{468x60.media}
Mr. Mavros

Hospitality Law

Tip-Pooling Practices May be a Thing of the Past

By John Mavros, Attorney at Law, Partner, Fisher & Phillips, LLP

Restaurants and other hospitality businesses in the Western U.S. recently received tough news as a Federal appeals court refused to strike down a controversial tip-pooling regulation from the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL). The DOL rule prohibits businesses from requiring employees to share their tips with back-of-the-house staff -- even if the tipped employees are paid minimum wage. Although a group of hospitality employers had hoped that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals would reject the rule as contrary to well-established law, it was upheld. The decision applies to all businesses operating within the Ninth Circuit, including the states of California, Nevada, Washington, Arizona, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Hawaii, and Alaska.

Background of Tip Credits and Tip-Pooling

Under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), employers are permitted to utilize a limited amount of employees' tips as a credit against their minimum wage obligations through a tip credit. Under current Federal law, if an employee earns $5.12 an hour in tips, it would be permissible for a restaurant to only pay the employee $2.13 an hour in cash wages in order to meet the $7.25 federal minimum wage.

In most Western states, however, employers cannot take a tip credit (including California, Nevada, Washington, Oregon, Montana, and Alaska) pursuant to state law. Restaurants in these states are required to pay employees cash wages at minimum wage levels regardless of the tips they receive. Some employers in these and other states have instituted tip-pooling programs. Under such plans, restaurants require servers to share the tips they receive with workers in customarily non-tipped positions, such as those that work as back-of-the-house staff (i.e., dishwashers and cooks).

Case History of Tip-Pooling

In 2010, the Ninth Circuit considered in Cumbie v. Woody Woo, 596 F.3d 577 (9th Cir. 2010) whether section 203(m) of the FLSA prohibits all employers from allowing non-customarily tipped employees from sharing in the company's tip pool, even when the front-house staff does not take a tip credit. The Ninth Circuit noted the FLSA's silence with regard to redistribution of tips and held that the FLSA does not prohibit employers from redistributing employees' tips where no tip credit against the minimum wage is claimed. This decision allowed employers in the hospitality and restaurant industry to broaden their tip pools to include back-of-the-house employees. The Cumbie decision held that as long as the employer does not attempt to take a tip credit and pays at least the minimum hourly wage, an employer may, without violating the FLSA, permissibly mandate tip-pooling with employees who do not customarily and regularly receive tips.

Dissatisfied with the court's decision, the USDOL issued a new rule in April 2011, stating that tips are the "sole property" of the tipped employee and cannot be used in a pool to share with back-of-the-house staff.

In 2012, a group of concerned hospitality employers challenged this rule in the case of Oregon Restaurant and Lodging Association v. Perez. The group argued that the USDOL had exceeded its statutory authority by issuing that rule and ignored the binding precedent established by Cumbie. Around the same time, three casino dealers working for Wynn Las Vegas brought a wage and hour lawsuit against the casino. The employer required dealers and other tipped employees to participate in a tip-pooling program, and the dealers claimed the casino was unlawfully taking their tips to share with other workers.

In 2013, a Federal judge in Portland, Oregon handed a victory to that group by invalidating the USDOL's new tip-pooling rule. Shortly thereafter, a Federal judge in Las Vegas ruled in favor of Wynn Las Vegas. The USDOL appealed the Oregon decision and the Ninth Circuit consolidated the companion case against Wynn Las Vegas into one appeal.

The Ninth Circuit Revives the DOL Rule

In February 2016, the Ninth Circuit upheld the DOL rule finding that the DOL had the authority to expand its tip-pooling regulations. The Ninth Circuit acknowledged the 2010 Cumbie decision and the right of employers to institute tip pooling programs. However, the February 2016 decision reasoned that Cumbie did not prevent the DOL from barring the practice. By issuing this decision, the court essentially reversed itself and rejected its earlier holding in Cumbie, explaining that the DOL's interpretation of section 203(m) was "reasonable" and therefore entitled to deference from the courts.

