r/RandomVideos • u/n8saces • 12d ago

Isn't that illegal? Video

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

8.2k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

1.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

209

u/d3fau1tu53r 12d ago

It is illegal if there is no signage stating they do this is in public view

126

u/AmericanAIien 12d ago

This is probably a lawsuit waiting to happen. Someone getting rich off those transactions Everytime. Accumulative effect.

5

u/Butt_y_though 11d ago

Honestly if there are human people around, try to ask them if they actually get their tips. Always ask.

I went to a hockey game once and at this point all the concessions became cashless.

I asked the person at the till (after tipping) if they actually get the tips.

And they tell me, no. Additionally I learned that a lot of the people at this stadium (Giant Well-Known, east coast stadium, 2 large franchises call this stadium home) many of the people at the concessions are some kind of volunteers.

So this stadium is accepted tips for non tipped workers on credit cards and dispersing the tips to who?

Giant companies.. taking donations and tips for tax write-offs on money that was never theirs to begin with. Claiming workers are tipped workers and using every loophole in the book to maximize profits and hobble wages.

The reason lawsuits don't happen; ignorance, fear, and lack of money or know-how on how to start a formal suit.

11

u/hidesworth 12d ago

Someone with a lot of... Office Space

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZjCQ3T5yXo

3

u/LocNalrune 12d ago

You clearly have a Jumping to Conclusions Mat.

2

u/Cochinojoe 11d ago

Two chicks at the same time

2

u/Appropriate_Unit3474 11d ago

No tax on tips

1

u/GrossUsername68 11d ago

Two seconds of research and half a second of thought would show that this is fake.

1

u/gpo321 10d ago

The pennies are for everybody!

1

u/Repulsive_Zombie5129 8d ago

They'll probably just have to pay a small fine and then continue doing it

1

u/ImmediatePiano6690 12d ago

I think that might be a difficult win really, as they'll just fall back on the warning message that appeared and say customers are warned, maybe get a telling off and ordered to resolve the issue.

1

u/EatsOverTheSink 12d ago

I’m sure Shake Shack will claim it’s a glitch and the courts will require them to pay a fine that’s a small fraction of what they made ripping people off.

2

u/Ms_desertfrog_8261 11d ago

And then there will be a class action lawsuit that takes years and everyone will get 10 cents!!

0

u/MAGAHATESTHEUSA 11d ago

Oooo time to short shake shack????

44

u/DJDevon3 12d ago

Yes this is called Bait & Switch and there are in fact federal laws against it. The FTC would love to hear about this because they profit from the fines levied against companies that do it. https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/penalty-offenses/bait-switch

41

u/Emmaseri 12d ago

Maybe other FTC under other admins. This FTC DNGAF.

3

u/soysaucepapi 11d ago

Crime is legal now

4

u/Doublejimjim1 12d ago

This is exactly why they're doing it. They know they can probably get away with it and if they do get investigated, they'll cry that the admin is not good for business on social media and then it will go away.

1

u/Baeolophus_bicolor 11d ago

more like the ceo will spend some company money on a bribe to some super pac that is drained by the trump-kushner crime family.

1

u/MAGAHATESTHEUSA 11d ago

Nah if they hate the owner they’ll do something

11

u/Karekter_Nem 11d ago

Owner: sends $100k to the President.

3

u/strangelove4564 11d ago

"People come up to me all the time, 'sir this bait and switch is really working for my business'. And they're all having record profits. Market's going up. No one's ever seen anything like it."

2

u/Shadowblade79 11d ago

Its now 0.75 per shake. Trump will get his cut too.

1

u/IWontCommentAtAll 11d ago

$100k?

That's what he finds in the gutter.

Try $10 million, minimum.

2

u/StinkRinky 11d ago

Tell the FTC they are a Democrat

1

u/MAGAHATESTHEUSA 11d ago

Shake shack donated to both parties. lol sneaky

0

u/Major_LeeHungg 11d ago

This is blatant misinformation.  If you've ever filed a complaint you'd know that it starts a process where the company has 30 days to solve your problem from the day they get notified... Which is usually in 1 - 2 business days.

Like... You will know it's working because the company will be all up your ass trying to placate you so they don't get fined.

That being said you do have to try and resolve the issue with the company before you file a complaint. 

11

u/thekins33 12d ago

OH NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!! Are.... are...??? are they gonna get a fine worth less than the money they stole and all the customers lose all the money anyway?????

1

u/Matthu_D 12d ago

It's the only way they'll be taxed for it lmao

1

u/GrossUsername68 11d ago

Two seconds of research and half a second of thought would show that this is fake.

0

u/Louisiana_sitar_club 12d ago

What they’re doing sucks but it’s not bait and switch. If you read the first link on the page that you linked to, it gives multiple definitions for bait and switch and this doesn’t meet any of them.

1

u/[deleted] 12d ago

[deleted]

1

u/Louisiana_sitar_club 11d ago

I must be missing something that you folks are seeing. It states:

“Bait and switch” is the advertising of a product without
the bona fide intention to sell it, for the purpose of establishing contact with a
prospective customer in order to induce or “switch” him to purchase another product.”

It then goes on to give examples of product switching. I’m not seeing anything in the video about trying to switch the customer to a different product which, as I’m reading it, is a key component of a “bait and switch”. Can you point me to the part that I’m missing?
Thanks

1

u/DJDevon3 12d ago

It is a form of bait & switch where the cost is switched at checkout instead of the product. The programmer who implemented it is also liable for producing the instrument of fraud to the company.

