StyleList.com:
As if wearing a Hooters uniform isn't bad enough, now news is out that some waitresses at the restaurant chain have to pay for their short-shorts, tiny tanks and shiny suntanned pantyhose, too.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Oh boy, are these gals misguided about paying for that uniform! There may be a few companies that pay for the uniform you wear but most do not. My son work at Target and they pay for their khaki pants and red shirts themselves. I don't think Wal-Mart pays for their employees' uniforms either. Most convenience store employees pay for their own shirts after the first one but have to buy their own khaki pants. As for the sharing of tips, that is illegal and Hooters will lose that part of the lawsuit. No matter where you work there will be some give and take on all of this. From what I've seen, Hooters isn't such a bad place to work and the girls are watched over fairly closely. Hells bell, there's a Bible class here that meets at Hooters once a week! You'd be amazed at their attendance! (This isn't a joke! It's a true fact!)
Where is "here"? I'd like to know so I can avoid a place where Bible classes are held at Hooters.
"Here" is Atlanta, GA and those classes are not rowdy. In fact, they read most of the time. The rest of the place is always full and most people don't even know there's a Bible class going on. Live and let live!
About the uniforms: It's a tank top and pair of running shorts, thick pantyhose, scrunched athletic socks and sneakers. I fail to see how such attire can be attributed to sluttiness, as implied or outright stated in many of the posts here. They're not bikinis, lingerie, or anything any more suggestive than common athletic wear you can see at your local jogging path.
About the girls: I can only speak about the place I worked at, and we were very diligent about creating a safe and respectable place to work, if not simply because it's the right thing to do, but also that if the girls feel safe and respected at their place of employment then they will be more productive for themselves and the business. The vast majority of them were college students. As in all groups, some were smart and not-so-smart, straight-laced and partiers, etc. That they happen to be capitalizing on being above average in looks is no different than an athlete capitalizing on his/her physical abilities. They all deserve respect and dignity.
I used to be a manager at Hooters.
At orientation, they are told that their first uniform kit is free except for the shoes. Whenever they wanted/needed a new piece of clothing they could purchase from the restaurant at cost, and they earned new stuff after so many hours. There was never a profit made from the employees' purchasing uniform items. The same goes for the t-shirts & polos required for the kitchen/host/bussing staff. And if something was ruined while on the job it was replaced at the store's expense, not the staff. Once they left employment, they had to return replacements for the original kit if possible, except for pantyhose.
cont'd...
I think that to really comment on this lawsuit you would have to know the details of New York labor law, which may be different than your state's labor laws.
I think what may be at issue here is that the minimum wage law may contain a clause prohibiting the employer from making mandatory deductions for work items that reduces the net wage below minimum wage!
The other part of the lawsuit may be that New York, like many other states, has a lower minimum wage for workers that get tips. But the waitresses may be saying that they aren't getting their tips, the cooks are, so the chain cannot legally provide them the lower minimum wage.
I want to give you an example of how being a server works. I am making up numbers, so bare with me.
Lets say the tip minimum wage is $3.35. The minimum wage is $7.25. They have to make $3.
90 an hour in tips. If they don't the employer is suppose to make up the difference. A good server can make anywhere from $15-$20 an hour just on tips and a bad one maybe $5-$10 an hour. That is still over $7.25 an hour. You have to add the tip minimum wage with the actual tips to get the actual minimum wage.
Every restaurant has a uniform. Some give them to you. Which you have to return after you quit or get fired, or you won't get your last check. Other restaurants do not give them to you and you have to buy them.
I worked for one restaurant that required the cooks to wear white button down shirt or white chef coat, black, tan, or blue pants, and non slip shoes. The servers where required to wear light blue, pink, yellow, or white color button down shirts. The socks had to be black and the pants and shoes where the same requirement as the kitchen. The dishwashers and bussers had to wear light blue shirts. Every area had their own requirements. You had to buy your uniform.
Continue.
I have works in restaurants for over 20 years. Anywhere from fast food to full service. Fast food always supplies a uniform. Full service not so much. Maybe a t shirt for the kitchen, but most have to buy a uniform.
