Lodge at Hualapai accused on social media of forcing bartenders to pay stolen money after robbery at gunpoint

[Dan Druff]

Lodge at Hualapai -- not to be confused with Arizona's Hulalapai Lodge (which I've stayed at, btw) -- is a bar in western Las Vegas, near the corner of Desert Inn and Hualapai. It's aimed at locals, and doesn't get many tourists.

They're now a subject of controversy, as a former employee has come forward with a very troubling accusation. It's being alleged that the owners force employees to sign a contract which makes them agree to pay back all money stolen or non-paid by customers. This means that dine-and-dashers and drink-and-dashers come out of the bartender's wallet. It also means that bartenders have to pay back the money stolen from the regsiter, in the event of an armed robbery!

Indeed, the latter supposedly took place, and a former employee is alleging that he was forced to pay back almost $4000 stolen by a couple on an armed robbery spree last year.

A man named Edward Parker posted this on a Facebook group called "Vegas Bartenders & Servers":






So could this possibly be true? The guy posted a pretty authentic looking document above, showing the agreement to have $300 deducted from each paycheck until it was all paid back.

I'm guessing the story is true, and the document shown above is authentic. Lodge at Hualapai hasn't commented on it yet, so the silence is definitely deafening. This is currently going viral in Las Vegas social media.

Regarding the legality, refer to code NAC 608.160, from here:

NAC 608.160  Withholding of amounts from wages due. (NRS 607.160, 608.110)

1.  Without the written authorization of an employee, an employer may withhold from the wages due the employee:

(a) Any amount required by law; and

(b) Any employee contribution to a benefit program, such as health insurance or a pension plan, as permitted pursuant to NRS 608.110.

2.  Except as otherwise provided in subsection 1, an employer may not deduct any amount from the wages due an employee unless:

(a) The employer has a reasonable basis to believe that the employee is responsible for the amount being deducted by the employer;

(b) The deduction is for a specific purpose, pay period and amount; and

(c) The employee voluntarily authorizes the employer, in writing, to deduct the amount from the wages.

3.  An employer may not use a blanket authorization that was made in advance by the employee to withhold any amount from the wages due the employee.

Item #2 above is what could possibly apply here. If the employer has a "reasonable basis to believe the employee is responsible for the amount being deducted", then it can legally be deducted from the paycheck. To take a very simple example, let's say an employee throws a plate full of food on the floor out of rage, and the employee admits it wasn't an accident. Regardless of whether or not the employee is fired, the employer would have a right to deduct the cost of the food (and the broken plate) from the employee's paycheck.

But what about this case? Can an employee really be held responsible for an armed robbery, or a dine-and-dasher?

It appears that, generally, they cannot. The burden is on the employer to prove that either the employee was in on it, or it was due to major negligence on the employee's part which allowed the loss to occur. For example, if the employee behind the register leaves the cash register open and takes a break, it could be reasonable to deduct money stolen from the register from the employee's paycheck. Similarly, if a register comes up short, it can be reasonable to deduct that money from the employee's paycheck, provided the proper verification was done at the beginning of the shift that the money was counted properly.

In this story, Mr. Parker alleges that he was held up at gunpoint by a couple on a long armed robbery spree, and that this couple was caught. Therefore, obviously he couldn't be blamed for this robbery occurring, as it happened to 8 other places before Lodge at Hualapai.

It seems that, at the very least, the robbery story is true, because it was covered in the LVRJ.

Why would Lodge at Hualapai possibly have such a contract in place? It's possible they kept getting burned by previous employees who either stole from the register or let friends eat there and walk out without paying, and then they played dumb. This might have been an overcorrection to the issue. It might also be that the owners are assholes. It might be both.

In any case, it will be interesting to see how this plays out.