Arizona voters will get to decide if they want to allow restaurants to pay their tipped workers even less than they do now.

In a brief order Thursday, the justices of the Arizona Supreme Court did not dispute the fact that state lawmakers, in voting to put the measure on the ballot for the Arizona Restaurant Association, gave it the informal title of the “Tipped Workers Protection Act.” What also is clear is that, if approved, the amount of money restaurants would have to pay their workers would drop from $11.35 an hour to $10.76.

It was that title that Raise the Wage Arizona said made Proposition 138 “misleading to the point of fraud” and something that “creates a significant danger of electorate confusion and unfairness,” all of which means it should not be allowed on the ballot.

But Chief Justice Ann Scott Timmer said she and her colleagues unanimously agree with Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Peter Thompson that there’s nothing inherently misleading about the title.

“The short title, ‘Tipped Workers Protection Act’ does not imply or promise a raise to the minimum wage,” the trial judge wrote in the order, now affirmed by the state’s high court.

He also noted that the Restaurant Association has an economic theory that reducing what they have to pay tipped workers actually helps them because it will mean the businesses can retain more of their employees.

And there’s something else.

Thompson ruled, and the Supreme Court appeared to agree, that while lawmakers said Prop 138 can be referred to as the Tipped Workers Protection Act, that is not the formal title. He said what is in the formal title does spell out the key provisions of how the law would work and “puts people on notice” of what it would do if approved.

“Voters beware” was the response from Jim Barton, attorney for Raise the Wage Arizona.

The fight over minimum wages at the ballot will be the third within two decades.

Voters enacted the state’s first minimum wage in 2006, raising it to $6.75 an hour when the federal minimum was just $5.85. It also provided for annual increases linked to inflation.

In 2016 voters approved a multi-step increase to bring it to $12 an hour by 2020. Mandatory inflation adjustments have now taken that to $14.35.

In the meantime, the federal minimum remains at $7.25.

At issue here is that 2016 law does allow restaurants to pay their tipped workers $3 an hour less than whatever is the minimum, or $11.35 now. The only condition is they need to be sure those workers do get up to the minimum with their tips.

Crafted by the Restaurant Association, Prop 138 would put a provision in the Arizona Constitution saying they could pay those same workers 25% less than whatever is the minimum, or $10.76 using current figures. But to qualify, the employers would need to be sure that these staffers brought home, with tips, at least $2 more than whatever is the minimum.

What that means, said Steve Chucri, president and CEO of the restaurant association, is that no employee would lose money if the measure is approved. And he said that most restaurant workers already bring home more than that with tips.

The bottom line, though, is that the financial burden on the restaurants would be decreased, something that Chucri said would benefit not just his members but also their employees by ensuring that more of them can be kept on the payroll.

Thompson, in his ruling, said the association is entitled to make that argument to voters. He said the dispute over the title amounts to what could be considered an economic disagreement of whether letting restaurants pay their tipped workers less than they do now actually is good for the employees.