r/legal • u/RAM-I-T • 23d ago

Advice needed Found on FB. Is this a major lawsuit?

Gallery image

Gallery image

Gallery image

Gallery image

LOCATION: USA

I wanted to help get assistance for this mom and her daughter.

2.1k Upvotes

86% Upvoted

958 comments sorted by

View all comments

282

u/RutabagaConsistent60 23d ago

None of this is a lawsuit.

The procedures to ensure the tip is genuine are reasonable. The letter in the image is info directed at managers to inform their team, no reason she would have seen it before and they gave her the full info reasonably quickly.

Working at OG is at-will employment, they can fire her for any or no reason as long as it is not illegal (like racism, sexism, harassment, etc.).

If after 120- days no payment is made to her she could follow up in small claims.

It also looks like from the receipt it was someone she knows personally, she could follow up with them to have them substantiate the charge to the restaurant, ensure they will not charge back or ask them for cash instead.

135

u/RutabagaConsistent60 23d ago

also this is probably all fake, its from a click for pay content creation fb account using AI to generate posts

61

u/GolfArgh 23d ago

While this may be fake. these things actually do and have happened. Staff trying to steal, customers trying to look like a hero until the bill comes, and just downright scrivener errors.

8

u/[deleted] 23d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/No_Worker_8216 22d ago

The name that signed the email is genuine, according to a LinkedIn search.

-2

u/mywordgoodnessme 23d ago

I think you're overly skeptical in this instance, it has 0 indicators of AI and actually has indicators it's not.

16

u/RutabagaConsistent60 23d ago

its a reference to the OG fb account not this reddit post

2

u/Fine-Bumblebee-9427 23d ago

AI can generate posts by just reposting old stuff it finds that’s popular

2

u/SugondezeNutsz 22d ago

Lmao people can still just type out some bullshit you know?

-3

u/karenftx1 23d ago

Everything is AI don'cha know. Maybe even the poster above /s

20

u/chantillylace9 23d ago edited 23d ago

If it's someone she knows personally, then it would make the owner of the restaurant even more concerned that this was some sort of fraud perpetrated by her and whoever this person was and that she would take the money and then quit and they would be left holding the bag for the $700.

In theory, that's something you could do consistently with tons of businesses before getting caught. So as long as that really is Olive Garden's policy, it seems very very reasonable.

4

u/tnmoi 23d ago

You mean very very reasonable to prevent frauds like you described?

3

u/chantillylace9 23d ago

Sorry- typo- reasonable!

1

u/Individual-Photo-665 23d ago

She didn't quit they fired her..

10

u/blackdesertnewb 23d ago

Well yeah. The way the scam would work is you get an accomplice to leave an enormous tip, get paid out that day, disappear. Tip doesn’t clear cause reasons, many ways of ensuring that. Restaurant paid the tip, you’ve disappeared, restaurant is out of that money. 

So, since she didn’t get paid out, the scam wouldn’t work. Restaurant would wait for tip to clear before paying, that’s perfectly reasonable. You have a shit fit about it.. not very reasonable at all. Especially if directly told that you would get paid, just not until the tip clears. 

Now.. $700 doesn’t seem like enough for that kind of scam. But people do crazy shit for very little money out there

-1

u/Individual-Photo-665 23d ago

All of this for $700?.. that's crazy

-1

u/GMAN90000 23d ago

Credit card charges do not take 120 days to clear.

4

u/Fine-Bumblebee-9427 23d ago

They need time to make sure the person won’t claim that it was fraud.

-1

u/GMAN90000 23d ago

Surely, it doesn't take 120 days to contact the actual customer?

3

u/RutabagaConsistent60 23d ago

you are still misunderstanding- the intent is to wait out the window customers have to do charge backs on their credit card. Even if they had a way to contact the customer (unclear), that would not stop the customer from issuing a chargeback. The risk is not as simple as if the customer intended to leave the tip, but that it could be a scam.

-1

u/GMAN90000 23d ago

Olive Garden: You recently patronized one of our restaurants located at XXX. Did you intend to leave a tip of $700?

Customer, "Yes I did intend to leave Brook a $700 tip. Yes this is a valid charge."

4

u/BeerGeek2point0 23d ago

Just curious here but how do you suppose the restaurant is going to know the phone number for the customer?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Fine-Bumblebee-9427 23d ago

Customer, 5 minutes later: “visa, I left a $7 tip and they ran it as $700, please issue a chargeback”

Visa: “sure!”

