McDonalds sued for debit card pay plan

[Vendetta]

Meanwhile I get charged for nothing. My employer pays money into my account (from which income tax has already been paid), this costs me no money. I spend money or withdraw it from ATMs or transfer it to other accounts, there are no charges for this no matter what breed of payment I make (also: Signature debit? Really? Still? You can't even do that most places here, it's all PIN).

And what's more, that's not my bank being uniquely special and good, that's what every bank offers here on even their basic accounts.

[Siege]

Yeah, I was gonna say... I've no intention of denigrating the USA but compared to the banking system in The Netherlands some of this sounds just bizarrely archaic. Pretty much everything money-related I do electronically: money is paid directly into my accounts, I use my bank's Internet banking service to pay the bills, I use PIN to pay in stores, I get my bank statements via e-mail, and if I do occasionally need cash money I can withdraw it from any ATM belonging to any bank, free of charge. I haven't used a cheque in my life. It's baffling to me that this isn't common practice in the USA. You'd think the nation that practically invented micro-electronics, personal computing and the Internet would have embraced it before everybody else...

[fgalkin]

It's a common problem for early adopters. The US was among the first to implement electronic banking....and that's the system they are still using to this day, because it's already there, and changing it would be prohibitively expensive. Meanwhile, other countries that were late in adopting the technology ended up with more modern systems.

It's even a bigger problem in Japan, where ATM networks are not even connected to each other (so you can withdraw money from your bank's ATMs and nowhere else), credit cards are stillborn, and the fax machine, not email, remains the primary method of business communication.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

[Beowulf]

Yeah, I was gonna say... I've no intention of denigrating the USA but compared to the banking system in The Netherlands some of this sounds just bizarrely archaic. Pretty much everything money-related I do electronically: money is paid directly into my accounts, I use my bank's Internet banking service to pay the bills, I use PIN to pay in stores, I get my bank statements via e-mail, and if I do occasionally need cash money I can withdraw it from any ATM belonging to any bank, free of charge. I haven't used a cheque in my life. It's baffling to me that this isn't common practice in the USA. You'd think the nation that practically invented micro-electronics, personal computing and the Internet would have embraced it before everybody else...

Most of the above is possible in the US. Withdrawing cash from any ATM requires a compliant bank, and most banks are a bunch of bastards who are perfectly willing to screw over people, especially if they aren't actually customers. Most of the rest of the time, the way to avoid the fees aren't too onerous, so people work around it.

[Siege]

Yeah, I would imagine that there'd at least be some forward-thinking modern banks amongst the bewildering number around in the USA. But the thing is, over here, like Vendetta said, what I mentioned isn't simply possible -- it's the absolute bog standard of service. I don't pay a dime for withdrawals, I don't pay for deposits, etc. So when people in this thread mention preposterous fees for the most basic of things, like what fgalkin said about how his bank charges him a fee for taking his money, that completely blows my mind. I just can't fathom how banks stay in business with revenue models like that. Why haven't they been competed into the ground if the only thing a competitor would have to do is not be a predatory asshole to its customer base?

[une]

It's even a bigger problem in Japan, where ATM networks are not even connected to each other (so you can withdraw money from your bank's ATMs and nowhere else), credit cards are stillborn, and the fax machine, not email, remains the primary method of business communication.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

That's not completely true. You can withdraw money from the ATMs of other banks. It doesn't work at every ATM at every bank, but they are much better connected than they were in the past. There's also the option of using convenience store ATMs. They are usually connected to most major and minor banks. Credit cards are also pretty widely accepted, at least in major cities.

The fax machine thing is accurate, though.

[Guardsman Bass]

When I was there on vacation, they did have a card system for the trains in the Tokyo Metro area that worked in the vending machines scattered everywhere (PASMO). Now if they could just integrate that with a credit card that most places will take . . .

Do any of the million small stores anywhere take credit cards? I know the Seiyyu supermarkets do, but I never tried a credit card anywhere else. I just used cash.

The fax machine thing is accurate, though.

Get outside of the export-oriented sector, and a lot of Japanese businesses aren't exceptionally productive or cutting edge in technology.