The Oregon Restaurant and Lodging Association sought a review of this decision before a full panel of Ninth Circuit judges to revisit the decision in hopes that it would be overturned. However, the Ninth Circuit recently issued an order that it will not take the case up on a full panel appeal.

What Has Changed

A tip is now considered the sole property of the tipped employee regardless of whether the employer takes a tip credit. This requirement does not preclude a valid tip pooling arrangement among employees who customarily and regularly receive tips. The FLSA defines "customarily and regularly tipped employees" as those receiving more than $30 per month in tips. Therefore, employers using a tip pool will need to ensure that none of their back-of-the-house staff partake in sharing the tip pool, including the head chef, dessert chef, caller, line cooks, dishwashers, expeditors, porters, or any other staff that may not fall within the FLSA's definition of "customarily and regularly tipped employees."

What will Andy Puzder do?

Despite these rulings, Donald Trump's pick for Labor Secretary - Andrew "Andy" Puzder - will have a huge impact on American businesses. Mr. Puzder has been the chief executive of CKE Restaurants, the parent company of Carl's Jr. and Hardee's for 16 years, and is an outspoken proponent of pro-growth policies, reducing Federal regulations (specifically within the restaurant industry), and reversing the anti-business stance taken by the previous DOL. Only time will tell whether Mr. Puzder actually rolls back "burdensome" regulations for businesses, but many experts wholeheartedly expect him to do so.

Guidance for Hospitality Employers

Unless Mr. Puzder immediately amends the DOL rule, or the ruling is overturned by the US Supreme Court, many restaurants and hospitality businesses in the Western U.S. may have to reevaluate how they disperse tips. Below are five alternatives for new tipping practices:

No Tipping

No-tip restaurants are by no means common, but the idea is starting to take hold as a means to comply with the DOL's new rule and to discourage competition among employees. Such a policy not only maintains compliance with the law, but also the theory is that tips disrupt the working environment and leave workers unsure of their take-home pay from week to week. For some restaurants, employers pay workers $15 an hour and any money left on the tables go to charity.

No Tip-Pooling

Employers can abandon tip-pooling and allow each employee to keep his or her own tip. As a result, performance and quality of service by the employee may increase, however, a possible consequence of such practice may: (1) Discourage teamwork; (2) Create disagreements over who is assigned less lucrative sections or guests; and (3) Lead to employees objecting to work lower revenue shifts.

Tip-Pooling Only Among "Customarily and Regularly Tipped Employees"

Tips received by "customarily and regularly tipped employees," such as servers, can be pooled and redistributed among only those employees. Be sure that any tip-pooling agreement is acknowledged and in writing.

Separate Tip Lines

Include separate tip lines on customer checks for front-house and back-house staff. Some restaurants have the traditional tip line in addition to a "kitchen" line as a means to comply with the DOL's rule and to increase the pay for back-house staff without raising customer prices.

Mandatory Service Fee

Many employers are abandoning the tipping system altogether and are instead charging customers a mandatory service fee. A compulsory charge for service, for example, 15 percent of the bill, is not a tip. Such charges are part of the employer's gross receipts. Sums distributed to employees from service charges will not be counted as tips received and can be divided among front-house and back-house employees.

Depending on your jurisdiction, tip-pooling is now a risky proposition. Restaurants and other hospitality businesses in the Western U.S. should immediately evaluate compliant alternatives to fit their business needs and take action to ensure that their employment policies comply with state and federal law.

This article provides an overview of the law and is not intended to be, nor should it be construed as legal advice for any particular fact situation.

John Mavros, Attorney at Law, is a partner in Fisher Phillips’ Irvine office. He represents employers with labor and employment law, such as unpaid compensation claims, including unpaid minimum wages, overtime, meal/rest period premiums, vacation pay, and/or business expenses, on both an individual and class action basis. Mr. Mavros defends businesses involved in civil litigation or arbitration. This includes defending claims brought before the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE aka the Labor Board) and the California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board. He assists employers with employee handbook preparation, wage/hour audits, new hire policies, employee compensation plans, severance agreements, reductions in force, and day-to-day workforce issues. Mr. Mavros can be contacted at 949-798-2134 or jmavros@laborlawyers.com Extended Bio...