I doubt this lawsuit goes any where. Only thing I see wrong is tip sharing with the kitchen. That is not right, but paying for a uniform is standard practice in the restaurant world.
there is no law in new york that states they can not make them buy there uniform. the tip credit law was designed to help small business not have to pay minimum wage to tipped employees because the tips they make often if not always exceed what they would have made. in california the minimum wage is higher as well as the overtime laws are more strict. in san fran its even higher tipped or not you make over 9 an hour. tip pooling or tipping out managers or kitchen or bar or busser or whatever the owner decides should be honored. every person has a choice to work somewhere or not. like hooters, you would think the objections would be wearing those skimpy outfits not the 19 bucks they cost. they look cheap and now we know how cheap they are.
I spend more on shoes for work than the servers are paying for their uniforms.
If these women worked in a factory or office, they would have to buy clothes for that job. Factory is usually steel toe shoes then what ever for shirt and pants. Offices you have to wear office attire. I think most here knows what that entails. Pant suit, nice blouse.
This is a very petty suit if you ask me.
its cheaper than the bush get motivated speach and they are serving the same clients
They should start a car wash, where they wear VERY small bikinis and take donations, the person who donates the most gets to take them out on a date.
h ( . )( . ) t e r s
i've never been to a hOOters. am curious to check one out.
Eh, I went to a Hooters about a decade ago. As a bar/restaurant, not bad. No complaints. Attractive waitresses, definitely! Nothing to really get excited about, but nothing to complain about, either.
Do they want some cheese with their whine?
If it had "JUICY" across the a s s they'd pay $150 for those shorts.
Someone just wants more. attention.
Were you required to pay for uniforms when you took the job? Yes? Then, quit yer whining. If not, then, work somewhere else, and quit yer whining.
To those who talk of "responsibility" and such:
At what point do we pay to work in a corporation, not just have to pay for what they demand workers wear?
I'm not sure why the girls are whining (it's a minimum wage paying job, but at least they get tips), but I doubt it's for any pragmatic reason...
I don't see how this lawsuit is going to go any where. The only thing I can see going through is tipping the kitchen. There is no need for that. Lots of restaurants have tip sharing. They share with the bus boy, bartenders, and some times the food runner. Four and five star restaurants they have to tip out the Maitre' D. Most restaurants make their employees get their own uniform.
I guess this dumb broads do not realize that the uniforms can be a tax right off.
You can explain to the mods why you like using sexist language.
I could have used something else. I am a woman.
That's "tax write-off". :)
And isn't "tip sharing" eeeeeevil socialism? if one girl with a D-cup brings in more money than the one with the A-cup, why should the A-cup get money she didn't earn? (yes, this "tip sharing" remark is complete sarcasm. In too many other contexts, it can be argued against. Including this one. Too many variables, including mood of the customer, how quickly the cooks fry up the garbage to be eaten, ambient surroundings (layout, music volume, type of music, etc), how many customers come in at a given point, and so on...
Cooks control more of the tip the server gets. If the food blows, late, or incorrect the server tip will suffer. No matter how good of service the server gives the customer.
You can write off the uniforms if you itemize; they probably don't make enough money to do that and probably just do the short form. Also, for other occupations that have to buy their own uniforms, you can only deduct the amount over a certain percent. I have to spend hundreds on uniforms and shoes and supplies for work each year, but it doesn't come to anything over the percentage. I also have to pay fpr fingerprints, license renewal and for many education classes every 2 yrs. In the past we could write off the education cost and uniform, etc. costs on our taxes, however, a few years this was changed so you can only write off the amount over the percent. So it's just an expense for us to keep our jobs. at least we make better wages, but I worked for low wages to pay to go to school, etc.
$19.43 for two inches of clothes? Imagine if they had to buy a whole outfit.
This is what happens in a culture that refuses to provide an honorable role for sex workers.
LOL! Love it.
Yeah, it is sad that guns and going to iraq to rape women and kill children is legal, but if a young woman wants to give a man an orgasm it is illegal!!!
I don't care what they wear. The food blows.
Yes it does and the service is worse. Guys go there only for the eye candy.
I know there's a double-entendre in there somewhere...
/ducksforcover
Loading comments…
First Posted: 10-30-09 01:20 PM | Updated: 10-30-09 02:33 PM