[Executor32]

Meanwhile I get charged for nothing. My employer pays money into my account (from which income tax has already been paid), this costs me no money. I spend money or withdraw it from ATMs or transfer it to other accounts, there are no charges for this no matter what breed of payment I make (also: Signature debit? Really? Still? You can't even do that most places here, it's all PIN).

And what's more, that's not my bank being uniquely special and good, that's what every bank offers here on even their basic accounts.

Pretty much everywhere in the States takes credit, and by extension takes signature debit, even if they don't take PIN debit. The only exception that immediately springs to mind is Aldi, which doesn't take credit at all and only takes PIN debit.

[Guardsman Bass]

Costco takes only Amex and PIN debit cards as well. It saves on the fees the merchants have to pay the card companies.

[Rogue 9]

Maybe I wasn't clear. When I say holidays I wasn't referring to public holidays (I guess you guys call them federal holidays), I was referring to annual leave which your employer gives you. If you have say one week leave, then you can set up the bank account then with all the money you saved. Please tell me American employers for the low income workers give their workers annual leave.

If you're full time employed. Maybe. Possibly. I work in manufacturing, and the plant has two annual shutdowns (surrounding Independence Day and in the week between Christmas and the New Year) during which everyone's leave time is taken away to pay them for the shutdown time (in essence, you are told when your vacation is and too bad so sad if you had something else you wanted to do at some other time of year). Fortunately for me I work in warehousing rather than production, where the work is never done, so I work over the shutdowns and can take my leave when I want it, but not all are so lucky.

When I worked part time jobs, no, there was no paid leave for anyone ever. If you needed a day off, you could ask and maybe you just wouldn't be scheduled (and naturally wouldn't be paid) on the day you needed, but that was always at the manager's discretion.

On another note, I just have to echo Korto... you Americans get screwed by your banks period. I thought Australian banks were bad charging us for withdrawing money from another institutions ATM, but geez. My bank account has zero interest, but zero fees as well. It allows direct debit from my employer and it can cash cheques from other institutions for... free. I can also view my account online and get it linked to other accounts, eg home loan and investment loan accounts (if its from the same bank) and also linked to other saving accounts (if its from another instition).

Eh. It's not so bad if you haven't done incredibly stupid things with money to crash your credit through the floor and can keep the minimum balance. I'm paid by direct deposit, and as long as I can stay above $500 in the account (which is easy; I'm paid that much or more on a weekly basis), have online banking, can cash checks, have no transaction limit (or at least not one that I've ever hit, and it isn't exactly an idle account), my checking and savings accounts are linked together, and all the rest. But I'm better off than some poor sap working at McDonald's. (Actually, McDonald's isn't even the lowest paying, all things considered.)

[folti78]

Yeah, I would imagine that there'd at least be some forward-thinking modern banks amongst the bewildering number around in the USA.

Most likely the bigger banks don't care about it (if it works, why fix it? Better squeeze the customers more mentality) and the smaller ones don't have the resources to implement them and/or don't see how it'd worth the effort.

In the EU, even the biggest banks are smaller and have more local competition which drives them to innovate and the EU likes to crack down on their practices every few years to force them to provide better services. Examples could be the mandatory same day execution of interbank transactions(initiated during business hours) which were introduced around 2010-11 or the recent mandatory reduction of interstate fees and transfer times, effective since this January(which maybe unintentionally, torpedoed the Hungarian governments transaction tax scheme, because nowadays you can open business accounts in Slovakian and Romanian banks really cheap).

But the thing is, over here, like Vendetta said, what I mentioned isn't simply possible -- it's the absolute bog standard of service. I don't pay a dime for withdrawals, I don't pay for deposits, etc. So when people in this thread mention preposterous fees for the most basic of things, like what fgalkin said about how his bank charges him a fee for taking his money, that completely blows my mind. I just can't fathom how banks stay in business with revenue models like that. Why haven't they been competed into the ground if the only thing a competitor would have to do is not be a predatory asshole to its customer base?

That's depends on the country in question honestly. Here in Hungary there are differences between the banks and the account packages they offer, but there are rather more fees. Esp. if you work with OTP, the nearly monopolistic fucker, who was always the here's a fee to cover the other fee type.

