posted
Hmm, not tipping? No, no, that wouldn't work at all (as has been discussed at lenght elsewhere in this thread). How about lobbying Congress? How about, it doesn't matter because it won't change and there are still people that should be paid.
Nevermind. This time, I'm really gonna try to be done with this thread. Tom, just one question: on an average trip to a restaurant, with average service and average food, do you tip apx. 15% or more? If the answer is no, then there is nothing anyone can say to make you change your mind. If the answer is yes, well, good, that's all I wanted to hear.
Posts: 2596 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
My actual tipping habits are, as far as I can tell, absolutely irrelevant to the conversation.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Vonk: As you said, a checker or bagger is paid the minimum wage. As we've also established a waiter's salary is a smaller hourly amount *plus* tips which makes it on average higher than minimum wage.
Thus. you can't argue that you should tip a waiter based on hardship, because they still have it better than many other jobs. You need to go beyond charity, which is what Tom has been pointing out.
General point: I don't think anyone is under the impression that prices would not increase if tipping were elimnated or severely curtained. The point is that we would prefer a less arbitrary system that is more transparent.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:That there's a social expectation of tipping does not speak to the morality, effectiveness, or utility of tipping as a mechanism.
For the servers taking home the money, I'd say tipping is effective in giving them money to utilize for a number of things. Morally, you're on your own.
quote:I said nothing about the server's perceptions.
You said "Someone's generosity of spirit is unlikely to be be accurately measured by their tacit support of the tipping tradition." Who would be doing the measuring if not the server in this case? And how would they measure if not by using their perceptions?
quote:Their server may not think so, but that server might in fact be wrong.
I would venture to say generosity is in the eye of the receiver. While a person my feel generous in leaving that nickel on the table, they may still be considered ungenerous by others. While a person may feel ungenerous by only leaving 18% (their usual being 20%), they may still be considered generous by others (who usually tip 15%).
quote:(In the same way, someone who left you a $100 tip may not be generous; he could simply be slightly drunk and hoping to sleep with you.)
Or he may be making a show of generosity in the hopes of appearing more desirable. Or, the server could be oblivious to his intentions, and feel it was a generous act.
A generous act doesn't mean someone's universally generous, nor does an ungenerous act mean they're universally ungenerous. People base their judgements on repeated experience - though if there's only one witnessed event, that makes either a generous/ungenerous/neutral first impression.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:And how would they measure if not by using their perceptions?
That's at least partly the point. The server's perception of someone's generosity should not be mistaken for someone's actual generosity.
I couldn't possibly care less what a given server thinks, except insofar as it's mistakenly taken as authoritative.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:The point is that we would prefer a less arbitrary system that is more transparent.
So, out of curiosity, would you support the article's proposed 20% (or some other percent)automatically added on to the cost of the meal if that was made transparent up front?
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:I couldn't possibly care less what a given server thinks, except insofar as it's mistakenly taken as authoritative.
I'm interested in how you feel generosity is measured, if it can be at all.
Is it an innate thing that you feel inside yourself wholly separate from the perceptions of others, or is it a description given a person based on their witnessed actions?
Or is it both?
There can be no "authoritative" ruling on whether someone is generous or not, I don't believe. However, people are certainly justified in thinking someone generous or ungenerous based on their actions.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Cow -- How generous would you consider somebody who contributes, say, over 20% of their income to humanitarian organizations but who always tips between 5% and 15%?
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:So, out of curiosity, would you support the article's proposed 20% (or some other percent)automatically added on to the cost of the meal if that was made transparent up front?
Not necessarily. I think tying the value of the service to the value of the meal is a flawed proposition.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Cow -- How generous would you consider somebody who contributes, say, over 20% of their income to humanitarian organizations but who always tips between 5% and 15%?
Knowing both of those things, I'd say they're pretty generous. Knowing only the first, I'd say they're pretty generous. Knowing only the second, I'd say they were pretty ungenerous.
Remember, generosity is gauged by other people based on what they know about you. In a restaurant environment, your personal life and past history does not come into play. You are judged based on your behavior from the time you walk in to the time you leave.
Based solely on that, the server gets their impression of you.
How caring would you say a person was who volunteered 50% of their time to help at retirement homes and nursing centers, but who had a nasty habit of kicking puppies?