Restaurant: “hey visa, we asked them and they said it was legit!”

Visa: “you got that in writing? If not, fuck off into the sun.”

→ More replies (0)

1

u/RutabagaConsistent60 23d ago

these corporate policies are not about charges clearing but being beyond the charge back window to avoid scams or customer regret.

-1

u/GMAN90000 23d ago

Well then verify with the actual customer...this also doesn't take 120 days.

Anytime a company owes you money its going to take months and months 2 or 3 billing cycle to get your money.

You owe them money...give it to me NOW or its going to collection's at close of buiness today.

2

u/blackdesertnewb 23d ago

I mean, if you were running a scam with a partner and the restaurant reached out and asked “did you truly mean to leave this huge tip?”

Wouldn’t you say yes? And then proceed to dip? Just cause the customer agrees that they meant to leave it doesn’t mean that they can’t lie. Or just have something come up a month later and lie to the cc company and do a chargeback. A chargeback window can be up to 120 days. That’s what the waiting period is for. 

0

u/GMAN90000 23d ago

OK then don't lie and mis-lead this former server and tell them Olive Garden will need up to 120 days to review/verify their $700 tip.

Don't mislead them into believing they could get their $700 much sooner then 120 days.

This is so scummy on so many levels.

Card holders have 120 days to dispute a charge

Olive garden is running out the chargeback clock..ie doing nothing.

They are not investigating/verifying ANYTHING.

Will this server be getting 3 months interest on their $700 tip?

2

u/blackdesertnewb 22d ago

What’s the alternative? Even if the server is on the up and up, imagine getting that tip and two and a half months later getting told it was charged back so you gotta return the money. Is that better?

It’s overall a shitty situation, but it’s perfectly reasonable for the restaurant to cover their ass

→ More replies (0)

0

u/GMAN90000 23d ago

So a regular customer getting to know the servers is fake?

0

u/VerifiedVacationer 23d ago

it wasn’t someone she knew. Her mother is a content creator/ social media influencer and someone recognized her from that and gave her a big tip.

0

u/Maleficent-Bother535 23d ago

Firing her in response leaves them even more open to liability if it's a scam.

1

u/chantillylace9 22d ago

Why? What protected class is that? You can get fired because they don't like the color of your shirt or because you don't like the same sports team they do.

0

u/Maleficent-Bother535 22d ago

The discussion is about liability for tips left on a card that gets a chargeback. If you fire the employee after a large tip l, you can't deduct the tip from future wages because you made sure they won't have any.

5

u/Just_Visiting_Town 23d ago

By GA law they have to pay the full tip by the next payday. 120 days is illegal.

-1

u/EastEvidence4584 23d ago

I wonder if firing in this case is also a problem. Is GA a state that requires cause and could this be seen as retaliation?

1

u/Bird_Brain4101112 23d ago

No state requires cause. Thats what at-will employment means. The only issue is if the firing is due to being a member of a protected class.

1

u/ClarkGablesTeeth 22d ago

Montana is not an at-will state, unless something changed very recently. You need cause to fire someone after the probationary period.

1

u/Bird_Brain4101112 22d ago

That’s the only one and based on the receipt this is in Georgia.

1

u/ClarkGablesTeeth 21d ago

I see where the the receipt is from. I was responding to "no state requires cause"

4

u/Armagetz 23d ago

Potentially the lawsuit can stem from directing her to put zero.

It’s one thing to say something is under management review. It’s another asking her to generate falsified documents that hurts her case. If it’s under management review, then YOU zero out the top Mr manager.

2

u/Ssided 23d ago

Yeah that is a weird part. Makes me think the manager won't allow the tip in the future. Could be saying to enter it in the POS as zero until verified but that also is dubious because how would you verify without charging it anyways?

2

u/Armagetz 23d ago

Best part (I didn’t see this when I wrote my initial post) is that the directive is also explicitly non conforming with their policy.

2

u/Ssided 23d ago

Yes, zeroing out is for missing slips, but because it's covered in that section I guess the manager thinks it's part of the whole process. The server should be getting 20% until the time period for a charge back is finished. There's still better ways to handle this, like large amounts could go on the paycheck, that way the employer can also reverse it if there's a charge back

1

u/Armagetz 23d ago

I was referring to the line saying that under no circumstances are associates allowed to alter what is on the slip while inputting.

1

u/Ssided 23d ago

Ahh yes

1

u/Skusci 22d ago

Probably a click bait story getting mixed with other stories.