[PhilosopherOfSorts]

I'd ask a local lawyer or somebody in a better business bureau if that sort of thing is actually allowed in your city/state. If it isn't then possibly ask the employer if they could not force you to waste money on a fee loaded card just so they can shave a few pennies.

I'm thinking of doing just that, my main cause for hesitation is that nobody else I work with seems to give a shit, so maybe I'm overreacting.

It sounds incredibly like a horrifying 19th century Company Town paying everyone in Company Script. And I thought that was pretty damned illegal now and that people in unions had fought and died to prevent it. Well, maybe we need some more fighting and dying because it seems every bad old thing is slowly creeping back into our society without anything positive for it.

That was the first thing I thought when this came down the line. Its not quite that bad, but its still a step in that direction.

[Vendetta]

Meanwhile I get charged for nothing. My employer pays money into my account (from which income tax has already been paid), this costs me no money. I spend money or withdraw it from ATMs or transfer it to other accounts, there are no charges for this no matter what breed of payment I make (also: Signature debit? Really? Still? You can't even do that most places here, it's all PIN).

And what's more, that's not my bank being uniquely special and good, that's what every bank offers here on even their basic accounts.

Pretty much everywhere in the States takes credit, and by extension takes signature debit, even if they don't take PIN debit. The only exception that immediately springs to mind is Aldi, which doesn't take credit at all and only takes PIN debit.

Here it's the opposite, pretty nowhere will take a signature card payment any more, they either take pin payments for debit and credit or no cards at all (and that's rare).

Also, increasingly they're accepting contactless card payment and some will even be moving to NFT payment via phones. (where you just hold your mobile phone next to the pin pad and it beeps, job done payment accepted.)

[fgalkin]

Meanwhile I get charged for nothing. My employer pays money into my account (from which income tax has already been paid), this costs me no money. I spend money or withdraw it from ATMs or transfer it to other accounts, there are no charges for this no matter what breed of payment I make (also: Signature debit? Really? Still? You can't even do that most places here, it's all PIN).

And what's more, that's not my bank being uniquely special and good, that's what every bank offers here on even their basic accounts.

Pretty much everywhere in the States takes credit, and by extension takes signature debit, even if they don't take PIN debit. The only exception that immediately springs to mind is Aldi, which doesn't take credit at all and only takes PIN debit.

Here it's the opposite, pretty nowhere will take a signature card payment any more, they either take pin payments for debit and credit or no cards at all (and that's rare).

Also, increasingly they're accepting contactless card payment and some will even be moving to NFT payment via phones. (where you just hold your mobile phone next to the pin pad and it beeps, job done payment accepted.)

Yes, PIN and chip cards are being promoted heavily by financial institutions because of the transfer of liability. With the old signature cards, if someone has made unauthorized charges, you were not responsible for them unless the bank could prove that you have committed fraud. The new PIN cards, however, are considered secure from a legal standpoint (they are not), so now if someone steals your card, you're shit out of luck. Saves the banks billions every year.

There is legislation trying to address this, but going's been slow. Ironically, archaic US financial laws from the 70s actually do a better job of protecting the consumer from this sort of thing.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

[une]

When I was there on vacation, they did have a card system for the trains in the Tokyo Metro area that worked in the vending machines scattered everywhere (PASMO). Now if they could just integrate that with a credit card that most places will take . . .

The train cards have been around for a while and are all over Japan. Each train company has it's own card and system. Until recently, you couldn't use cards made for one train line at a different line, but they fixed that a few months back.

Also, the train cards can be used at most convenience stores and some shops like McDonalds.

Do any of the million small stores anywhere take credit cards? I know the Seiyyu supermarkets do, but I never tried a credit card anywhere else. I just used cash.

I think the big issue with credit cards is whether it's a foreign or domestic card. Most places, that I go to at least, accept them if they're domestic credit cards. I don't go to any mom & pop type stores, so I can't tell you about them.

[Broomstick]

Ah, I see. Sorry about that, I was under the impression that a credit union was roughly equivalent to a building society in the UK.

I think the American equivalent to that is a savings and loan association.