How other people view you is based on what they've witnessed. The more they witness, the more complete a picture they can paint.
quote:I think tying the value of the service to the value of the meal is a flawed proposition.
How about tiered service plans. "I'll take service plan A for $10 that includes you simply brining my food and drink and later the check" or "I'll take service plan D for $30 that includes special orders, repeated stops back to the table, meal suggestions and advice, prompt refills on my drinks, and a smiley face on my check."
Would that work out better for you? I think that'd be pretty neat, actually.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Would that work out better for you? I think that'd be pretty neat, actually.
Absolutely. Although a better way to do it is simply pay servers an hourly wage unrelated to the number of tables they wait.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
So, would there then be some reward system based on performance attached? Or would my experience at Applebee's be like my experience at the DMV?
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I doubt it. But it seems rather odd to suggest that quality of service will decline by making it a mandatory function of the job, rather than an optional component conditional upon a server's ability to predict the future.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Quality of applicant, and thus quality of service, depends on compensation expectations and training/education restrictions.
If servers in restaurants made minimum wage only, what would make you think you'd get better quality of service than supermarket cashiers, McDonald's cashiers, or other minimum wage earners.
If they were compensated at a higher rate and had higher training/education requirements to applly, you'd have a higher quality of applicant and likely a higher quality of service.
So, to take it back to your referencing dental assistants - they achieved a certain level of training and education to be there, and are compensated at a higher rate for a higher expectation of job performance.
If you want a comparable expectation of job performance, you need a comperable wage and application standards (training/education).
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:If servers in restaurants made minimum wage only, what would make you think you'd get better quality of service than supermarket cashiers, McDonald's cashiers, or other minimum wage earners.
If they were compensated at a higher rate and had higher training/education requirements to applly, you'd have a higher quality of applicant and likely a higher quality of service.
And the BEAUTY of this system is that restaurants which want a higher quality of applicant and higher quality of service could pay more, and the ones which are willing to accept a lower quality of applicant could pay less. Everyone wins!
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
It is a nice system. It's the way it should work, really.
It doesn't work that way, but it should. It would be nice.
I'm curious, though, in that scenario, what sort of costs would be passed on to the consumer - and how the restaurant economy would handle the hike in prices.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
The hike in prices shouldn't be too noticable, because the consumer would no longer be tipping. The difference would be, as kat has mentioned, the risk of a slow night would be assumed by the restaurant instead of the waiters. Of course, the restaurant could cut staff if it's a slow night, so there would still be some risk for the waitstaff, but less.
Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: How does a dentist or a oil change place handle the "hike" in prices because they have to pay their employees?
It's just part of the cost of that service.
but mph, we've clearly established that right now that is NOT included in the restaraunt's cost of service.
If suddenly server wages were raised from $2.50/hr to $7.50/hor (or whatever numbers you want to throw in there) then suddenly restaraunts are going to be paying 3 times as much for their servers than they are right now. if you think restaraunts would just take it on the chin, then frankly you're delusional.
In principle any cost increase to compensate for higher server wages would be about equal (one would think) to the 15% that people currently tip, so for a "normal" person in American society the cost of dining would remain largely unchanged. However, for those here that are arguing that tipping is not necessary, and therefore I assume don't include tip in their billing expectations, they will be seeing an extra 15% that they might not have been paying prior.
Posts: 1038 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:How does a dentist or a oil change place handle the "hike" in prices because they have to pay their employees?
mph, are you intentionally misunderstanding, or are you just having trouble keeping up?
The dentist or service station doesn't have a hike in prices. However, if they were to suddenly pay their employees 2 to 5 times as much as they are now, you would certainly see a hike in prices to accomodate.
If restaurants started paying their employees a fair wage, they would have to more than double their salaries to even make it to minimum wage. Better restaurants would need to multiply wages by 4 or more in order to have even $10 an hour, and fine dining restaurants would need to bump wages considerably more to attract the level of server their patrons have come to expect.
With such drastic increase in overhead, prices would need to increase accordingly.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:In principle any cost increase to compensate for higher server wages would be about equal (one would think) to the 15% that people currently tip, so for a "normal" person in American society the cost of dining would remain largely unchanged.
Not really. Because on a slow night, the restaurant would still have to pay full wages - which would be more than the server would have made. There would also likely be more standards on hours worked per week, which means restaurants wouldn't be able to just cut servers when things got slow.
