|
Can an employer in Texas force an employee to share their tips with other employees? When is a tip yours vs something the company has any say over?
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2019 00:55
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 09:42 |
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:https://twc.texas.gov/news/efte/tip_pooling.html Thanks I have passed that along. Thanatosian posted:Are you really getting pissy about tipping out? Well no since I'm not working for tips. But the friend of a friend is more worried about non working coworkers. Tipping out isnt the same as tip pooling.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2019 02:00
|
|
|
Devor posted:When you say "tip out" you mean what we say by "tip pooling" I always used it as meaning sharing with folks who dont get tips (back of house, etc). Not as pooling and splitting evenly amongst all the servers. Also in this particular case the bussers and cooks are getting screwed also.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2019 02:08
|
|
|
Kimsemus posted:If you check that Texas law, back-end staff aren't eligible anyway. Thanks. The issue is servers being forced to pool and split evenly at end of night when not all are working full shifts or covering as many tables. I gave her the link and said to read it and decide how much she really cares about that job.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2019 02:12
|
|
|
CongoJack posted:There's a big difference between some clown tailgating in a residential zone because they want to drive 45 mph in a school zone and an idiot driving in the left lane on the freeway going the exact speed limit or lower. My favorite is living near a hilly stretch of I10 where the limit is 80mph. People will chug up the hills going <70 and then fly down the hills at >90. So they end up passing me and getting passed in an endless cycle or I get stuck behind them because of the 18wheelers in the right lane that are going even slower.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2019 21:11
|
|
|
I just love the "I dont believe in laws or the authority of the court" attitude coupled with him running to a bunch of lawyers for help. What did he expect to happen?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2019 20:30
|
|
|
So has anyone been taken to court because they signed the "I will not boycott israel" box on a government form and then boycotted Israel?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2021 15:44
|
|
|
EwokEntourage posted:https://www.texastribune.org/2019/04/25/judge-blocks-texas-law-banning-contractors-boycotting-israel/ Thanks. I've always wondered about that when I see it on a form.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2021 17:46
|
|
|
Devor posted:If I mail someone a gun 30 years after they received a refund, how long should I wait before I send my demand letter for the original purchase price. Followup question, can I make them pay me in bitcoin He hasn't received a refund. His bank has given him a credit in the same amount as a courtesy to their customer. The bank will absolutely take that credit back if they find the merchandise was shipped and received. Also he says the charge back has a 90day deadline and it was a month to receive the merchandise.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2021 02:37
|
|
|
my kinda ape posted:
This is an important part that's missing. The bank very well may have said "provide evidence they received their goods" and they sent that evidence because you now have received it. The bank doesn't care past this and can now remove the credit from your account.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2021 03:37
|
|
|
Yeah there's a lot of misguided hate about that. As an actual trained restoration biologist I'm going to say that maybe it's a good thing to clear it out and allow some understory and midstory to develop or maybe it's a terrible idea because it's virgin old growth forest. There's a lot of things he can do to thin the forest and create better wildlife habitat and improve the area. They probably can't help with the legal aspect but a local native plant society or master naturalist group would be a good free resource to help you if those are things you care about.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2021 22:17
|
|
|
euphronius posted:I actually litigated a common law marriage case and won . In 2008 How much of that case rested on a Facebook status?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2021 03:26
|
|
|
This came up in a TFR thread.Imgur posted:
knuthgrush posted:Side question: If the team really did ask and didn't just state that they were coming in, what would happen if you told them no? Would they come on in and set up shop anyway? Under what conditions could the police demand entry in to a house not directly involved in the incident?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2021 06:14
|
|
|
Sounds like you should be job hunting. I don't know how much you get paid but surely you can find a lateral move in to another kitchen job that will just be a different kind of hell. It doesn't sound like you're going to qualify for unemployment if you quit because your boss is really poo poo and the jobs stupid.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2022 01:13
|
|
|
Brennanite posted:The preferred lawyer in my life was just informed that one of their clients that they got an acquittal for last year was re-arrested for the same crime. At the same place. Where they should know there are working security cameras because that featured prominently in their trial. Happy New Year's! Sounds like a vote of confidence for the lawyer.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2023 17:09