And I believe Paypoint can be used to pay rent to a prvate citizen, but only if they're using a third-party property management service who deal with repairs and the like in return for a cut of the rent.

No, my landlord does the managing and repairs himself, no third party involved. It's not what I'd call a frequent arrangement, but common enough not to raise eyebrows when encountered.

There is of course a limit to how much "demanding" you feel you can do when you're poor, unskilled, and easily replaced.

That's what picket lines are for.

Did you miss the “easily replaced” part?

Well, yes, American workers do get holidays... during which the banks are closed.

He's not talking about federal holidays. He's talking about annual leave, as in take a holiday whenever you want it. Now, I understand that US workers technically get something called annual leave but most are under significant pressure not to take it.

We call that “vacation”. While many jobs do offer vacation the low-level retail and minimum wage type jobs do not always have that. It depends on how asshat your employer is.

My employer will allow me time off, but it's always unpaid leave. My recent trip to Buffalo, for example, meant a week without income for us.

[bilateralrope]

I have to pay my rent in either cash or check because my landlord isn't going to go through the hassle and expense of setting up an electronic payment scheme on his own.

My parents have a rental property down the back of their house. For them, having tenants set up an automatic is the simplest way to handle rent payments. They give the tenants the number of the account the money goes into, then just check the bank statements in case of a missed payment. The only fee I'm aware of is a one time fee of a few dollars for the tenants to setup the automatic payment, I don't think there is any ongoing fee.

Cash is a bit of a hassle because that requires the landlord to provide a receipt for each payment. So the tenants preferred automatic payments, with the only exception being one guy who got deported.

Nobody pays by check.

I'll add my voice to the people saying that US banks are ripping people off.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Speaking as someone who's had one of these for over 6 years, they're actually nothing like company script, most obviously because you're not limited in where you can spend it. I got mine when I started working at the truck wash back in 2006, and I kept it after I left. I can direct deposit money from, say, an employer or my tax refund for no charge, and if I want to manually load cash from, say, a birthday present or something, I can go to Wal-Mart and have it loaded on the card for a flat fee of $3.74 (that's a recent addition). There's no charge for signature debit, and PIN debit is $.25 per transaction. At Allpoint network ATMs there are no surcharges, and for all other ATMs there is a $1.50 surcharge, in addition to whatever the ATM may charge. The nearest Allpoint ATM is around 20 minutes away from me, so as long as I don't need too much cash, I just get cash back at the store. If I need to pay someone with a check, I can fill out a Transcheck and call their customer service number to activate the check for whatever amount I need for no charge. When I was at the truck wash, making one out to yourself was the suggested way to deposit your full pay in your bank account. You can also transfer money to a bank account for some percentage fee through their website, but I've never done it and I've lost my fee schedule so I have no idea what that percentage is. There's also an account maintenance fee of $2.50 or something, but that fee is waived as long as you have activity in your account for the month, and there's also no 'overdraft protection' and associated fees to worry about. In my use case, wherein I use direct deposit and pay for almost everything via signature debit, I actually rarely have to pay any fees whatsoever.

You're clearly much smarter than average to properly game the system. Most people cannot work with finances that easily and so would get nailed with on the order of ~200 USD a month of charges (this based on an analysis of the growth of similar cards for handing out financial aid by schools, which fortunately all have opt-outs under federal law). And even then you're getting a horrible deal, much, much worse than my credit union by far, so bad that to contrast it with company script rings pretty hollow for me. The principle behind company script and these cards is the same: By controlling access to the workers' salaries, you increase your own profits.

[Zaune]

Did you miss the “easily replaced” part?

No I did not. But even in this day and age, giving everyone the sack and bringing in new hires when they go on strike is a) almost certainly flat-out illegal in at least some jurisdictions and b) a great way to dump a great steaming heap of shitty PR on your company when the press gets to hear of it.

And quite frankly, the line has got to be drawn somewhere and to hell with the risk of getting the sack, because otherwise the US is going to backslide right back into the good old days of company scrip. Or worse.

[Raw Shark]

Did you miss the “easily replaced” part?