As it is now, servers don't mind getting cut early - they wouldn't have made any tips anyway. If there were no tips, then their hours would have to be more constant, meaning during slow times restaurants would take a hit.
So, instead of a 15% hike, you're looking at a lot larger one.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
It is not a coincidence that health care prices have gone up astronomically while food prices have not. The difference in health prices does reflect the increase in wages, while the difference in the tipping amount expected also reflects the increase in wages.
Since 1976, the average price of a house has gone up eight-fold. The price of a car has gone up over ten-fold. The price of food has doubled. That's it.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
You're just talking in circles, FC. No one here is saying that prices wouldn't have to rise; in fact, we're saying it'd be a good thing.
And the restaurant industry, like almost every other industry in the world, would have to learn how to manage its labor appropriately.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:mph, are you intentionally misunderstanding, or are you just having trouble keeping up?
Are you deliberate being obnoxious and condescending, or is that just the way you are?
mph, FC has a perfectly legitimate question here... you've been an active part of this discussion, so I agree with his confusion when you try making the comparison here to dental workers.
Posts: 1038 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:How does a dentist or a oil change place handle the "hike" in prices because they have to pay their employees?
Where'd that comparison come from? The hike comes from a change in the system. There was never any mention of changing the dentistry/mechanic system. Hence, no hike.
It was a silly argument that had no bearing on the topic. Grimace addressed it just before I did, albeit in a far more tactful manner.
My apologies, mph. I didn't mean to come off as snarky as I did, but for the last three pages I feel as though I've been under particular attack by you.
With Tom, it has felt like a rhetorical discussion, with you it's been more targeted "gotchas" instead of constructed responses.
I didn't mean to offend.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:I agree with his confusion when you try making the comparison here to dental workers.
To be fair, I made the comparison. And it's this: if we eliminate tipping, the market for waitstaff becomes similar to the market for other mid-to-low-end service jobs, ranging from dental assistants at the high end of the scale down to burger-flippers at the low end. And I think that's a good thing for everyone concerned.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:mph, FC has a perfectly legitimate question here.
Asking which is true -- am I being dishonest and pretending to not understand, or am I just not bright enough to understand his posts -- is not a perfectly legitimate question.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
My night at work reminded me of this thread.
1. A girl spent all night waiting on a large party of people. At the end of the night their bill was about $200, for which they left her a 4 dollar tip. Now on a busy night like tonight, we have a food runner, and a service bartender to get drinks because the bartenders just don't have time. Servers have to tip out the busser, servicebar, and food runner, 1% of their food sales, and still have to pay tax (7% of sales I think) on the rest. Basically, by the time she finished serving the table, paid her taxes, and tipped people out, she ended up having to PAY TO WAIT ON THEM, as opposed to getting paid to do it. She was understandably upset (in the back crying for awhile), as what should have been a forty dollar tip ended up being a tenth of that.
2. If you paid servers where I work what the low end cooks make, there wouldn't be many servers. I make $11 an hour, which is damned good I think for my age and lack of training, and position as a college student. None of my friends the same age as me make even $9 an hour, so I really can't complain. But I can't think of many servers who'd work for what I make any time other than the summer, when it's slow. Who'd want to work a busy night, or take a demanding party on, when there's no incentive to do so? There's no regularity to the job at all. I think a mixed hour wage/reduced tip would be a fair compromise between incentive based good service and guarantee of good pay for servers.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Servers have to tip out the busser, servicebar, and food runner, 1% of their food sales, and still have to pay tax (7% of sales I think) on the rest.
I'm surprised that this isn't illegal.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not putting fault anywhere, just saying you tend to judge people on thins that are important to you. When your livelihood depends on generosity, you're more apt to judge that trait in people.
quote:I'm surprised that this isn't illegal.
Thinking more about the system, I'm surprised a great many common practices aren't illegal.
I had a tipping dilemma last night, actually, that I wanted to share.
We had a waitress who was very good. Prompt, courteous, friendly, helpful. My girlfriend got to talking to her about how the restaurant was to work at, because she's looking at picking up some serving shifts while she's back in school for her master's.
Two items came up that hadn't yet been presented in this thread.
First was the fact that she was a trainee, and therefore made no tips. This is pretty common, and I also have waited tables in restaurants for no tips. Whatever tip is left goes to your trainer/trainers - even though they do no actual work other than watching to make sure their trainee doesn't screw up.
