Thinking about ways to spend $30 at several very special campus locations can be pretty fun.  

I could buy several paperbacks at the University Bookstore — or if I’m lucky maybe a used textbook. I could purchase a series of meals at the Union and maybe even pick up a sandwich from the Ingraham Deli if I’m feeling adventurous. I might hit up the Digital Outpost and pick up some good quality headphones.    

This sudden wealth of campus cash is somewhat overwhelming and will no doubt require an exhausting amount of my attention. And perhaps for that reason I should be thankful the Wisconsin Union, my former employer, made my fall shopping agenda so much easier. Who knows what I would have done with hundreds of dollars I could spend any place?  

If I knew it was this concern for the psychological welfare of its employees that motivated the Union to fully enforce a “no-tip” policy, I would be especially proud of my former employer and ashamed of my past acceptance of tips. But alas, I am skeptical.  

You see, there was once a time when employees of the Union walked home with pockets fat enough to buy a round of drinks for more than just their closest friends. It wasn’t unheard of for employees of the Rathskeller, Lakefront on Langdon and even the Daily Scoop, to pocket $30 worth of tips in one day of work.  

Wealthy businessmen who couldn’t be bothered to take their 63 cents of change, mothers who sympathized with the patience the employees showed their bratty kids and irresponsibly generous drunks — they all contributed to the tip funds of union employees through a time-honored American tradition that confuses Europeans but also puts hundreds of thousands of Americans through college.    

It’s not entirely the Union’s fault. The seemingly sadistic behavior is actually the result of state law, which prohibits state employees from accepting tips.  

What most employees would tell you is that the Union’s fault lies in its enforcement of the unpopular policy. In the past tipping was the worst kept secret at food service centers.

My co-workers at the Daily Scoop told me they used to line the counter with tip cups and plant bills in the cups to encourage customers to tip generously. Of course, by the time I showed up in late May, there was already a menacing note from our manager on the bulletin board warning us to turn down all tips.   

However, it’s not the Union’s rigorous enforcement of state law that should draw the ire of every self-respecting student employee. Rather, it’s the Union’s stubborn refusal to work within state law to fight for its employees’ right to accept tips.   

The Union could apply to the Board of Regents for a waiver of the state’s no-tip policy. If the Regents approved of such an action, they could then seek approval from the state. So far the Union has not pursued this route.  

Union Director Mark Guthier told me “that would not be the best way to address the issue.”  He cited the “complexity of the state system,” as well as inability to report tips to the IRS as logistical problems.  

But he didn’t stop there. He also cited a philosophical commitment to prevent customers from feeling the need to tip for excellent service. When the top Union official says a thing like that, you can pretty much forget about the big, bad complex state system. The system apparently serves their needs. This way, the administration reasons, the Union doesn’t have to worry about workers exchanging tips for favors, as was so unfortunately displayed by the arrests of several allegedly thieving Rathskeller employees last year.  

What Guthier and the rest of the Union administration should know is that the consequences of the “no-tip” policy are much worse than a few bad apples giving free beer to their friends.  

Widespread low morale in the work place defined my experience at the Union this summer. The resentment for management was at a fever pitch, and the desire to spite the administration by accepting tips anyway was the predominant view voiced by my co-workers. If people want to generously give us money, why should the administration step in the way? Why should a statute designed to prevent government workers from accepting bribes hamper such a beneficial transfer of wealth? The black “contribution” boxes the Union put in place of the tip jars only incensed workers more.  

Here’s the solution: The Union should apply for a waiver of the no-tip policy. The administration should outline a system in which the wages of tipped employees are slightly reduced — by as much as two dollars. If what my co-workers told me about the tipping glory days is even half true, the tips received would provide workers higher wages than what they’re receiving now. Meanwhile, the money taken from the tipped employees’ wages could be used to raise the wages of non-tipped employees, such as maintenance and tech workers.  

The process to realize such a plan would be long and arduous but would nevertheless raise student pay, increase worker morale and, perhaps most importantly, bring to a close the unhealthy sense of distrust between worker and management.  

Jack Craver ([email protected]) is a senior majoring in history.