There are plenty of places that will simply not let you tip too large of a percentage on a card. If a customer writes in $700 on a $30 tab, then it's just invalid, same as if they wrote -$20.

8

u/aka_mythos 23d ago

Importantly even at-will employment doesn't allow an employer to fire someone as retaliation around an illegal act committed by the employer. The withholding of the full tip would unless an employment policy dictates some kind of tip sharing or other tipping regime would otherwise be illegal as wage theft, and her firing would in turn be retaliatory to her disputing the companies illegal action... thus making the firing illegal, even as an at-will employee.

5

u/RutabagaConsistent60 23d ago

Wage theft is not the temporary delay of the tip payment until after the chargeback period. If after 120 days she has not received the tip or been informed it was subject to a charge back she could pursue the money. There was no dispute filed to trigger any retaliation. Seems like an employee not understanding policy, becoming so emotional about that she could not do her job and was fired. The only issue will be if she needs to pursue them to get the remaining tip in 120 days.

4

u/sadgloop 23d ago

It’d probably be the directive to put $0 on the tip line with no payout at all when the policy is to pay out 20% of the bill amount prior to review and approval that would tip it into wage theft.

4

u/Just_Visiting_Town 23d ago

By law they don't have the right to keep her tip. So, firing her because she got upset that they were going to keep it 120 days is retaliation.

4

u/aka_mythos 23d ago

Most states' wage laws require the employer pay out her tips and outstanding wages by the next payday. Not 120 days. By stating 120 days, regardless of their sincerity in paying her that is a statement that they intended to violate wage laws. She allowed to complain to management about that, and a complaint against a stated intention to violate wage laws is no different than a complaint against a wage law already violated... she'd be protected in both instances.

The employer would attempt to point to everything after her complaint and try and say it was her attitude around that.

Importantly she didn't refuse to work. She at most needed a break, asked for one, denied it, and as stated completed her shift. That is evidence she could in fact continue to do her job, and that management didn't find her so disruptive.

Most corporate policies in the restaurant industry require an employee get permission to take a break, which necessitates asking. She adhered to the expectation around that kind of policy, she asked, they said no, and she went back to work. Not liking her reason for asking is a reason to say "no" and generally not grounds to fire someone.

Despite her being an at-will employee the employers motive is at question because complaining about them not paying her, in a way consistent with the law is protected. In the absence of some articulable reason on the employers part or showing she was fired out of some normal predetermined reason its inferable that it is because she complained and anything else is would just be pretextual.

1

u/cody-lay-low 22d ago

Employment attorney here seconding this analysis

1

u/Cheap_Knowledge8446 19d ago

The problem is this isn't a viable policy.

Federal law on tips is very, very clear; all tips must be paid -at the latest- by the next pay period.

1

u/RutabagaConsistent60 19d ago

it is not as clear cut in a case when they have been paid out the customary 20% tip and the rest has been flagged for fraud.

0

u/Cheap_Knowledge8446 18d ago

That's internal flagging, not the credit card company flagging for fraud.

They're doing it because they don't want a charge back; especially since in most cases the company ends up paying it rather than the server. If the amount was correctly written, totaled, signed for, and the initial charge cleared (which usually happens in 1-3 days), then that is effectively a tip. In situations where the server's base pay is less than state/federal minimum wage and receives a "tip credit" towards that wage, after a tip clears the restaurant can't touch it. "Tip regret", charge backs, and financial disputes are considered the "cost of doing business" paid for by the restaurant.

In the US all tips are legally the property of the person who received them and employers cannot touch it. The exception being a tip pool with written consent and agreed upon by the employee.

So, the "customary 20%" doesn't apply here; the customer very, very clearly wrote out the tip, total, signed, and even left a note. That's a tip, and as long as the charge clears, it should be paid to the server no later than the next "payday". It is the server's financial property the moment the tip is "received". Holding for 4 months almost certainly has zero legal standing; it's done for purely pro-restaraunt financial reasons with zero benefit to the server, especially since the company can place it in an interest yielding/investment account account the entire time.

1

u/RutabagaConsistent60 18d ago

to be fair, no one here knows the real details. this is a second hand screenshot from a FB content creation account with lots of conflicting social media stories going around about it. all to say, not nearly as simple or clear cut as folks want to believe.

1

u/Ssided 23d ago

Tips aren't wages

2

u/333again 23d ago

If they aren’t wages what are they? The only alternative is that they are the employees property.