Second was the fact that tips in the restaurant were pooled, meaning at the end of the night the four servers would put all their tips in a big pile and divide four ways.
In this particular case, the restaurant apparently trains for two weeks - meaning no tips at all for the trainee for two weeks. This fact made my girlfriend mentally cross off the restaurant from her possible list, but it also meant that our wonderful server wasn't going to see any tip if we left a large one or not.
Our waitress was going off shift, and the other waitresses would be cashing out our check for her. As she was going by in plain clothes, another friend at the table (there were three of us) gave her $10 (on the $51 check) and told her to take it. She did, and left.
The dilemma came now in the fact that if we left nothing on the check (I'm a semi-regular in this restaurant, and two of the waitresses recognize me when I come in), then they could very easily assume that the waitress pocketed the money. Yet we couldn't justify leaving a standard tip, because the people getting it did no work for us.
We ended up leaving $5. I don't know if that's good, bad or indifferent. We just did. It was an uncomfortable situation, essentially caused by our friend jumping out and giving her a tip on her way out of the restaurant.
Now, I'm pretty sure the restaurant pays actual minimum wage for trainees. I've been down that road myself, making a boatload for my trainer who made plenty of tips on her own tables while getting my $5.50 an hour or so. I paid my dues, then made money later. But my training was only ever 2-3 days, not two weeks. That's just crazy.
Beyond that, I never liked the idea of pooled tips. Behind a bar, I understand, because you often are just tagteaming the whole bar and picking up whatever tips you see on the rail to drop in the bucket. But in a room with four servers? Just seems weird.
I know I'd never work there, and my girlfriend came to the same conclusion. I'm just curious how prevalent these two other "broken" facets of the system are?
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Yet we couldn't justify leaving a standard tip, because the people getting it did no work for us.
Don't you think training counts as work? Don't you think teachers deserve payment for what they do?
Incidently, all of these situations do raise one question: If the pay practices are unfair, why are they working there?
Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Pay practices might be unfair, but if it's a busy night, i can walk out with 170 bucks in my pocket. that's why we work in restaurants Posts: 3516 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Don't you think training counts as work? Don't you think teachers deserve payment for what they do?
Normally in a training situation, the trainer is with you as you approach the table, assists with bringing food out, jumps in to help the trainee with anything forgotten or missed, etc. They often have a reduced number of tables (or none at all) so they can focus on how well (or not well) the trainee is doing.
The thing is, in this particular instance, it was the waitress' fourth day on the job. She knew everything backwards and forwards, and no other servers approached our table or shadowed her at all. Beyond this, the tips were pooled - so the other three waitresses (none of whom approached our table or aided the trainee) would have split the trainee's tips.
Ordinarily, I have no problem tipping trainees with shadows (because I've been shadowed and have done shadowing and understand that system), but in this case it seemed particularly unfair to the server. When a trainee knows their stuff, you let them go solo (in any place I've worked) - not hold them to no tips for an additional week and a half.
quote:If the pay practices are unfair, why are they working there?
Funny you should mention it, because that restaurant has a particularly high turnover in waitstaff. The trainee said she probably wouldn't stay there long, and said that a lot of servers left because the tip setup wasn't very favorable.
I do second Leonide, though. For all the potential downsides, there are potential upsides. A slow night can leave you with barely enough for gas money for the week, let alone rent or food. But a busy night can be very profitable.
It's intermittant reinforcement, which is incredibly effective on lab rats - and also on people.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Most restaurants have an extremely high turnover rate. Where I work, we get a new batch of 20 servers every month or so, and by the time the next batch comes in, there's room for them.
It's been a BIT different lately, because of the local economy, people are a bit less willing to quit on a whim when they know they really can't make quite as much at other restaurants in the area. We're a bit more high end, and very high traffic, so it's good money for servers.
New servers at Champps (Where I work), have to do 4 (might be 2, now that I think of it) server follows, 2 expo follows, and a manager wait. So, however quickly they can get that done, is how long their training takes. Personally I hate the training, as I have to lead them all by the hand when they are doing their expo follow, and I don't get anything for my trouble. I think the training rate here is something like $7.50 an hour. Usually the trainees are attached to the hip of the trainers, it's a bit of a rule to never let your trainee/trainer out of your sight. Everyone gets a pretty good impression pretty fast of who is and isn't going to work out.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