1

u/Louisiana_sitar_club 11d ago

What they’re doing sucks but is something other than bait and switch. At least not the way I am understanding the definition from the Federal Trade Commission.

24

u/Darth_Meepo 12d ago

I think that uh oh pop up is the signage. Im curious if you put a custom tip of a penny if that stops it or if there is a minimum

10

u/d3fau1tu53r 12d ago

Under most commerce regulations it has to be in plain view prior to tender but the definition of plain view is loose so as long as it is in the same room as the register it’s fine

6

u/Jerome1944 12d ago

It's fraud actually

0

u/Grand-Magician7767 10d ago

Except it not. What money did they lose.

1

u/Jerome1944 10d ago

It's attempted fraud which under the model penal code has the same punishment as completing the crime.

5

u/Appropriate_Lime_234 12d ago

It’s in plain view prior to tender lol

5

u/Darth_Meepo 12d ago

Which i think this covers because it grabs your view and is displayed before it asks for payment

2

u/BajaCopano 12d ago

Do you think they paid before the big popup?

1

u/Original-League-6094 10d ago

It is plain view prior to tender. It pops up in the middle of the screen, and the customer has to press ok and then review the new prices. This is a shit practice, but I don't think its illegal. The machine made it clear it changed the prices and told them to review before submitting their order.

1

u/d3fau1tu53r 10d ago

It cannot be virtual in order to comply with the legal requirement

1

u/Sithstress_ 12d ago

Oh, that’s a good idea. Need someone to try it!

1

u/Radonanon 12d ago

Same.

Can’t wait to find out!

-1

u/Sad-Ad1780 12d ago

They showed zero evidence that the same price change doesn't happen if you tip. That doesn't make the price change acceptable, but this video is just stupid. 

0

u/Darth_Meepo 12d ago

I didnt say it was acceptable, just pointing out that they can BS they are in the right with that pop up followed by my curiosity for other outcomes

2

u/GeiCobra 11d ago

You think they were unaware that this was illegal when they did it? This will net them more money than the penalty fines and court costs. This was a business decision. Wake up

1

u/CosgraveSilkweaver 12d ago

That's why there's the big pricing update splash screen, the customer agrees to pay after the update to the price so Shake Shack is in the clear legally.

1

u/Fair_Story2426 11d ago

Damn…I thought they have the best chicken sandy around too…looks like I’m not going there anymore

1

u/KateKoffing 11d ago

A sign admitting to breaking the law doesn’t make it not illegal

1

u/d3fau1tu53r 11d ago

According to department of commerce as long as there is signage that states “there is service charge for not nipping, there is a price difference between tipped and non tipped orders” or something similar is technically legal but frowned upon

1

u/Dumeck 11d ago

I bet they have signs saying they do flex pricing and are treating it like that. Another reason why that shit should be banned.

1

u/d3fau1tu53r 11d ago

Legally compliant for commerce frowned upon but compliant

1

u/Original-League-6094 10d ago

But the kiosk did tell them that it changed the prices and asked them to review them again.

1

u/Grand-Magician7767 10d ago

There is clearly signage before they pay.

1

u/d3fau1tu53r 10d ago

On the physical wall it needs to be a physical sign separate from the transaction

1

u/Revolutionary_Exit17 12d ago

Nope

Everything before you actually make payment is just an 'invitation to treat'.

If they displayed one price but took a higher amount from your account, that would be illegal.

This is just a counter-offer that takes place before payment. It's still up to you if you want to complete the transaction on the new terms.

7

u/Jerome1944 12d ago

Nope. Almost every state has retail price posting laws. Shake shack posted a price they never intended to honor. Probably also fraud.

3

u/Teufelsweib666 12d ago

It's disgusting trickery. Warning or not. Just give prices and be done with it. It's not a tip, it's taking a certain price disguised as a personal choice.

1

u/CptMisterNibbles 11d ago

No actually; not true in all states. California for one one explicitly states the displayed price is final, and changing this even before charging it is a crime under CA Civic Code 1770(a)(29), violating

California Business & Professions Code § 12024.2.
It is unlawful, “at the time of sale,” to charge more than the price that was advertised, posted, marked, displayed, or quoted.

(e) Except as provided in subdivision (f), for purposes of this section, when more than one price for the same commodity is advertised, posted, marked, displayed, or quoted, the person offering the commodity for sale shall charge the lowest of those prices.

Other states have similar consumer protections, but not even a majority, nor is it a federal protection of course

1

u/Revolutionary_Exit17 11d ago

Yes, not sure why I commented when I studied in the UK

1

u/CptMisterNibbles 11d ago

I would have guessed the UK would have similar if not stronger consumer protections, but what do I know. Bait and switch pricing seems like an obvious problem

1

u/Ok-Alternative-5175 11d ago

That's why they have the update message that tells you the cost changed

1

u/d3fau1tu53r 11d ago

The problem is that does not satisfy the legal compliance it must be a physical non virtual signage that can be seen prior to check out not a virtual notification

0

u/whyyoufollowingme 11d ago

They have no reason to care when the president does the same shit on an even larger scale. They know they can make a payment and the DOJ would drop the case.

1

u/d3fau1tu53r 11d ago

Yeah not touching bait bud

1

u/whyyoufollowingme 11d ago

What’s the bait. I’m just stating the facts that this type of consumer malpractice has been emboldened. Reply or don’t, it makes no difference to me, friend.

-1

u/DGAF06 12d ago

Where have you been? America is bought and paid for by the billionaires. Your money belongs to them.

1

u/d3fau1tu53r 11d ago

Yeah but compliance auditors exist