Many sectors, particularly catering, have a mandatory “home” pooling practice, where the employer takes over workers` advice, pools them, and then allocates the money to its employees, as it sees fit. Tip Pooling is not mentioned anywhere in Section 351 and this appears to make it an illegal “take” from the employee`s “property.” However, the courts have conducted a fanciful analysis to conclude that it is admissible as long as the distribution is “fair and appropriate”. Leighton v. Old Heidelberg, Ltd. (1990) 219 Cal.App.3d 1062. In that sense, yes, your employer can take your advice. Finally, tip pools usually contain employees who usually receive advice and are in the service chain, such. B as waiters, buses and bartenders. But tiping pooling agreements are not necessarily limited to those that provide services directly to the customer.8 Finally, California is also subject to The Ninth Circuit jurisprudence on this issue. In 2009, a California appeals court ruled that kitchen staff were included in the “service chain” and that they were drinkable, which is safe to drink in accordance with Section 351. Similarly, in 2010, the Ninth Circuit itself maintained that the house`s staff could participate in tip pools as long as the employer did not receive a counselling credit. But the ninth Circuit s 2016 verdict at Oregon restaurant denied the effect of the previous two precedents and ruled that, according to department regulations in 2011, kitchen and rearguard staff might not be included in tipp pools. But that decision is currently being challenged by the U.S.

Supreme Court and could be overturned – which could pave the way for the pooling of california home heads. As this legal field evolves rapidly, California employers are warned not to include domestic staff in some sort of forecast pool until they consult with the Board. The non-binding information on the website of the Department of Labour Standards Enforcement is confirmed by a letter of opinion from the Department of Labour Standards (2005.09.08), which indicates that an employer may have an agreement on the pooling of advice as long as: Answer: Yes. According to a California court, laboratory code 351 authorizes the involuntary pooling of tips. Therefore, your employer may request that you share your advice with other employees who offer services at the restaurant. In this regard, it is the position of the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement that if a pooling agreement is in place, the advice must be distributed to employees who provide a “direct table service.” Such employees could imagine waiters and waitresses, busboys, bartenders, hostesses and master of s. Staff who do not offer direct table service and do not participate in the Tip Pool include dishwashers, cooks and cooks, except in restaurants where cooks prepare the meal at the guest`s table, in which case the chef can participate in the tipp pool.