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Cops have test strips that they run across scales, bowls, etc. and then say "oh, it reacted, this bowl must once have been full of cocaine" and then you have a real problem. Maybe not a conviction but that's small consolation while you're in a cell because you can't make bond. Those test kits also can have an amazingly high percentage of false positives and still be in use by the police because that is considered a feature not a problem. https://www.propublica.org/article/since-we-reported-on-flawed-roadside-drug-tests-five-more-convictions-have-been-overturned
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2023 02:52
|
|
|
null_pointer posted:Hypothetical but extremely practical: If a cop stops you and says the typical stupid poo poo like "do you know why I stopped you" or "do you know how fast you were going", etc, what's the correct answer? "Hello officer. Here's my license and insurance." Just ignore the question.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2023 04:33
|
|
|
E-flat posted:It’s this. Is the demon more powerful than the genie? Did they both roll magic checks? Who won?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2023 20:51
|
|
|
Why not just use your wish to gain power or leverage over the demon and force them to modify the contract. Maybe turn him in to your tame demon pet. There's no way that could go wrong.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2023 19:27
|
|
|
Blue Footed Booby posted:The NPC is clearly evil and/or stupid, because he entered a pact with a demon. But he's also clearly dangerous, for the same reason. The optimal solution is just kill the NPC. Wish for 4 copies of the npc and turn in his souls.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2023 23:42
|
|
|
BigHead posted:What? It's a Steven King book. There are at least two versions that I can think of off the top of my head, including the Mark Wahlberg version. Are you thinking of The Happening? Marky Mark wasn't in The Mist.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2023 22:16
|
|
|
Gothmog1065 posted:Just for clarification, I am paying the amount on my statement 100% in full each month by the "due date" (the 20th, usually within a few days of getting the bill). These are 2 different statements.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2023 15:16
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:They aren't. If he paid it in full every month he wouldn't have gotten the late fee. He was late. It may or may not be noted on his bill, but none of us have seen the bill. If not the system sounds hosed up. But he wasn't paying in full on time every month.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2023 23:50
|
|
|
Skunkduster posted:Unrelated question. In this video, the girl is under arrest for DUI and the cop is reading her rights. He says, "Your right to speak to an attorney or remain silent does not apply to requirement of the the New Mexico law that you take a breath test". How can state law negate constitutional rights? New Mexico has Implied Consent laws that state by driving on our roads you have stated you consent. Refusal means you will lose your license. I'm not sure how that lines up with people from another state, but either way you're taking a ride if you don't blow and probably also if you blow.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2023 01:40
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:You know some shady lawyer wants to use it as a defense for sexual assault That's not even remotely close to the same thing.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2023 04:23
|
|
|
E-flat posted:Can you kill someone to save yourself? Like, say you’re extreme rock climbing with somebody you’re tethered to, and something happens, and this person falls. If you do nothing, your strength will fail and you’ll both fall to your deaths. If you cut the tether, the person will fall to their death but you could survive. Would that be considered murder? Are you referencing the famous Cliffhanger V Colorado case?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2023 04:50
|
|
|
E-flat posted:No? I’ve never heard of it. I was trying to think of reasons why you might have to kill another person to survive. I originally thought of ‘you have to hit the switch to change trolley tracks from you to them’ but I figured the law would find the person who tied you two to the tracks in the first place culpable for that. I misremembered some of the facts but here's what happened.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 25, 2023 09:46
|
|
|
sleepy.eyes posted:I am absolutely not trying to loophole this, just want to make sure I don't gently caress over my buddy or myself through ignorance. The chances of it being a problem are slim. But if it becomes an issue, he's going to end up back in prison. Is it worth that?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2023 12:56
|
|
|
Captain Invictus posted:there's no urge to seize the land(e: lol just googled "adverse possession", didn't realize that's literally Squatter's Rights, that's not what I was intending), I had heard of some law about land changing hands and wanted to ask about it. What law do you imagine would allow the land to change hands that wasn't either buying it or seizing it?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2023 07:14
|
|
|