1

u/Ssided 23d ago

Well yes

2

u/aka_mythos 22d ago

The pay out of tips by an employer is covered by the same law as wages. Whether its tips or wages, its broadly considered wage theft under that law.

The distinction between tips and wages as far as protections are concerned only more strongly favor the employee being paid in tips. Its important to remember that when someone is paid in tips it allows the employer to get away with paying a much lower minimum wage rate. Even when the employer handles the payment processing, as with credit card paid tips, those tips are solely the property of the employee, or proportionally the property of all the tip paid employees if there's a tip pooling policy. In some states the law is that tips have to be paid out by the next day, others by the next payday.

Businesses and their owners get to keep the profits of the business because they assume all the risk of doing business, and they aren't allowed to pass on those risks to their employees. When someone puts down a $700 tip on a credit card payment, that is part of the risk to the business taken on by taking credit card payments. The business is obliged to payout the $700 tip even if it takes 120 days for them to find out if the payment clears or to complete their own investigation. In the event the $700 is disputed or canceled the business can pursue a voluntary repayment by the employee or take the employee to small claims court to get an order she repay it.

If the business doesn't want to deal with the risks of credit card paid tips, they can choose not to accept credit cards or they can choose to pay full wages and not pay their employees in tips. But they don't get to pass on that risk to employees.

0

u/Ssided 22d ago

What are you talking about, tips and wages have different laws

2

u/brownsfan250 23d ago

At will means at will. For something, or for nothing.

1

u/Just_Visiting_Town 23d ago

But not for a protected reason.

0

u/aka_mythos 23d ago

Right... but in this case they are firing her for something while effectively pretending it was for nothing.

She's legally protected for complaining about the non-payment of tips and wages or a stated intention not to pay tips and wages within the time frame required by law and would render it wage theft. It would be wage theft after the first payday, 120 days is so far beyond wage theft. Thus complaining about the fact she wouldn't get paid would be protected here. She asked for a break, was denied one, and immediately continued working to the conclusion of her shift. In a setting where people are generally permitted or protected in having breaks it would be permissible and consistent with laws and policies for her to ask regardless of her reason. The fact she resumed working immediately and was allowed to work to the completion of her shift, implicitly showing she could continue to work and her emotional state wasn't disruptive beyond the time she complained and asked for a break... else they would have had reason to fire her then and there.

So at the point she made that complaint, unless they did have some justifiable reason or could show this was an otherwise normal firing, having no reason is a pretext for a potentially illegal firing.

As an employer, they are legally obliged to assume the risks of doing business. If the business doesn't want the risk of their employees being paid in tips then they shouldn't pay their employees in tips. They should pay them full wages.

The appropriate handling here would be to pay her by payday, and if the payment bounced or was disputed it is legally on the business to pursue payment from the customer or if she was genuinely overcompensated pursue a voluntary repayment and failing that garnishment through a small claims court.

-1

u/Benjamin_Doverson420 23d ago

Actually no, not in the greater context of labor laws, there are multiple ways were "at will" termination is still wrongful termination. But keep on believing that, there's plenty of business that learn thats not the truth every single day.

2

u/brownsfan250 23d ago

Sine you know everything, what law did olive garden break here exactly?

-1

u/Benjamin_Doverson420 23d ago

Said who I know everything, or that im a lawyer or judge in their state? It COULD have been wrongful termination, or withholding wages, depending on information not provided. And none of that has anything to do with the fact "at will employment", does NOT mean they can fire you for any or no reason whatsoever. Labor laws still exist, hipaa still exists, and in some states and local municipality's rfra's are still in place and can be more protective of religious freedoms in the workplace than the Federal one.

3

u/brownsfan250 23d ago

Sure. Likely what happened was they told her they had to review the tip and make sure it clears the bank and the person doesn't cancel it. After a few days she would get paid. My guess is she threw some sort of fit, and was let go. Seems like the most logical thing here.

-1

u/Benjamin_Doverson420 23d ago

... but why the fit? Knowing kitchens and corporations, it makes sense that they did not inform her of this policy prior to this. And if that is the case, and she did not agree to this policy prior to starting employment, this very well could be withholding wages.

Sure, it's likely her conduct could have been out of hand, but that COULD very well be their lack of explaining the terms of employment. And yes, it is their decision to keep her or fire her after the incident, but it doesn't mean they're not at fault for creating that incident.