No I did not. But even in this day and age, giving everyone the sack and bringing in new hires when they go on strike is a) almost certainly flat-out illegal in at least some jurisdictions

Some, perhaps, but not in the "at-will employment" state of Colorado.

and b) a great way to dump a great steaming heap of shitty PR on your company when the press gets to hear of it.

And quite frankly, the line has got to be drawn somewhere and to hell with the risk of getting the sack, because otherwise the US is going to backslide right back into the good old days of company scrip. Or worse.

The typical response to this sort of argument around here is along the lines of, "Why do you hate freedom?"

[Vendetta]

We call that “vacation”. While many jobs do offer vacation the low-level retail and minimum wage type jobs do not always have that. It depends on how asshat your employer is.

My employer will allow me time off, but it's always unpaid leave. My recent trip to Buffalo, for example, meant a week without income for us.

In the UK we are legally entitled to a minimum of 5.6 weeks paid annual leave. (28 days for a full time worker, pro ratad for part time workers). The only exception is if you are self employed.

[Rogue 9]

Did you miss the “easily replaced” part?

No I did not. But even in this day and age, giving everyone the sack and bringing in new hires when they go on strike is a) almost certainly flat-out illegal in at least some jurisdictions and b) a great way to dump a great steaming heap of shitty PR on your company when the press gets to hear of it.

And quite frankly, the line has got to be drawn somewhere and to hell with the risk of getting the sack, because otherwise the US is going to backslide right back into the good old days of company scrip. Or worse.

The thing to understand is that a large majority of low-income workers are terrified of losing their jobs and won't go along with any strike scheme. Also, even though it's illegal to do so, any talk of unionizing will be met with firing the person doing the talking. In an employment at will jurisdiction, either party can terminate the employment relationship at any time for any or no reason. "Any" doesn't cover things that constitute wrongful termination (such as union organizing, injury, disability, sexual orientation, etc. etc. etc.), but no reason means they can fire you for any of those things and just not say it. It means that if you worked there long enough to qualify for unemployment benefits they can't contest it, but it also means that they can make an example of you to keep the rest in line.

[Lord Relvenous]

Did you miss the “easily replaced” part?

No I did not. But even in this day and age, giving everyone the sack and bringing in new hires when they go on strike is a) almost certainly flat-out illegal in at least some jurisdictions and b) a great way to dump a great steaming heap of shitty PR on your company when the press gets to hear of it.

And quite frankly, the line has got to be drawn somewhere and to hell with the risk of getting the sack, because otherwise the US is going to backslide right back into the good old days of company scrip. Or worse.

In right to work states, striking has absolutely no power. Your employer can fire you at any time for any reason, and there are plenty of people to replace you with.

[Rogue 9]

Did you miss the “easily replaced” part?

No I did not. But even in this day and age, giving everyone the sack and bringing in new hires when they go on strike is a) almost certainly flat-out illegal in at least some jurisdictions and b) a great way to dump a great steaming heap of shitty PR on your company when the press gets to hear of it.

And quite frankly, the line has got to be drawn somewhere and to hell with the risk of getting the sack, because otherwise the US is going to backslide right back into the good old days of company scrip. Or worse.

In right to work states, striking has absolutely no power. Your employer can fire you at any time for any reason, and there are plenty of people to replace you with.

It can if the workplace requires skilled labor and is already unionized, with membership that doesn't object to funding the union and staying in it. Post right to work, getting a union organized is monstrously difficult, and since right to work goes hand in hand with employment at will, the instant the employer finds out those doing the organizing will be fired.

Manufacturing is still alive and well where I live (for some reason), and a couple of the plants are unionized, but most are not. Those that aren't pour a huge amount of training and orientation time into anti-union propaganda; they're terrified of it and will do almost anything to prevent it.

[fgalkin]

We call that “vacation”. While many jobs do offer vacation the low-level retail and minimum wage type jobs do not always have that. It depends on how asshat your employer is.

My employer will allow me time off, but it's always unpaid leave. My recent trip to Buffalo, for example, meant a week without income for us.

In the UK we are legally entitled to a minimum of 5.6 weeks paid annual leave. (28 days for a full time worker, pro ratad for part time workers). The only exception is if you are self employed.

In the US, you are entitled to nothing. All leave is provided by employer on a voluntary basis.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin