senate bill comes with more restrictions. The deduction for tips is limited to $25,000 per taxpayer and the deduction for overtime is limited to $12,500 per taxpayer. The House and Senate bills both provide a deduction of up to $10,000 for interest paid on loans for vehicles made in the United States. And on Social Security, the bills don't directly touch the program. Instead, they grant a larger tax deduction for Americans age 65 and older. The House sets the deduction at $4,000. The Senate sets it at $6,000. Both chambers include income limits over which the new deductions begin to phase out. The caps on state and local tax deductions, known in Washington as the SALT cap, now stand at $10,000. The House bill, in a bid to win over Republicans from New York, California and New Jersey, lifts the cap to $40,000 per household with incomes of less than $500,000. The credit phases down for households earning more than $500,000. The Senate bill keeps the cap at $10,000. That's a non-starter in the House, but Republicans in the two chambers will look to negotiate a final number over the coming weeks that both sides can accept. The House bill prohibits states from establishing new provider taxes or increasing existing taxes. These are taxes that Medicaid providers, such as hospitals, pay to help states finance their share of Medicaid costs. In turn, the taxes allow states to receive increased federal matching funds while generally holding providers harmless through higher reimbursements that offset the taxes paid. Such taxes now are effectively capped at 6%. The Senate looks to gradually lower that threshold for states that have expanded their Medicaid populations under the Affordable Care Act, or 'Obamacare,' until it reaches 3.5% in 2031, with exceptions for nursing homes and intermediate care facilities. Industry groups have warned that limiting the ability of states to tax providers may lead to some states making significant cuts to their Medicaid programs as they make up for the lost revenue in other ways. The Medicaid provision could be a flashpoint in the coming House and Senate negotiations. Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., was highly critical of the proposed Senate changes. 'This needs a lot of work. It's really concerning and I'm really surprised by it,' he said. 'Rural hospitals are going to be in bad shape.' The House bill would allow companies for five years to fully deduct equipment purchases and domestic research and development expenses. The Senate bill includes no sunset, making the tax breaks permanent, which was a key priority of powerful trade groups such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Republicans in both chambers are looking to scale back the clean energy tax credits enacted through then-President Joe Biden's climate law. It aimed to boost the nation's transition away from planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions toward renewable energy such as wind and solar power. Under the Senate bill, the tax credits for clean energy and home energy efficiency would still be phased out, but less quickly than under the House bill. Still, advocacy groups fear that the final measure will threaten hundreds of thousands of jobs and drive up household energy costs. The House bill would allow millions of Americans to use their health savings accounts to pay for gym memberships, with a cap of $500 for single taxpayers and $1,000 for joint filers. The Senate bill doesn't include such a provision. The House reinstates a charitable deduction for non-itemizers of $150 per taxpayer. The Senate bill increases that deduction for donations to $1,000 per taxpayer. Republicans in the House bill included a new annual fee of $250 for EV owners and $100 for hybrid owners that would be collected by state motor vehicle departments. The Senate bill excludes the proposed fees.
