Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Date: October 29, 2015
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comThe policy change will impact 11 notable NYC restaurants, including the Gramercy Tavern, The Modern, and Union Square Café, as well as the 1,800 tipped employees that work in such establishments.

Although there are a number of factors driving this no-tipping business decision, New York’s end-of-the-year tipped employee minimum wage hike from $5 to $7.50 is undoubtedly a major factor. Although many servers at high-end NYC restaurants earn substantial money as tips, little of this will count towards the employer’s responsibility to compensate, even though the tip credit has been an ingrained element of restaurant economics. Restaurant owners also face anticipated increases in the minimum wage for fast-food workers up to $15 an hour, which may tempt kitchen staff to seek higher paid positions at those establishments.
For restaurant owners, eliminating tipping arguably offers a number of advantages. For one thing, it makes employment law compliance and record keeping much less complex. Rather than navigating a dizzying maze of local, state and federal wage regulations applicable to tipped employees, members of the wait staff would be treated like all other non-exempt, hourly workers.
Mr. Meyers further explained that, by raising menu charges for food and beverage to include a service component, the employer is able to reallocate total revenue to narrow the earnings gap between those who make the food and those who serve it. Under the Fair Labor Standards Act, gratuities paid to servers cannot be shared with non-tipped employees, such as kitchen staff. “The gap between what the kitchen and dining room workers make has grown by leaps and bounds,” Meyer told the . During his 30-year career in the NYC restaurant industry, “kitchen income has gone up no more than 25 percent. Meanwhile, dining room pay has gone up 200 percent,” he added.
For wait staff, the response is largely mixed. Some would prefer to earn a predictable wage, which eliminates the fear that a slow night can result in a low paycheck. However, other servers are wary that no-tipping policies will eliminate the “upside” income opportunity that comes with big tips for good service.
There are different variations of a no-tipping policy. For instance, Dirt Candy, which is located on the Lower East Side of Manhattan, adds an “administrative fee” of 20 percent to each check. Under the law, if proper legal notice is provided, this is not a “tip” which is defined to be a “voluntary payment made by the patron to the server.” Whatever the name, an imposed service charge is a tip and can be credited to meet the employer’s minimum wage obligations (some jurisdictions will not permit a reallocation of the service charge to pay other employees however). Dirt Candy’s fee helps cover the $15/per hour the restaurant pays its waiters, waitresses, and bar staff. Other eateries are experimenting with raising food prices and imposing other types of services charges.
In the end, Mr. Meyer’s bold move will certainly warrant close attention by the restaurant industry, both inside and outside of the New York City metropolitan area. A crucial factor for success will be whether customers are willing to pay higher prices in exchange for eliminating the need to tip. NYC Restaurants would face potentially higher withholding tax obligations and would no longer be eligible to claim the favorable FICA tip credit. It also remains to be seen whether employees will be willing to work at an establishment which offers higher hourly rates that does not match the potential upside offered by tips.
To discuss how a no-tipping policy may impact your labor compliance obligations and costs please contact attorney Gary S. Young
Related Articles:
Wage-Violations Lawsuits By Restaurant Workers Featured By NJHRA
Wage Employees Sue Restaurant In Wage Disputes
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

High-profile founder litigation is more than just a media spectacle. For startup founders, these cases underscore the legal and structural risks that can arise when rapid growth outpaces formal oversight. While launching a new company can be both an exciting and deeply rewarding endeavor, founders must be mindful that it also comes with significant risks. […]
Author: Dan Brecher

Every New Jersey company should periodically evaluate its governance framework. Strong corporate governance protects directors and officers, builds investor confidence, reduces litigation exposure, and positions a company for sustainable growth. The first quarter of the year is a great time to evaluate your corporate governance practices and perform any routine maintenance needed to keep that […]
Author: Ken Hollenbeck

Being served with a lawsuit is one of the most stressful legal events a business or individual can face. Whether the claim involves a contract dispute, an employment matter, an intellectual property issue, or another legal challenge, the actions you take in the first few days can significantly shape the outcome of your case. Acting […]
Author: Robert E. Levy

Special Purpose Acquisition Companies (SPACs) continue to gain momentum as we move through 2026. After enduring a significant contraction following the 2021 boom and the regulatory scrutiny that followed, SPAC activity rebounded sharply in 2025 and now carries forward into 2026 with real momentum. The SPAC resurgence reflects broader improvements in both market conditions and the […]
Author: Dan Brecher

Compliance programs are no longer judged by how they look on paper, but by how they function in the real world. Compliance monitoring is the ongoing process of reviewing, testing, and evaluating whether policies, procedures, and controls are being followed—and whether they are actually working. What Is Compliance Monitoring? In today’s heightened regulatory environment, compliance […]
Author: Dan Brecher

New Jersey personal guaranty liability is a critical issue for business owners who regularly sign contracts on behalf of their companies. A recent New Jersey Supreme Court decision provides valuable guidance on when a business owner can be held personally responsible for a company’s debt. Under the Court’s decision in Extech Building Materials, Inc. v. […]
Author: Charles H. Friedrich
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!