HotelExecutive.com retains the copyright to the articles published in the Hotel Business Review. Articles cannot be republished without prior written consent by HotelExecutive.com.

Receive our daily newsletter with the latest breaking news and hotel management best practices.
Hotel Business Review on Facebook
RESOURCE CENTER - SEARCH ARCHIVES
General Search:

NOVEMBER: Architecture & Design: Authentic, Interactive and Immersive

Eric Rahe

The advent of social media brought with it an important shift in the hospitality industry. Any guest’s experience might be amplified to thousands of potential customers, and you want to be sure that your hotel stands out for the right reasons. Furthermore, technology has increased competition. According to Euromonitor International, the travel industry will have the highest online payment percentage of any industry by 2020, often occurring through third-party sites that display your competitors alongside you. As a result, many hoteliers are looking to stand out by engaging customers and the experience has become more interactive than ever. READ MORE

Pat Miller

Even the most luxurious hotel has a finite budget when it comes to the design or re-design of hotel spaces. The best designers prioritize expenses that have the biggest impact on guest perceptions, while minimizing or eliminating those that don’t. This story will focus on three blockbuster areas – the entry experience, the guest room, and the public spaces. This article will focus on these three key areas and shed light on how the decision making process and design choices made with care and attention can create memorable, luxe experiences without breaking the bank. READ MORE

Patrick Burke

For over 35 years, American architect Patrick Burke, AIA has led Michael Graves Architecture & Design to create unique hospitality experiences for hotel operators and travelers around the globe, in Asia, Europe, the U.S. and the Middle East. As the hospitality industry has shifted from making travelers feel at home while away to providing more dynamic experiences, boutique hotels have evolved to create hyper local, immersive environments. Having witnessed and contributed to the movement, Burke discusses the value of authentic character that draws on physical and social context to create experiences that cannot be had anywhere else in the world. READ MORE

Alan Roberts

More than ever before, guests want and expect the design of a hotel to accurately reflect its location, regardless of whether they visit a property in an urban center, a historic neighborhood or a resort destination. They also seek this sense of place without wanting to sacrifice the level and consistency of service they’ve come to expect from a beloved hotel brand. A unique guest experience is now something expected not just desirable from any hotel wishing to compete in the world today. A hotel’s distinctive design and execution goes a long way to attracting todays discerning customer. READ MORE

Coming Up In The December Online Hotel Business Review




{300x250.media}
Feature Focus
Hotel Law: Issues & Events
There is not a single area of a hotel’s operation that isn’t touched by some aspect of the law. Hotels and management companies employ an army of lawyers to advise and, if necessary, litigate issues which arise in the course of conducting their business. These lawyers typically specialize in specific areas of the law – real estate, construction, development, leasing, liability, franchising, food & beverage, human resources, environmental, insurance, taxes and more. In addition, issues and events can occur within the industry that have a major impact on the whole, and can spur further legal activity. One event which is certain to cause repercussions is Marriott International’s acquisition of Starwood Hotels and Resorts Worldwide. This newly combined company is now the largest hotel company in the world, encompassing 30 hotel brands, 5,500 hotels under management, and 1.1 million hotel rooms worldwide. In the hospitality industry, scale is particularly important – the most profitable companies are those with the most rooms in the most locations. As a result, this mega- transaction is likely to provoke an increase in Mergers & Acquisitions industry-wide. Many experts believe other larger hotel companies will now join forces with smaller operators to avoid being outpaced in the market. Companies that had not previously considered consolidation are now more likely to do so. Another legal issue facing the industry is the regulation of alternative lodging companies such as Airbnb and other firms that offer private, short-term rentals. Cities like San Francisco, Los Angeles and Santa Monica are at the forefront of efforts to legalize and control short-term rentals. However, those cities are finding it’s much easier to adopt regulations on short-term rentals than it is to actually enforce them. The December issue of Hotel Business Review will examine these and other critical issues pertaining to hotel law and how some companies are adapting to them.