spacetoaster posted:Right, it's why I'm not escalating. I'm wondering how long do I let them go with that before I get irate about my family not having any heat or a/c. I don't think the lawyer thread is the place to find out the parts availability for an unnamed A/C part.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2023 22:16
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:A SUV had wrapped itself six inches deep around the . . . six feet of steel railroad rail . . . I'm not a lawyer but I can't imagine bollards don't have an established legal status. And I feel like with all these what ifs tye first and most minor hurdle is "does it have a use beyond being designed to hurt someone?" A mailbox no matter how strong is at least still a mailbox. A landmine is just a landmine. A chain across a driveway is a gate. A rope at neck height on a trail isn't a gate.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2023 19:39
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Sure, but it's one thing for the government to put up a bollard; it's another thing to slap one down in the middle of the public sidewalk or road in front of your house (as my father did; he had removed a tree planted by the city and planted one he preferred instead. Never got in trouble for that either. It was a very nice tree once it matured). I feel like the vast majority of bollards are put up on private property.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2023 21:57
|
|
|
pseudanonymous posted:I mean… do you think she’ll actually pursue a claim against you for $420? They absolutely will. It will go to collections if you don't pay it.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2023 20:42
|
|
|
neogeo0823 posted:We were given no forms or letters, and signed nothing. We're pretty sure we were supposed to sign some kind of paperwork, Don't sign anything. Good luck with your job hunt.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2023 15:58
|
|
|
neogeo0823 posted:It's a big globe-spanning company that makes a product that basically everyone has used at least once a week for the last 30+ years. We are not unionized, though. It cannot be overstated not to sign or say anything. A company that big is going to be way better at this than you and there is zero upside for you to do anything but cleanly separate with a minimum of communication.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2023 18:40
|
|
|
BigHead posted:I used to do a small amount of work with the K9 officers. They had something like a 99.5% success rate in terms of positive hits, if I'm remembering correctly from years ago. The dogs were way more likely to miss drugs than to do a false positive. Even then a false positive was usually "you touched meth then you touched your door handle so your door handle smells like meth" or "your clothes are soaked in fentanyl smoke." Those dogs and handlers start failing a lot more when they actually get tested properly. And the "it's not a false positive because you could have been near drugs once" excuse is always tossed around when they fail to find anything. There's a lot of bias introduced to the system by cops who don't want to be wrong about their hunches. https://www.npr.org/2017/11/20/563889510/preventing-police-bias-when-handling-dogs-that-bite quote:"The dogs are mainly used to confirm what we already suspect," says Fulmer. "When the dogs come out, about 99 percent of the time we get an alert. And it's because we already know what's in the car; we just need that confirmation to help us out with that." These aren't the words of someone who actually needs a drug dog. He just needs a probable cause dog. Atticus_1354 fucked around with this message at 13:34 on Feb 9, 2024 |
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2024 13:29
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:
Why would you see a case where the dog didn't find anything? By default, you're going to see the cases where a dog does discover something.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2024 01:03
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:In theory, sure, but in practice, again, if the dog is there, they have some other reason to search anyway, and if they can't use the dog to get an excuse to search, they'll just find a different excuse, like suddenly "smelling weed," etc. It's not that I just didn't see any case where the dog didn't find anything; I didn't see any case where the dog wasn't just there to provide a parallel construction and they were going to find a reason to search anyway. Because there's a filter where you're going to predominantly see the cases that turned up something for whatever reason. That doesn't mean the dog is 99% accurate.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2024 03:13
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:. . . but, i mean, to the extent such cases happen, relatively speaking they aren't a problem. Nobody went to jail. You don't think using inaccurate dogs as a pretext to search isn't a problem as long as nobody ends up in jail from it? Because that's my big problem with it. If you don't need the dogs like you're saying, then why have the dogs? If we do need the dogs, then we should be really concerned about their false positives.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2024 03:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 09:42 |
|
|
Captain Duvel posted:His lawyer has specifically requested fingernail testing which she probably won't pass. What's her lawyer requesting? A coke heads not passing those tests either.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2024 07:36
|
|