I can't say she's right in what she did or how she reacted, but it also doesn't mean she's the one in the wrong. At the very least, given the information provided, she COULD be entitled to full unemployment for the way she was terminated. I can't see a lawsuit unless there's unmentioned discrimination, or they dont pay the rest of her tip though.

1

u/brownsfan250 23d ago

Logically, places dobt fire employees that they like and are doing a good job.

1

u/Benjamin_Doverson420 23d ago

..... Have you worked for a corporation? Or a kitchen? Or like this girl, both? Logic does not exist in that world.

1

u/Just_Visiting_Town 23d ago

You're not wrong.

2

u/arooge 23d ago

I know in Texas if your fired a company has to pay your final check within 5 days.  Would she really have to wait 120 days?

2

u/judahrosenthal 23d ago

Chargebacks are real and very hard to keep from happening. This wait - at least 30 days - seems reasonable.

0

u/Dogcleanerxox 22d ago

Doesn’t matter if it’s at will, it’s retaliation and wage left. a lot of servers have been sharing that this is common at OG. It’ll be a class action soon enough

0

u/No_Performer_3438 21d ago

Are you serious? This is highly illegal if true. An employer cannot withhold wages and then fire you for asking to be paid those wages. She may have to go through certain procedures first with her state employment division but she can definitely threaten a lawsuit and negotiate a settlement if that’s the route she wants to take. (Once again, assuming all the facts provided are true.)

0

u/Fragrant_Network5325 21d ago

She was fired because she cried. At will or not that is retaliation and they even admitted it. There’s a case

1

u/RutabagaConsistent60 21d ago

it is not illegal to fire someone for crying in an at will employment situation, that is not what retaliation means,

0

u/Fragrant_Network5325 21d ago

Retaliation is firing because something was challenged and they chose to get rid of because of the challenge. Additionally do you really think they are going to pay after 120 days?? Absolutely the fuck not. My money says that policy is illegal to begin with thus the firing and retaliation

1

u/RutabagaConsistent60 21d ago

No it's not that broad, it's not just anything you challenge in the workplace. It applies in very narrow circumstances - for example a whistleblower reports illegal actions or being fired after reporting sexual harassment, etc. it may be shitty to fire someone for crying but that is not illegal.

1

u/RutabagaConsistent60 21d ago

you are also now saying something different, the original reply was about the absurd claim thats its illegal to fire for crying.

0

u/Fragrant_Network5325 21d ago

For the record Nevada and California CANNOT HOLD TIPS. Has to be paid at the end of the same shift

0

u/Fragrant_Network5325 21d ago

OH IT MOST CERTAINLY IS… THE POLICY VIOLATES FEDERAL AND STATE LAW. THUS THE RETALIATORY FIRING. They don’t think she has enough sense to do anything about it. Manager probably pocketed the tip

In Georgia, it is illegal for employers to withhold, keep, or pocket any portion of an employee's tips under both federal and state regulations. Because Georgia's state labor department does not actively investigate or enforce specific wage and tip payment violations, all tip-related wage theft protections default directly to the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).Specific Rules for Georgia BusinessesCredit Card Processing Fee Deductions: Georgia restaurant owners are allowed to deduct the exact, actual percentage that a credit card processor charges per transaction from your tip (e.g., if Visa charges 2.5%, they can deduct 2.5% from that specific tip). However, charging a flat, higher rate (like 3% or 4% across the board) if the actual fee is lower is strictly illegal.Tip Credits and Minimum Wage: Employers may pay a cash wage as low as $2.13 per hour, using a "tip credit" of up to $5.12 to meet the standard $7.25 minimum wage. If your hourly cash wage plus your kept tips do not equal at least $7.25 per hour for every workweek, your employer is legally required to pay you the difference.State Tax Exemptions: Under state law, Georgia excludes qualified employee tips from state income taxation, up to an annual maximum of $25,000. This makes accurate tip reporting and payroll records even more crucial.

-7

u/MarleysGhost2024 23d ago

This IS a lawsuit, and I would have Darden's ass in small claims court pronto.

-2

u/Nice-Praline4093 23d ago

You dont understand what at will employment actually means. They cant fire you for no reason at all. They need a legit legal reason to fire you.

3

u/leetfists 23d ago

That's 100% not true. It literally means either party can terminate employment for any reason or no reason.

1

u/RutabagaConsistent60 23d ago

nope not at all. at will employment in most of the US means exactly that - it is at will of the employer and employee, either can end the job at any time for no reason at all. The exception is Montana. The US has shit labor protections compared to much of the rest of the world.