Do the circumstances of this case sound familiar? Or how about this (literal) money quote:

"Tips really help those receiving the lowest wages. I think Starbucks should pay shift supervisors higher wages instead of taking money from the tip pool."

Seems that tip confiscation is going to cost corporate greedheads $106 million Star bucks -- and that's just in California. Were a Nevada court to uphold former state Sen. Donald Mello's interpretation of the tip-sharing law he wrote, it would be bad news for Starbucks and Wynn Resorts alike.

Counsel for Starbucks whines that the judge's ruling was unfair 'cause it was, like, only four paragraphs long. Who said justice had to be long-winded? Or that cheapskate execs can get around paying a fair wage by plundering front-line employees' tips?

While we're on the subject, why does Starbucks -- or any other retail outlet -- need to subject its employees to the humiliation (or its customers to the emotional blackmail) embodied by the tip jar? It's thisclose to panhandling. I second the sentiments expressed in a recent Wall Street Journal column which deplored the practice, not least -- in fact, most of all -- because it's asking customers to subsidize wage rates that employers are too cheap to pay themselves. If StarJavaCoffeeSexpresso Detour is going to charge John Q. Public $4.95 for that Blended Oreo Latté and $1.95 for a slice of banana bread, you'll never convince me it can't afford to pay a living wage ... and not "living" in the sense of "living on welfare" or "living below the poverty line," either.

That sound you hear is the buzzer signaling the end of Robin Leach's exceptionally prolonged 15 minutes of fame. You know Leach. He was the randy Andy who almost cost Emeril Lagasse his liquor license back in '99. Anyway, an exceptionally reliable source informs me that when Leach hove his bulk over the horizon at a recent media event, the following colloquy ensued ...

CHECK-IN PERSON: "And you are ... ?"

LEACH: "Leach. Robin."

CHECK-IN PERSON: "Let me look you up."

Gaming Commission rolls the dice. Restoring the casino license of an admitted scammer is a big risk. If Angelo Stamis screws up again, it'll be the Nevada Gaming Control Board and Gaming Commission that'll look bad, not him.

It reminds me of what Gaming Commissioner Art Marshall once told me: "The Control Board dispenses justice; the Gaming Commission dispenses mercy." And 33 years has been a long time to spend on parole, as it were. Many felons get off with far less.

In other business, the Gaming Commission approved the Carano family's acquisition of a casino in the greater Carson City area. The Caranos own Eldorado-branded casinos in Reno and Shreveport/Bossier City, La.

It's over. Massachusetts' House of Representatives drop-kicked Gov. Deval Patrick's casino-legalization proposal by a 2.3-1 margin. Following a rebuff -- nay, a beat-down -- of those proportions, I'm guessing Patrick won't be returning to the issue until either A) the economy gets a helluva lot worse or B) he wins a second term.

[Email Blogger]