True, but at the same time not every bartender makes a great cocktail, or cares to. If people want service levels to race to the bottom this is the way to do it.
The main problem with the DD model is that they're asking people to decide a tip before being provided a service. That's unfair to the customer and driver. As far as paying a decent wage before that, DD could provide a mile cost reimbursement as well as one for the time spent on the order. Paying the driver a blanket fee for every order they deliver rather than one based on time and millage is not sustainable. I understand that's much how the model used to work, but the whole thing about tip culture is rewarding people who do the little things to make the experience worth it for you having to pay extra. As a customer of DD you're only going to be aware of things after you've received your food.
Also, if a bartender is not getting the best shifts, that may be because the bar cycles their shifts or they aren't as good, or maybe Wednesday is a busier night and they only staff one bartender so that person may end up doing better than having to split a bar with several others. That said, if it's busier on a Saturday and the bartenders are getting hammered, why should they have to subsidize the bartender who isn't there?
Tipping is a poor form of quality control. If you get a bad cocktail, ask for a new one or speak with the manager and give your direct feedback. Paying less puts them in a complex game of guessing why you did that.
American tipping culture exists in the service industry because the base wage is not livable. Yes, tips should not be mandatory. But first you need a livable minimum wage or otherwise "tipping" is not primarily about rewarding outstanding service but about making sure they can eat.
I agree with you fully. The fact that certain states are still so far behind with paying a wage under $3/hr is archaic and needs to be shamed until it is brought up with federal/region standards.
That said, the biggest problem with most service type employees right now, and this sadly gets away from DD, but is the amount of hours they are being given to work. I know many people who only get 12-18 hours a week at their service job (and even worse, you can be sent home early or even called off if it's slow), and even in CA where minimum wage is $14.25, one cannot pay rent let alone earn a living or even hope to have or provide for a family.
Quality bartenders generate increased revenue for businesses by either being more efficient and/or driving additional business. If a bartender excels at their job this can be objectively measured and their pay rate increased vs their peers as a reward.
Regardless of skill or experience, they seem to be getting promoted over other more qualified individuals, anyway. At least that's what I've noticed in my places of work over the last four years. I'd hate to tell you how many of those places went under as it's all anecdotal. I am however getting a little put out by people around me not getting promoted on merit, but on optics.
Parden? I'm talking about people getting promoted into positions they aren't qualified for and sinking companies. I really don't care about your sex, race or who you like to invite into bed. I'd rather be on a winning team.
this is my point - don't you think it a salient fact to inform the reader that these employees will in fact be paid for the work they perform....at some point
The point is that they won't be repaid for the costs incurred from being without any income for months. These include late fees, high interest rates on loans, long-term damage to their credit, etc.
I heard workers sued the government over late fees and other personal penalties workers had from the 2013 shutdown. They won in court last month, but it took 6 years.
... at some point where they may be homeless because of missing rent because of living paycheck to paycheck and the first $0-by-government-shutdown paychecks have already been sent out.
Just imagine how many payday loans are currently being processes right now at crazy interest rates. The true fallout might actually occur long after this shutdown is over.
If officers who put their life on the line in the most populated/congested city for 150k are overpaid, then I'd like to talk to some software developers in San Francisco.
Being a police officer is less dangerous than being a house painter, convenience store clerk, taxi driver, or any of a multitude of jobs in which you are not given a stick and a gun and encouraged to use them freely.
Given that nearly half of work-related casualties police officers experience come down to things like heart attacks on the job, I'd be interested in seeing the statistics. Sitting in front of a computer cannot be good for long-term heart health.
Either way, it's more dangerous to be a pizza delivery boy than it is to be a cop.
Except that's not true as it stands right now, because if it were, companies would pay that amount since the private sector relies on markets to make decisions in a way the public sector often doesn't.
Have you ever seen an MTA job fair, thousands of people are fighting for jobs that are considered low skill when you start where they train you on the rest. They should lower wages until that line dies down and to maximize hiring with the same budget.
VCs have distorted the market for programmer salaries to the point that they are artificially 2x-3x what they should be in the absence of VC funding. When that bubble bursts, programming is going to return to its historic means, especially when most businesses start calculating the actual costs and benefits of the software they use/need. Until then, enjoy the party while it lasts.
I have to still disagree here, top tech companies have massive profit margins and could easily pay their employees far more than they do now. It's all about how much you prioritize talent, this said I would expect a deflation of new grad salaries with an increase in senior/principal salaries over the long run as is comparable with other human capital intensive industries like banking and consulting.
No it's not, there are millions of people living in NYC on half of that and they are supporting on average 2.67 people with that much money. Just because you cannot afford lower manhattan market rate real estate doesn't mean that you live in poverty.
How do you propose anyone will have a MVP within a day? Which is the purpose of this event. I mentioned giving them a month to develop and build some level of product and anticipation for what it is they're proposing. Nothing about calling them a 'start-up' based on any level of randomness. Or perhaps you don't understand the word 'maybe'.
Any release of damaging information about a party involved in an election can change the result. This has not been a problem before when Wikileaks almost definitely influenced the result of Kenyan election in 2007. Assange even got an Amnesty International award for leaking information then.
I suppose you're referring to pizza-gate. I'm also assuming you did zero digging into that narrative on your own. Keep eating that gov't cereal from the MSM.
